IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)
1.0
1.1
l^|2£ 125
■^ itii 12.2
^ 1^ i 20
m
IIP llli^ U4
<
6"
►
<?>
^
^;;
^j>
'/
Photographic
Sciences
Corporation
'^1%\
^ .i^ ^^^
23 WiST MAIN STRUT
WnSTIR.N.Y. 14580
(716)872-4503
'^
'^'
:^
CIHM/ICMH
Microfiche
Series.
CIHM/ICIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.
Canadian institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques
-fill
Tachnical and Bibliographio NotM/Notas taehniquaa at bibliographiquaa
Tha Instituta has anamptad to obtain tha baat
original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia
copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua,
which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha
raproduction. or which may aignlficantly ehanga
tha uauai mathod of filming, ara ehackad balow.
□ Colourad eovara/
Couvartura da eoulaur
r~| Covara damagad/
D
Couvartura andommagia
Covara raatorad and/or laminatad/
Couvartura raataurAa at/ou pailicuMa
□ Covar titia miaaing/
La
D
D
D
D
titra da couvartura manqua
r~*1 Colourad mapa/
Cartaa gAographiquaa an eoulaur
□ Colourad init (i.a. othar than blua or black)/
Encra da eoulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou noira)
r~~| Colourad plataa and/or illuatrationa/
Planchaa at/ou illuatrationa m% eoulaur
Bound with otlwr matariai/
Rali4 avac d'autraa documanta
Tight binding may cauaa ahadowa or diatortion
along intarior margin/
Laraliura aarrte paut cauaar da I'ombra ou da la
diatoraion la kmg da la marga inlAriaura
Blank laavas added during restoration may
appear within tha text. Whenever posaibia. theae
have been omitted from filming/
11 se peut que certainae pages blanchee ajoutiae
lora d'una restauration apparaiaaant dana la taxte,
mala, loraque cela Atait poaaibie, caa pagae n'ont
paa «ti fiimiaa.
Additional comments:/
Commentaires supplAmantairas:
L'Inatitut a microfilm^ la meilleur exemplaira
qu'il lul a itA poaaibie de se procurer. Les dttaiis
da cat exemplaira qui aont paut-Atre uniquaa du
point da vue bibiiographiqua. qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dana la mAthoda normale de f iimaga
aont indiquAe ci-deaaoua.
□ Colourod pagae/
Pagaa da eoulaur
□ Pagae damaged/
Pagaa andommagAea
□ Pagaa raatorad and/or laminated/
Pagaa reataurAae et/ou peiliculAes
Pagae diecoiourad. stained or foxed/
Pegea d*color*es. tachatAes ou piquies
Pagae detached/
Pagaa ditachias
Showthrough
Tranaparence
Quality of prii
Qualit* in#gala de I'impreasion
Inciudaa supplementary meteri
Comprend du matirial aupplAmentaire
Only edition available/
Seule Mition diaponibia
D
Thia item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/
Ce document est film* au taux da rMuction indiquA ci'deaaous.
Tha
toti
Tha
I I Pagae detached/
r*T| Showthrough/
rn Quality of print variaa/
rn Inciudaa supplementary meteriei/
rn Only edition available/
ofti
film
Orifl
alofl
oth4
ftrat
alon
orii
Tha
ahal
TINI
Mai
diff<
anti
Pagaa wholly or partially obscured by erreta
aiipa. tiaauas. etc.. have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les poges totalement ou pertieiiement
obscurcies par un feuiiiet d'errata. una pelure,
etc.. ont 4ti fiimAes A nouveau de faf on A
obtenir la meiileure Image poasibia.
righ
raqi
mat
10X
14X
18X
22X
26X
30X
1
_y
12X
16X
20X
24X
2SX
32X
TlM copy fllm«d hmw Hm bMii raproduewi thanks
to tho gonorooity of:
I
itail*
I du
odificr
' une
mag*
quality
lagiMllty
tha
LakahMKl Unhranity
ThundtrBay
Tha imagaa appaarinfl hara ara tha
poaaibia eonaidariiHl tha eondMon
of tha ori^al copy ami In kaaping
fUming eontraet apaclfieatlona.
Original eoplaa in printad papar oovars ara fHmad
baglnntaig with tha f rant oovar and anding on
tha laat paga wvith a printad or illuatratad Impraa-
alon. or tha back covar whan appropriata. AN
othar original copioa ara fihnad baglnnlng on tha
first paga with a printad or INustratad impiaa-
slon. and anding on tha laat paga with a printad
or illuatratad impraaslon.
Tha last raoordad frama on aach microficha
ahall contain tha aymbol -^ (moaning "CON-
TINUED"), or tha aymbol ▼ (moaning "END"),
whiehavar appNaa.
Mapa, piataa, eharta. ate., may ba fHmad at
diffarant raductton ratioa. Thoaa too larga to ba
antiraly included in ona axpoaura wm fHmad
baginning in tha uppar laft hand eomor, loft to
right and top to bottom, aa many framaa aa
raquirad. Tha following diagrama illuatrata tha
mathod:
L'axamplaira fHm4 fut raproduit grica i la
gAndroait* da:
LakriiMd Univtrdty
ThundwrBay
Laa imagaa auhrantaa ont #ti raproduitaa avae la
plua grand aeln. compta tanu da la condition at
da la nattati da ramamplaira fllmA. at an
conformltA avae laa condhiona du contrat da
fHmaga.
Laa anampiairaa originaux dont la eouvartura it
paplar aat imprimAa aont fiimAa an comman^nt
par la premier plat at en tarmlnant aoit par la
damiAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'Impreealon ou d'lNuatration. aoit par la aacond
ptot. aolon le caa. Toua lee autrea axemplalrea
originaux aont fHmia en eommen^ant par la
pramlAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impreeakMi ou d'lHuatration at en terminant par
la demiAre pege qui comporte une telle
ampreinte.
Un dee aymbolee auhianta apparahra aur Ui
damlAre image do cheque microfiche, aelon le
caa: la aymbole -^ aignifie "A 8UIVRE". le
aymbole ▼ aignifie "FIN".
Lea cartea, planchea. tableeux, etc.. peuvent Atre
fiimto A dea teux de rMuction diff Arenta.
Loraque le document eat trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un aeul clichA. U eat f HmA A partir
de i'angle aupArieur gauche, de gauche A droite,
et de haut en baa. en prenant le nombre
d'imagea nAceaaaire. Lee diagrammea auh/anta
ilhiatrent la mAthode.
irrata
to
palure,
n A
D
32X
1 2 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
* / ^-^
WITH THE COMPLIMENTS OF Mr.
Mouse of €^ntmnnn9 Btliatts
FOURTH SESSION-SIXTH PARLIAMENT.
';4;
t^fM'
SPEECH OF MR. DALTON MCCARTHY, M.P.,
ON THE
FRICE lANBUABE IN THE MTH-Wra
TUESDAY, 18th FEBEUAEY, 1890.
Mr. McCarthy. I think it is not unreason-
able that, at this hour, I should claim the indul-
gence of the House. The debate has lasted over
five days, or nearly so, and during that time I
have been subjected to as much abuse certainly as
the rules of Parliament permit, and perhaps a
little more than the rules would warrant. I look
at my friends who are opposite to me and I find
no sympathetic sli^nces, and I have no reason to
expeek tnem. I look to the band of Nationalists
who tfnnk I am assailing their race and nationa-
lity and language, and I do not find any and I do
not ipvpect any. And even when I look amongst
ttuMe on this side who were once my friends and
alUes, I find, perhaps, more hostile glances than I
do elsewhere. I am standing here ah>ne, or almost
aloQS^ doing what I believe to be my duty, and,
notwithstanding the sneers, and the taunts, and the
insinuations that have been made, I propose to do
my duty to the end, if I stand alone, or almost
alone, on the floor of this House in the vote
which is shortly to be taken. The hon. gen-
tleman who has last spoken (Sir Richard Cart-
wright) has made no disguise of his feelings or
h:s principles. Hu speaks not from the principle
or statesmanship but from a purely partisan or
party point of view. He argues with his
friends behind hint and his friends before him
on that ground, and he appeals to them not to
fall into the trap which I am accused of having
laid and which some of those friends, he thinks,
have already fallen into, but to reject the Bill
which I have had the honor to introduce. Ho
makes this appeal without one word of argument
upon the merits of the Bill, without a word as '^~
wnether it is right or wrong in the interests of
people of the North-West, for whom we areJnro
to judge and to legislate upon this questicm^
simply with a view to the elhMt it may haVe eijii
the \abta of the people whom he thinks he leads
from the Province of Ontario. He warns them as
to the results. He knows well enough that they
have gone tway from him never to return, but he
tells them that they will have lost all if they
support such a measure as this and had better
return to their allegiance. I looked for better
things from that hon. gentleman, but have looked
in vain. His speech was a purely partisan speech,
without one reaeeming feature, without one thing
to raise it above the level of the mere party
machine. I welcome his statement even from
a party point of view if from no other, because
it leaves that hon. gentleman without a shred
of reputation as a statesman, which he once
pret«nded to be. But I have to address myself
not only to the hon. gentleman from South Oxford
(Sir Richard Cartwright). I have to speak of the
attack which has been made upon the measure
from other sources, and to endeavor to clear up. if
I can, the accusations which have been made.
The hon. members who have supported me are
small in number, though they are as true as steel.
They have been overborne in this debate by the
power of numbers — nq|; of argument ; and I will
endeavor to show that, amid the tissue of mis-
representation whi(.n has been poured out upon
our devoted hefids, hon. members will find tnat
there has been no warrant for any part of it. I
am accused of having got up this agitation, of
having originated it not only on matters of race,
but on matters of religion, and I am accused of
doing that for selfish purposes and ends. I would
like to know what end I had to serve in SHvering
myself from the gentleman I have hitherto sup-
ported, and from those hon. gentlemen behind me,
who, I have reason to believe, would not have
be^QjHMIUIing to see me advanced in the ranks of
_ hat could have led me to teUm this
'^'fiff'^"; has been untruly represented to the
through the House to the country ?
,db course in regard to this matter did
pot origiliitie last July in my address to my
Constituents. But on the flodr of this chamber, in
the presence of hon. members who hear me now,
I stated that I had discovered — as, I am ashamed
to say, I discovered for the first time — that the dptt!
language clause was in the North-West Act. W«
then talked it over, and I appeal to the hon. mjonlMlr
^27;i^ /I
,.,"»'
• ^n
PROPERTY
OF
'-AKpEAD
j,^
for West Aasiniboia (Mr. Davin) if we did not call
him acro88 the floor and ask him how it was, as our
attention had been called to the subject by a speech
having been delivered by a Lieutenant Governor of
the North-West Territories, for the first time, in
French, in the preceding session. That is what
aroused our atteiition to tiiis fact, and, if I am not
misinformed, that is what first drew attention to
the fact in the North-West — that a French Gover-
nor who was sent up there to govern what was
practically an English speaking people — true. Sir,
to the policy of his race, true to the object which
my hon. friends from Quebec have had in view
from the very first day tliat this country was ceded
to Great Britain, namely, to perpetuate their race ;
and they know full ■well, if other hon. members
choose to disregard it, that the perpetuation of
that race can only be by the perpetuation of their
language — I say, knowing that the Lieutenant
Governor of the Tvorth-West delivered there his
speech in French and 'English, and imported into
that Territory a secretary, in order that the laws
might be translated into French and published in
that language. This, Sir, it was, if I am not
grossly misinformed, which raised the indignation
of the members of the Legislative Assembly of the
North-West so much that they threatened, if that
occurred again, they would withdraw in a body.
Well, Sir, whether that be so or not, so far as I
am concerned it was as I hav-^ stated. I con-
sulted some of the hon. gentlemen who are
sitting about me and we agreed — some of these
hon. gentlemen have been true to their pledges,
but the voices of some others have lieen stifled
because they feared to hurt their party — ^we then
and there pledged ourselves that we would, at the
earliest opportunity, bring to the notice of this
House the iniquitous legislation which the hon.
member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills) had fathered,
which he pretended he had acquiesced in reluc-
tantly, but, as it now appears, he had deliberately
connived at its introduction into the Act of th
North- West Territories in the year 1878. That
was the beginning of it, and I notified my leader
at an early day that I would take this course. I
had nothing to do with the agitation in connection
with it. The agitation whif h has been spoken of
with regard to the Equal Rights Association got
no strength from my connection with it. I had
never even attendee! the convention which assem-
bled at Toronto ; all I had to do with it was to send
a telegram of regret that I was unable to attend,
being otherwise engaged in professional duties,
and that I sympathised with the motives and the
objects which had brought together the great band
of people from all parts of Ontario to take such
measures that for the future, at all events, their
voice should l)e heard on the floor of this Parlia-
ment. When it became my duty to visit my
constituents, as I did upon the 12th July — the
first time, I may state, that I ever addressed a
body of my constituents on that day, or made any
political utterance on the 12th July- -I then an-
nounced publicly, that I would take the earliest
opportunity of asking thb Parliament to undo
what, according to the records — I will not use the
wnfA " surreptitiously "—but what, according to
word
the records, had been stolen through in the dying
hours of the Session of 1878, un<ler the charge of
the hon. member for Bothwell. Was that an agita-
tion of which any man need 1)e ashamed ? Was
that pandering to )the already aroused passions ?
What followed ? It is said that I have undertaken
to act for the people of the North-West Territories ;
that no mission has been given me so to act for
them, and that I am an intruder. Sir, when it
became known that I puiposed to take my holidays
in the North-West, I was invited to address
meetings throughout the Province of Manitoba.
I had to decline to do so, except at one place,
which, ultimately, was fixed for me, at Portage la
Prairie.
Mr. WATSON. A Conservative centre.
Mr. McCarthy, when I got to Portage la
Prairie, and was on my way up to the North-
West, it was not that I was seeking to intrude
myself upon the domain of the North-West,
but my difficulty was to deny myself to
those who desired that I should address them
and in the end I merely addressed one meeting,
and that was at Calgary. I refused to make ad-
dresses in British Cmumbia, only to find on the
next morning that the newspapers abused me for
passing them by. I refused to address a meeting
at Winnipeg, only to find that I was subject to
castigation lor passing by the important centre of
that Province. The Ron. member says I spoke at
a (conservative centre. He knows pretty well, I
think, he will be honest enough to admit, that
tlie choice of place for holdingtne meeting, which
happened to be at Portages la Prairie, was not my
choice ; but when I stated, as I did state, that I
would only deliver one address in the North-
West, and those who invited me fixed on Portage
la Prairie as the place of the meeting, and I had
no choice in the matter, one way or the other.
I know the charge was made that it was chosen,
because it was in a constituencv represented by the
hon. member who has just made the interruption,
but I think that hon. member will do me the
justice to say that, at all events, that charge was
not founded so far as I am concerned. The charge
has also been made that I was playing the game
of the First Minister, that I was a mere tool in
his hands, that I was going through this country
without being sincere m my pledges, that in what
I stated I was carrving on an agitation in collusion
with him. Sir, I do not think that charge was
even worthy of contradiction, as it ought to be
denounced, but it is a charge which I now take
the opportunity, in the presence of the First Min-
ister, to say, as every hon. member on the floor of
this House must realise, was certainly wanting in
a tittle of foundation. I did what I thought was
honorable and fair by this hon. gentleman whom I
have hitherto followed. I have been careful to
hold no intercourse with my former leader, my
still leader in all questions affecting the general
policy of the country.
Some hon. MEMBERS. Oh, Oh. Hear, hear.
Mr. McCarthy. Yes ; I am not ashamed to
announce this fact. There is no reason why I
should cross the floor of this House, for there is,
in mv judgment, on that side an inability and an
unwillingness to grapple with the questions which
are looming up, and which call for settlement,
and I find a bigotry still more profound upon the
other side, a still greater truckling to that which,
as every man from the Province of Ontario knows,
I propose to devote the rest of my political life to
Mr. M
was tenij
these vie
ever I sp
on the fl(
language
■'V.
8
't
i(i-
lusion
was
to be
take
Min-
oor of
ing ill
was
horn I
ful to
r, my
ineral
I
ere 18,
[Will ail
which
enient,
lon the
which,
nows,
life to
denounce, and, ii possible, to overturn. There-
fore, why should I cross the floor of the House and
follow the banner of hon. gentlemen opposite?
I took an opportunity long ago of stating exactly
where I stood; I spbke in the Opera House in this
city — I do not know whether the First Minister
took the trouble of reading it, but it was there for
him to read — I stated then exactly where I stood.
I stated that when these questions came up, if my
party dififered from the view whicli ought to be
taken, I must stand alone, and I must follow these
questions to their end. On other questions I
stated there, as I have stated elsewhere, that aa I
was elected a supporter of the general policy of
the Oovernment, I was still a supporter of, and
still a lieliever in that policy. If my connec-
tion with the party that I have hitherto sup-
ported is an injury to that party, as I think
perhaps it is, if the gentlemen who sit behind
ine CIO not want me liere, I am willing
to go here or there, I care not where. I think I
can (uid a seat in this House, and I can still voice
the opinions of my own constituency, and a large
proportion of the people of Ontario, whether I
am turned out of this party or not, and whether
I am accepted in that party or not. Such has been
my course, and I am not ashamed of it. I de-
nounce that man as a traitor to his country, I care
not who he may be, who endeavors to arouse
political passions and race passions by misrepre-
senting my views ; he is the man who is doing the
wrong, he is the man who is endeavoring in this
Parliament and in this country to set race against
race and religion against religion, because u my
views are fairly looked at, if my statements are
fairly examined, if my speeches are fairly read, I
think no taint of bitterness will be found, because
no taint of bitterness exists, towards my French
Canadian fellow-citizens.
An hon, MEMBER. Oh, oh.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman may
laugh, but he must know that I have a perfect
right to the opinion which I entertain, that the
best interests of this country are to be subserved
by a unity of language, that the future of this
great Dominion, with which this Parliament is
charged, will be best worked out by the people of
this country coming together and speaking the
language of the majority, the tongue that ulti-
mately must be spoken on all this continent of
North America. And, if I am right in that, I do
no injustice to my Canadian fellow-subjects ; I do
only what is my right and my duty, if among
those hon. gentlemen and their constituents I
endeavor to propagate my views and to support
those views by arguments. I frankly admit, I do
not deny it, that to many of these hon. gentlemen
these are unpalatable views ; but is tliat any good
reason why, if I do think, and there are many who
think with me, I should hesitate upon the floor of
Parliament in temperate language, and my lan-
guage was temperate, to express these views.
Some hon. MEMBERS. Hear, hear.
Mr. McCarthy. Mv language, I re-assert,
was temperate, and I will refer to it to support
these views. My language was temperate wner-
ever I spoke, ancl it was more especially temperate
on the floor of Parliament, as an hon. gentleman's
language ought to be temperate here. No such
words escaped my lips as those which the Secre-
tary of State used towards me heijf to-day ; no
language of that kind has ever escaped my lips in
this debate, and I trust, notwithstanding the pro-
vocation of the Minister of Public Works, notwith-
standing the provocation I received from the
Secretary of State, who denounced me in laueuage
not fit for this Assembly, I trust no word will
escape my lips which will resemble those used in
the course tney have pursued towards me. My
arguments may tend to a certain conclusion, but
my tone was temperate, and I venture to say that
my argument was fairly drawn. Now, what was it ?
I ventured, in the first place, to give a short ac-
count of the history of this legislation. I ventured,
in the second place, to demonstrate, what I am
glad to know I did succeed in demonstrating be-
yond the region of contradiction, that the French
language was not, according to any treaty rights, to
be given, if you choose to call it so, to be made a part
of the system in the North- West Territory. For
that purpose it was necessary that I should trace
the history of the cession. I was sorry I intro-
duced even the word conquest, if it was offensive
to any hon. gentleman, and I am quite willing
to put the fact in any words, although most men
will admit that the words make very little diffe-
rence when the history is known to us all. I said,
ti'acing that history step by step from the cession
of 1763 to the passage of the British North Ame-
rica Act in 1867, that no word was to be found in
all that history to show why that Act was passed,
for which the hon. member for BothweU ( Mr.
Mills) is responsible, which was represented in
that day to the House, but which I am sorry to
say was not fairly or correctly represented to the
House at that time, by the hon. gentleman,
as a piece of legislation warranted upon a ground
of that kind. My next argument, and I think it
was a not unreasonable one, was this.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). The hon. gentleman
was himself a member of the House.
Mr. McCarthy. I am not at all unaware of
that fact. What I repeat is, that the matter was
misrepresented to this House.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). In what way?
Mr. McCarthy. By the hon. member for
Bothwell.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). I deny it.
Mr. McCarthy. I win tell the hon. gentle-
man in what way. That legislation was introduced
into the Senate upon the suggestion of Mr.
Girard, the Senator for Manitoba, but it was
placed there by the member of the Government
leading the Senate, Hon. Mr. Scott.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). I do not believe it,
Mr. McCarthy. I have better information
than the hon. gentleman, and, therefore, I shall
not withdraw my statement. I speak by the book ;
I speak on the authority of a gentleman who was
present ; I speak in a way I can prove. I can prove
that Senator Girard merely asked that some pro-
vision should be made by which the French half-
breeds would have the right to speak in their own
language in the courts ; and the matter was taken
into condideration by Hon. Mr. Scott.
Mr. CHAPLEAU. That is not the only thing
that was asked.
Mr. McCarthy. Tliat is correct according
to my information, and it is probably quite as good
as that possessed by the Secretary of State.
Some hon. MEMBERS. Oh, oh.
Mr. McCarthy. I have sat for five days in
this House listening to this debate. I have been
abused by almost every hon. gentleman who has
spoken, but I have made no interruption. It is
strange that if with ten to one against me they
cannot give mo even free speech.
Mr. CHAPLEAU. You stated as a fact that
which was not correct
Mr. McCarthy, whether correct or not, the
hon. gentleman knows the rules of debate. Sir, I
am speaking by the book of what I know from infor-
mation on the very highest authority. The lea<ler of
the Senate then stateuthatduring the recesshe would
consult his colleagues, and after recess he came down
and put the clause, which is now clause 110, into the
hands of Mr. Oirard, who moved it, and it was
carried in the Senate. If that be so — and we had no
clear explanation about it, although I threw out the
challenge in my opening remarks — then the reMp<m-
sibility for this trouble rests not upon my shoul-
ders but upon the shoulders of the hon. member
for Both well and his friends in the Government at
that time. Those are the men who ar^ responsible
for the trouble, and it l)ecame my duty to oring it
forward. 1 do not say I have not failed i.i my duty
heretofore ; I failed in my duty probably in not being
present when that was <lone, bv 1 1 do Tiot suppose
that a young memb<3r, for I w^.a tl-.en only in my
second yeor of my parliamentary life, would have
ventured to interpose at that stage of the Session.
That I have failed in my duty since I do not
fretend to deny, but when I did ascertain the facts
would have been wanting in my duty, feeling and
believing as I do feel and oeliove with respect to
this matter, if I had not brought it to the attention
of the country in the first place, and, in the second
place, to the attention of this House. With respect
to other matters on which I desire to speak before
I deal with the question itself : It is true I ad-
dressed a meeting in Montreal ; it is true I addressed
a meeting in this city of Ottawa, but those who
know the facts must know that those meetings
which I have ha^) the honor to address were not of
my seeking. I have a list of places and a bundle of
papers which would satisfy hon. gentlemen that
I, at all events, was not seeking to force myself upon
the public, but my attendance was demanded by the
great city of Montreal and by the city of Ottawa,
and it was otdy in answer to repeated calls that I
went to those different cities. So much with
respect to what has been said in regard to this
agitation. If hon. gentlemen will deal with the
matter fairly, they will see that there was no other
course open to me, feeling as I feel, and realising
my responsibility as a member of this House, but
to take the action I have pursued. But exception
has been taken to some of my language. I had the
misfortune to miss the speech of the hon. leader
of the Opposition, and I have not yet had time,
having only received Hannard this evening, to
•rPeruse his speech throughout ; but I am told the
non. gentleman assaile<l my speech on the ground
that -X had used harsh expressions with regard
to his nationality. If the non. gentleman under-
stood my remarks were with respect to his
nationality and his race, then I do not wonder
at the hon. gentleman's indignation. If the hon.
^{entlemun supposes that I was oupablu of apeak -
ing of any people of this Dominion, or any sec
tion of the people of this Dominion in these
terms, he was perfectly within his duty in calling
attention to the language and denouncing it in the
most vigorous terms. But that was not the moan-
ing of my words, and I think my hon. friend, a
master as he is of our own tongue, perfectly well
realised that was not the meaning. I spoke of the
national cry and the national party that he among
others has been establishing and fomenting in one
of the Provinces of this Dominion, and I denounced
that nationality, or rather that pretending nation-
ality as a bastard nationality. I again denounce
it here on the floor of Parliament as such. I say
that the legitimate nationality, and there is but
one, is the nationality common to us all, the
nationality that spreads from ocean to ocean and
embraces all races and peoples within this great
Dominion. I stiy that ii any one in any poi-tion or
comer of this Dominion gathers a party together,
whether English, Irish, Scotch or French, and en-
deavors to rise a cry on the nationality of that
particular race, there is no word that describes it
other than the word that I used, and to which the
hon. gentleman called attention. Although the
hon. gentleman thought I dare not, I have no
hesitation of repeating that statement on the floor
of this House, and there is no hon. member under-
standing the sense in which I stated it before, and
in whicn I repeat it now, who can deny that the
expression used was applicable.
Mr. LAURIER. The expression was unfortu-
nate.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman may
say so, but I do not know how else he could put it.
In justice to him I will say that he quoted my
words fairly, or otherwise I woidd have quoted
them myself. There is but one nationality that I,
at all events, am willing to recognise in this coun-
try. I do not speak of our loyalty to the Throne ;
I do not speak of our allegiance to the mother
country ; I speak of that higher nationality of Can-
adians to Canada. I speak not of one nationality,
not of one race, but of all Canada and all Canadians
joined together as we should be joined and proud
to acknowledge our allegiance. I regret that so
much time has been taken up by a somewhat per-
sonal explanation, but, perhaps, if I was to do the
subject justice with which I propose to deal, it was
necessary that I should clear away from the dis-
cussion those extraneous matters which those
opposed to me have thought well to introduce. We
perfectly well understand the arts of the politician.
\Ve do not always spread it so exactly or plainly
to the public as the innocent member for South
Oxford (Sir Richanl Cartwright) j we do not
always exactly announce that we arc givingparty
instructions when we speak on the floor of Parlia-
ment as tliat hon. gentleman has thought fit to do,
but it has been perfectly plain and perfectly clear
to the vision of tne most uninitiated among, us that
the object here hn - been not to discuss this matter
on its merits, not lo deal with this question, as it
ought to l)e dealt with, as to wether it should or
not become law, but uy abusing the plaintiffs attor-
ney — the unfortunate promoter of the Bill — and by
raising clouds of race prejudices and religious
prejudices as well, to have this Bill rejected because
•" \
) hon.
;puak-
y sec
tlieae
filing
in the
inean-
enil, a
ly well
) cf the
among
in one
lounced
nation-
snounce
I say
is but
all, the
ean and
is great
31-tion or
jogether,
ami en-
of that
icribes it
vhich the
ough the
have no
the floor
(er under-
efore, and
r that the
a nnfortu-
Bman may
uld put it.
luoted my
kve quoted
lity that I,
this coun-
le Throne ;
;he mother
ity of Can-
lationality,
Canadians
and proud
•et that so
iewhat per-
ils to do the
deal, it was
im the dis-
hich those
Iroduce. We
le politician.
ly or plainly
kr for South
we do not
;ivingparty
ir of Parlia-
jht fit to do,
[rfectly clear
long, us that
1 this matter
lestion, as it
it should or
fintiff 8 attor-
Bill— and by
Ind religious
Tected because
of matters which ought not to have lieen mentioned
in connection with it. What is the proposition we
are dealing with here ? It is a simple one. It is
said that it is the onterina of the thin end of
the wedge ; it is said that I have commenced a
crusade, and that this is the first thing I have
attempted and that my success in this will mean
success later on in other matters. Even if that wore
so, and if the continuance of the present condition
of things is an injury to the people of the North-
West — if this in calculated to do that great portion
of our Dominion an injustice, aie the people of the
North-West to suffer under this grievance because
of the imfortunate language — if it be unfortunate —
because of the unfortunate terms — if they be
unfortunate — in which the Bill was presented to
the House of Commons. I do not think the prac-
tical people of this country will accept any such
excuse. I will just add as a rider to the advice of the
hon. member tor South Oxford (Sir Richard Cart-
wright): " Do not I beseech you hon. members who
sit beliind him allow yourselves to be carried away
with such ill advice as that." This Bill and this
only must be dealt with on its merits. It is not
for the speech of the member who introduced it
you are going to vote, it is not for his speech in
the Opera House at Ottawa you are going to vote,
but you must vote " yea " or " nay " upon the Bill
itself which is now before you. If that Bill is one
which in the interests of our common country should
be passed, I do not think that excuses such as are
presented Iiere will save hon. gentlemen fiom the
just indignation of their constituents. Again,
there has oeen a very great misrepresentation of
what I stated in my speeclt. Mv argument upon
the question of language is to lie found in these
words :
"Now I venture to think I hovo to advance 3ome
explanation of the proposition whiuii I nm dealing with—
that is, that language ib of grnat importance, that it is of
vital oonsoauence to the nation, that the Ivnguage spoken
by its poonio should be common to them all, and that
they should not at all events be encouraged and trained
in speaking different languages."
Is there anything revolutionary in that ? Is this
the language of the incendiary ? Is there anything
here that ouglit not to have been uttered on the
floor of Parliament, ^ou can look throughout tlie
speech and you will find nothing more radical than
that. I gave my reasons and I cited what my
hon. friend from West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) was
good enough to sneer at as my "authorities." We
are not all, like the hon. member for Assiniboia,
versed in literature, history, philology, ethnology
and in all the other subjects he is so well acquainted
with, nor is the country so learned as that hon. gen-
tleman ; and I thought in justice to my position that
I should quote my authorities. This subject is a
comparatively new one to most of us, anil I do not
repent of it in the sliglitest degree that in tlie
introduction of this Bill I stated my reasons and
gave my authorities, which have been open to the
criticisms of hon. members who did me the honor
to listen to my address or who read my observa-
tions. After all the impassioned language we have
heard, after all the abuse that has been heaped
upon my devoted head, I ask : Do not those words of
mine stand unref uted and incapable of refutation t
The hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills) and
the hon. member for North York (Mr. Mulock) —
the loyal embryo knight from that constituency —
have first set up a man of straw and then
attacked him. The hon. member for Bothwell
contended that I had not gone far enough — that
I ought to liave struck at the language here in
this chamber and in the Province of Quebeo —
that I ought to have prevented its use in the pulpit,
on the platform, in the schools, and so on. Why, Sir,
we have nothing to do with these matters ; we have
no call to meddle with them ; butlamglad to be able
to inform the hon. gentleman that the North-West
Legislative Assembly are themselves dealing with
this matter of the schools, which is, ]ierhaps, the
most imi)ortant of all. They, discovering as they
did lately, just as we have cfiscovered lately, what
was going on in the so-called Separate schools in
the French settlements, have already, in advance
of the Province of Ontario, put an end to that, and
the teaching is now in the English tongue. What
I have Boiight for here is that which is in our
power. We have this enormous territory yet to
oe peopled by millions, and do we want to have
repeated there the spectacle which is presented on
the floor of this House, or the spectacle, still more
deplorable from a ymtriotic point of view, which is
depicted in the Legislative Chamber of the Pro-
vince of Quebec? Do you want that, Sir? It
would be biBtter that we all spoke French than
that half of us should speak French and half of us
English.
Mr. CHAPLEAU. Hear, hear.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman says
" hear, hear," and he is (juite right. I do not pre-
tend to know the glories of the French language, nut
I do know enough from what I have been told to
believe that it is a beautiful tongue. But that is
not the question we are dealing with. We know
that the French language is not and never can be
the language of British North America and we
ought to realise — more especially ought the French
Canadians of tliis country to realise — that their true
interest, as our true interest, is at as early a day
as possible to have but the one language spoken in
this country. Well, of course, I do not expect,
and it would be hardly reasonable to expect, that
those hon. gentlemen wlio agree with me that we
should all l>e better speaking French will go the
other step with me and agree that we should be
all the better speaking English, though the hon.
leader of tlie Opposition I am told^for I had not
the honor of hearing him — rather leaned to that
view. Now, I am not going to follow the hon. gentle-
me.i on the other side of the House in theirexcursions
into Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, Cape Colony,
Mauritius, and other places which have been
brought to our notice. I have stated before, and
I repeat, tliat these cases are not the rule, but
the exception ; and while I quite admit that the
Province of Quebec is also an exceptional case,
the legislation proposed here has no reference to
that Province ; it has no reference even to this
Parliament : it is with regard to the great terri-
tories of the North-West, which have always be-
longed to the Crown of England, which never be-
longed to the French in any sense, notwithstanding
the statement of the bishop which is in our Votes
and Proceedings. History tells us that north
the Height of Land and n'om there to the Pac
Ocean the Frenchman, although he went^^j"
went there as a trespasser, and was ®9>'V that
trespasser. I see a smile on the iacfi-^^°^'^
sopher f rom Bothwell, who endea^^
I
the French territory extended as far aa the Rooky
Mountains.
Mr. MIILL8 (Bothwell). So it did.
Mr. McCarthy. But that was settled by the
boundary decision. Those who represented the
Province of Ontario in that (lispute, before tlie
Privy Council, put forward that pretension, and
the hon. aentleman sat there with liis wig on his
head ready to argue, if he were only allowed, in
favor of it, but it was better argued by his seniors.
But the Privy Council rejected liis contention, and
the boundary was placed where we now have it.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). Not at all ; it was on
the ground of acquiescence tha.) they decided.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman is, of
course, wiser than the rest of us. As the Privy
Council gave no reason for their judtfineut, but
simply reported to Her Majesty where the bound-
ary was, 1 do not know where he got that infor-
mation.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). During the argument.
Mr. McCarthy. There was not one word
during the argument, which I took part in, which
wouUl lead to that conclusion. At all events, the
observation of a judge durir.g an argument is not
a decision.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell.) The observation of Lord
Selborne
Mr. McCarthy, if the hon, gentleman will
keep his soul in patience we shall get on more
easily with this debate. That being so, on what
pretense, I want to know, did that lion, gentle-
man's Government introduce this clause into the
North- West Territories Act ? 1 am not now dis-
cussine the Province of Manitoba ; but with regard
to the North- West Territories, is there a shadow of
reason for this provision ? If so, it has not yet Iteen
given to show why the dual language should be
imposed on the people of the North-West Terri-
tories. If there ue no answer, as no answer there
can be, then I want to know what is the duty of
this Parliament V Is the duty of this Parliament to
leave it there ? In that respect I understand that
the politician of the party, the hon. mem))er for
South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright) differs from
the hon. member for West Durham, and he is wise
to differ with him and withdraw himself from his
protection. The proposition of the hon. member
for West Durham, the most monstrous ever sub-
mitted to any assembly, is to keep the language
as an encouragement to the French to emiirrate to
the Noith-West, and to settle this tjuestion, Ly-and-
bye, after they get there. If they go in masses,
says the hon. member, I shall much regret it ; but
if they do go there in masses — and we perfectly
well know that they do not ao in any other way —
then, he said, something will have to be done. If
I might appeal to the reason of the House without
prejudice, I would say, let us look at the position
of the North-West to-day. We are told, and the
census confirms it, that in 1885 there were but
1,500 French Canadians in the North-West. If you
add the numberof the half-breeds of French descent,
the number will still be less than 5,000. I have
'ot the exact figures here. We know that at the
. i" to which I refer, there were in the three dis-
* ■'*• ?85 English-speaking people ; I am leaving
out of consideration. The ratio is
therefore 83 to 17 per cent., and if our records are
correct that disproportion has been vastly increased,
and it is not too much to say tiiat there are not to-
day in the North-West one-tenth of the people who
speak the French language to the nine-tenths who
speak the Knglish language. And moreover, when
we look ut the record we find that these French
are scattered.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell).
the mass ?
Then they are not in
Mr. McCarthy. " Then they are not in the
mass " is the very erudite observation made by the
hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills). They are
here, there and everywhere, in small bands and
surrounded by a lurgtf population of English -
speaking people That being so, can there l>e any
l«ttei time for scttliiiK this ([uestion than the
present ? Sliould there be an immigration in the
North- West, in the near future, of the French Cana-
dians, should they go in there induced by the speech
of the hon. memlnirfor West Durham (Mr. Blake),
or should this House l)e insane enough to adopt
the proposed resolution of thiit hon. gentleman, I
do not know, in common justice, how it wouhl be
possible to 8<vy, by-and-bve, to those who had immi-
grated upon the faith of such resolution, that this
dual language should be done away with. There-
fore, tliis is the time to deal with the question, and
I venture to say that this is the place. The hon.
member for South Oxford threw another insinua-
tion, and it certainly would be more satisfactory,
if instead of insinuating, he would make his state-
ments so clear that they could be understood. He
said that the North-West Council had been moved
to present the petition I sjioke of by some outside
influence, about which he indicated I knew some-
thing. What did the hon. gentleman mean ? Has
the hon. gentleman ever lieen in the North-West ?
Has he ever seen the members of the Council or of
the Assembly ? Does he know the character of
the men there ? My wliole connection with the
North-West Assembly commenced with stopping
over at Calgary and then passing on ; and I had only
one communication with one of the members of that
Council ofter this matter was dealt with by the
Council, and that was with reference to the form in
which the petition ought to l)e present' I to this
House, But to suppose that the North-West
Council, composed of 22 members, representing
three districts, whicli are in a much less degree
represented in this House, were not competent to
deal with this question ; to suppose tliat their
opinion is to have no weight with us, but it is to
be set at naught ; to suppose that the great doc-
trine of provincial right? in the case of tlic North-
West Council is not to have even the support of
hon. gentlemen oppositv;, is a very extraordinary
conclusion to arrive at. Now, what is the posi-
tion ■; The North-We&t Council, by a petition
which is practically unanimous — carried by 20
to 2 — and wliich lias been laid on the Table, asks
for the passage of a measure such as the one I have
introduced. Hearing that petitions were being
presented here from certain settlements, tliere was
at once— and without the slightest communication,
so far as I know, with any member of this House ;
without any communication at all events with me
— a burst of indignation at what appeared to these
men to be the imposition which was being prac-
tised upon this House, The petitions which the
m-
\ i
\
are not in
hon. inemberR presented, and which aroused this
indignation, were couched as follows : —
" The petition of the undenigned humbly expoae that at
a nubllo incetln| of the ratepayers of Lethbridke, District
of Alberta, N. W. T., held this second day or January,
A. D, 1890, they have been respectively appointed chair-
man and neoretary, and tlint the following resolution has
been unanimously adopted :
" WharoBR, the French language Is, under the conKtitu-
tion and the lawn, one of the two official languages of the
Doruinion ; and
" Whereas, under the ' North-West Territories Act '
the French In, equally with the Bnglish.an official lan-
guage, the suppression of Its use, as such, in Iho North-
west Territories, would be a fliigrant injustice towards
the settlors of French origin, who were the pioneers of
this country, and towards those of the same raci- who,
upon the faith of the constitution and existing lawf ime
and estiihlislioil theuisulvos in the North- West, aiul have
oontribiitud, with otlxT citizens of other nationalities, to
the dcvelopmunt of the rusourcog of the country ;
" Ue it resolved ;
" That a petition containing the resolution that has Just
been paiinod be signed by the chairman and the secretary
of this ineuMnfr, and bo addressed to the House of Com-
mons, asking that no law be passed alTccting the rights
of the population with regard to the official use of the
French laiiguagu, as guaranteed by the constitution and
the ' North-Wpst Turritories Act.' ''
No sooner did tlie news reach the North-West
than petitions suuli as this were l)einK circulated ;
than an indignation meeting was called at Leth-
bridge. What was the resiut of that meeting t I
have a telegram which was sent to me, and which
reads as follows : —
" At a meeting of the Board of Trade of Tjethbridge,
thirly-flve members present, the following resolution was
passed : —
" ' Moved by .T. D. Hlgginbotham, seconded by C. C.
McCaul, that whereas it appears from reports in the
public press that a petition purporting to be from the
ratepayers of Lethbridge, against the proposal to abolish
the dual language system, has boon presented to Parlia-
ment, this Uoard of Trade emphatically protest against
such petition being accepted as the /lews of the rate-
f layers or inhabitants of Letbbridge, because no such pub-
ic mooting was over held in Lethbridge, and the said
petition was secretly prepared and forwarded, and the
ratepayers of Lethbridge never had any opportunity of
voting thereon, and that a copy of this resolution bo tele-
graphed to Mr. Dalton McCarthy, and a copy forwarded
Dv mail to the public press. Please let I). W. Davis,
M.P., have copy of this telegram.
" W. A. GALLIHER,
" Secretary Board of Trade,"
Mr. CHAPLKAU. And the Privy Council has
a coniimmication which shows what the meeting
was and the number of people present, and which
exposes the falsity of that telegram.
Mr. McCarthy. I am very sorry the hon.
fantleman did not think lit to lay it upon the
able.
Mr. CHAPLE:AU. It is before the I'rivy
Council, and the names can be given and the
papers produced at any time my hon. friend wants
tliem.
Mr. McCarthy. I do not think any staite-
ment of that kind wouhl convince me, and 1 will
tell the hon. gentleman the reason why. I have
a letter from a gentleman, who has given me the
liberty to read it — a gentleman well known to tlie
right hon. the First Minister, and who is as in-
capable of telling an untruth as is the hon. the
Provincial Secretary himself.
" February 5th, 1890.
" Dear Mb. McCahthy,— The Empire publishes certain
resolutions in regard to the dual lan^uagr question, pur-
porting to have been passed at a publio meeting of rate-
Kayers at Lethbridge. The ' publio meeting ' must bar*
eon very privately called, as none of the rntepayeri to
the publio school ever heard of it. It was in fact a meet*
ing of the Roman Cathollo supporters of the separate
■onool, a very small minority— and they wera very care-
ful not to let the general publio get any inkling of their
proceedings,
" You can rely on it that the general feeling of Leth-
bridge and this dlitriot, is entirely in favor of your
motion,
" Yours faithfully,
•' C. C. McOAUL.
"You are at liberty to make any use of this letter that
you see fit."
That is not the only communication I got. I got a
letter from Banif from a gentleman perfectly well
known to the right hon. the First Minister, Mr.
Frederick J. Boswell :
" My Drar McCarthy.— I noticed in the Toronto Globe
the announcement that Davis, M. P. for Alberta, has pre-
sented to the House of Commons from Banff, Anthracite,
Canmore, ,&c., a resolution askingthe Parliament not
to do away with the French language in the Territories ; "
that the said resolutions wore passed at publio meeting
held in the above named places ; I can most positively
assure you that no such meetings were held either at
Banff, Anthracite or Canmore, the only meetings that
have been held were two, in reference to the regulations
and leases in the townsite of Banff.
" I think it right to let you know this, as I am with you
in re your dual la'jgnage Bill and am at work getting a
petition signed by all inhabitants of this place backing
you up. Dr. Brett, ourmemboroftheLogislative Assem-
bly, is strongly in your favor, and you mav depend that if
it is referred to the Assembly he will do his utmost to
carry it.
" I think it very unjust of Davis to misrepresent us.
" Wishing you and your Bill every success.
"I remain,
" Yours very sincerely,
"FRKDJ. BOSWELL."
I have also a telegram, which I believe was also
sent to the hon. memljer who represents Alberta in
this House (Mr. Davis), in these words :
"At a mass meeting in Calgary to-night. Mayor Lafferty,
chairman, the following resolutions passed by 2r)0 to 7 : —
" ' No. 1. That the use of a dual language in official pro-
ceedings in the North-W'ist Territories is uiinucessary,
expensive and calculated to prevent the complete union
of the several nationalities who reside in the Territories,
and that to brin|; about a united Canadian people in this
part of the Dominion, the Kngllsh language alone should
be legalised in the proceedings of the Legislative Assem-
bly, tne courts, and all other official bodies.
'' ' No. 2. That this meeting heartily endorses the action
of the Legislative Assembly at Kcgina, in reference to tlie
dual language, and requests that the petition presented
to the Dominion Government in pursuance of such action
be granted.
* No. 3. That a copy of the above resolutions be for-
D. W. Davis, M.P.. D'Alton . McCartliy, M.P.,
warded to
the Hon. James Louj^hvcd, and the Dominion Parliament,
and thatD. W. Davis, M.P., be requested to forward in
every way the movement for the abolition of French as
an official language in the Territories.' "
Now, let us see where we stand in regard to this
question, considered as a local one. Tlie memliers
of the North-West Council were elected two years
ago, if my memory serves me, since the members
of this House who sit for that district were elected.
They are twenty-two in number. They are spread,
of course, and come much more in contact with
the people of their respective territories than do
the members who sit here, whose districts are so
much larger. They have unanimously, or with
practical unanitiiity, petitioned this House to
abolish this clause in the North-West Territories
Act. On the motion being made here, and the
matter, being brought before Parliajueiit, and it
appearing that certain cut-and-dried petitions were
presented here from certain places in that Terri-
tory, the people there at once set about getting up
f
I i
oounter-p«titiniiN which I have had the honor to
prMwnt to the Huum. Thov arc not fwtition* pur- I
portinu to li« jigiiwl by the chairnieii and Hevrutariee !
of public meeting!, which may conceal the fact that
no «uch meeting! wore lield, but they are signed i
by the leailing men in the ulaces from which they |
come. For inatance, in ('algiirv, the petition was I
signed by the mayor at the lioacf, by two ux-niayort I
and over MM) others ; and, in anotlivr place, the |)eti- I
tion is Bigne<l l)y a French Catholic gentleman, who, |
I think must Ik; the gentleman who grows coA'')e, to
whom tho meinlwr for West Assiniboia (Mr. I)a>-in)
referred to the other night, though of that I ara
not iiuite sure. Tlien we have a public meeting at
whicii a vote of 2!)*) to 7 was lecorded in favor of
this change ; and vet we are told that we do not
know what the feelings of the pe'>(>lo of the North-
West arc in regard to this quent Kin, and titat we
ought to give them time for couKi'lcrution, ami to
allow the memliers of the Asseiiilily there another
opportunity of appealing to their constituents.
Ttiere are many other questions which conieljcfore
this House with which, if that argument is to pre-
vtiil, we would find it difficult to <lortl at all. But
I do not conceal the fact that I do not look upon
this matter as a hntal ({uestion. When I a<ldre88ed
the people of Calgary, and they were good enough
to say tliat they understcMxl I was to take a part
in the movement to abolish the aepamte school
system and the dual langua(;e in the North- West,
I said, as to the dual language I shall move in Par-
liament, whether you petition or not ; I look upon
that (juestion as a matter of national importance,
OS a matter affecting the whole Dominion, as a
matter which is proper to lie dealt with in
Parliament and not by a Local Legislature.
I found at the same time, in the organ of
the hon. gentleman which is published in the city
of Toronto, a statement that if the people in the
North -West signified their desire to aixilish the
use of that language officially, effect would be
given to their wish. When the Assembly met, al-
most tlieir earliest act — and I think not their least
important act — was to adopt this petition, which
placed on two grounds their desire to abolish the
use of that language : one, that it was not required
in the interest of tlie country ; and the other, that
it was contrary to sound public policy that two
lanuuageH should prevail. Follow that up by the
petitions I have hud tlie lionor to present, and by
the report which I have read from my place in
Parliament, and then, if the House is not seized of
the opinions of tlie North- West in regard to this
matter, I fail to see how we will ever be able to
obtain the views of that people on the subject. Do
not let us exaggerate, I have no desire at all to ex-
aggerate tlie importance of tliis question of
language. I udiiiit as freely as it can be admitted
that there are cases— ami the case of Switzerland
is one — where, under peculiar circumstances, people
speaking different languages, those languages
being officially there three instead of two, have
enjoyed a certain amount of prosperity, or
very great prosperity if you like. But do hon.
gentlemen see any analogy lietween Switzer-
land and Canada? The cantons of Switzer-
land came together us independent bodies under
bargains and terms and conditions to whicli every-
one of them had to agree, and that possesses nothing
of an analogy to the case of our own North-West.
But, if we look at the history of the Swiss Con-
federation, what do we find ? I Iwrdly expected
from the historian of tlie House, the hou. memlter
for West AssinilNlia ( Mr. Davin), that so much stress
would lie laid up<m the caae of Switi«rlan«l. I^t
us look at this case of Switzerland for a few mo-
ments, while I give a sliort statement of its history.
It is quite true that Switzerland is oomposeil of 22
cantons, it is (|uite true that there are three otticial
languages there, it is equally true that there is a
fourth language which is not recognisetl. But the
history of the Swiss constitution may briefly lie
summarised thus : Between 1291 and IH74, tho
oonfedorution has passe<l throuuh no less than seven
{riiases, of which, since 179H, there have lieen four
— one in I79N, one in 180.3, another in IHI.I, another
1848, and a revision in 1874. Is that the evi<luice
of a stable constitution t Is that tho kind of con-
stitution that the hon. member would like to have
fastened upon the people of his beloved North-
West ? Just let us see :
" The third phase lasted till 17gS "
I am reading f^om the best work, I believe, on
the snbjec*. the work of Sir F. O. Adams—
— " without modification, and wsa marked by intornal
diioord, religious wars, and rerolti of peaiunts."
That is the first beautiful picture we have of the
Confederation of Switzerland. This phase lasted
from 1815 to 1848 :
" Then oame an epoch of agitation and of discord.
" The Confederation suffered from a fundamental vice,
i, e., tho powerleggness of the central authority. The
Cantons had become too independent, and (tavu to their
deputiee initruotions differing widely from each other."
Now, here is what we find happening in 1847 :
" On the 4th November. 1847, after the deputies of the
Sonderbond had left tho Diet, this league was declared to
be di88olved,and hostilities broke out between the two con-
tending parties. A short and dooisivo oamnaign of t wenty-
flvo dayn ensued ; Freiburg whs tiikon by the Federal
troopii under Ucneral Dufour, later Lusom opened its
gates, ihe small cantons and the Vslais capitulated, and
the strife oame to an end."
Now, let me give you a comment upon this from
a paper which, perhaps, will not command the
attention of the members of this House, the 'Edin-
burgh Review, which, so late, as the month of
•January last, spoke of the Swiss Executive in
these words :
" It (the Swiss Executive) guides the policy of a state
eternally menaced by foreign complications ; it preserves
harmony throughout a confederacy made upoi twcnty-
twu cantons, each jealous of one another and sympathis-
ing only in common jealousy of tho Federal power."
I do not think that any of us would like to plant
in the virgin soil of the North-West, a constitution
such as the Swiss constitution, with tiie results
which have attended its use, and, therefore, the
illustration is very far fetched. Take another
illustration which we have had, take ('ape (^'olony ;
I dare say some hon. gentleman know more about
Cape Colony than I do, possibly some members of
this House may have visited it ; but is it not a fact
that the Dutch Boers, as they are called, have
rebelled and have left the English colony and have
formed an independent repuolic on its Iwrders?
Have not, within recent times, the British arms
suffered a defeat at their hands, and to-day is
there not very great trouble between the Dutch
who remain in the English colony ' Certainly, it
is the last example I would expect to be given by
any persons, cognisant with the facts in support of
a duality of language in any country. But need we
f
m
go so fai
wwirihiH
forliear <
of B<jhei
by two I
■peaking
tempt wi
these lai
arrived u
tion ? I
Joseph,
has great
to settle t
the Diet
('ermuii i
together,
a separat*
solution "
found in
resort to
from Hyi
necessary
from dest
position .
nirtlier th
not design
ing up th
leader of t
Canadian
•or to say t
Mr. LA
Mr. Mc{
Mr. LAI
Mr. Mel
say that th
gentleman
Ml. LAI
ality ?
Mr. MoC
but the fon
continent.
Mr. LAU
Mr. MoC
result of tl
regard to t
Dominion ?
one which it
the I'rovinci
outcome of
freely by Lr.
when I had t
no other. Bu
this House tf
liank, as thi
(Mr. Davin)
of the Provi
mine. I difl
possible to d
nave too gre
fellow-subjec
the language
their cause oi
recognise in
Tbe, one of tli
Tias produced
It may suit th
jtion to say ^h
Sspiratioiis, li
nee of Queb
g(i Ro fur afield ? Let nio give une tiiDi'e iMtance,
weHriboine oa these iiiHtanvea inay Im. I cannot
forlioMr (luotiuu to the Hoiiae the itrikiiiu oxiunple
of lioheiiiia. Boheiiiia, we all know, in inhnhiteil
by two nationalities, the < ierman*, and the Zecha,
apeak ing eauh their language. We know an at-
tempt waa made, not long ago, to put down one of
theae languaueH, and how haa a aettleniont lieen
arrivo(l at t What haa l>een the only piasilile anlu-
tion ? Under the intluence of the Kniperor Franuia
Joaeph, who ia beloved by hia aubjecta, and who
haa great influence among them, thev have reaolved
to aettle tiie ditiiuultv in ttiia extraordinarv faahion :
the Diet ia informally divided into tw<» Curiu-, one
C-'ernibn and the other Zouh, which sit and delwte
together, although each poaHeaaes the full power of
a aeparate and co-ordinate Houae. That ia the only
solution for a <luality of language which could Ite
found in liohemia, and it was found neuesaarv to
resort to that in order to prevent tliese people
from tlying at one anfither'a throats, it was found
necuHsury to resort to that to prevent the Oermana
from deserting to Bisnutrk. Now, what ia the
poaition here? — l)ecauae, it ia uaeless for us to go
lurtlier than our own country. If tliis language is
not dusigncdly perpetuated with the view of keep-
ing up the h renoli nationality — which the hon.
leader of the Opposition has l>een the only French
Canadian on the fl<M>r of Parliament to denounce,
-or to say that he does not sympathise with it.
Mr. LAURIER. What ?
Mr. McCarthy, a Frencli nationality.
Mr. LAURIER. What did you say 1
Mr. MciCARTHY. I sivy you denounced it ; I
.saj' that the leader of the Opposition is the only
gentleman of that imtionality who denounced it.
Mr. LAURIER. Denounce what, my nation-
ality ?
Mr. M(!CARTHY. No, not your nationality;
but the formation of a French nation upon this
continent.
Mr. LAURIER. No.
Mr. McCarthy. I ask, what is the ultimate
result of the system that is being pursued in
regard to the French language throughout this
Dominion ? Is there any other result, except the
one which is pointed out to us in newspapers in
the Province of Qucl>ec ? Is that not tlie logical
outcome of the views whicii were enunciated so
freely by La VMt4 which I read to this House
when I had tlie honor to introduce this Bill ? I know
no other. But I deny the right of any gentleman in
this House to repudiate the language of the mounte-
bank, as the hon. member for West Assiniboia
<Mr. Davin) calls him, the " mountebank Prenuer "
of the Province of Quebec. The language is not
mine. I differ from Mr. Mei-cier as mucTi as it is
possible to <lifFei' from any public man, but yet I
nave too great a respect for my French Canadian
, fellow-subjects to speak of tlmir First Minister in
I the language which was used by the champion of
their cause on the floor of this Parliament ; for I
[recognise in him, whatever his other faults may
[be, one of the greatest men which his nationality
pas produced in Canada. We know that although
It may suit the purposes cf the leader of the Opposi-
tion to say ^hat he does not sympi.i,in8e with these
spirations, his words are not uttered in the Prov-
ice of Quebec. We know that the hon. gentle-
man ia going hand in han<l with the Premier of the
Province of Quelle in all hia local conteata, in all
hia endeavora to faaten what he calla the Nation-
aliat Party upon that Province, and in which, up
to ^hia time, he haa Iwen aucceaaful. We know, >Sir,
t' .t the hon. gentleman waa preaent at a great
public meeting at which the I'remier of Queliou
announced the aapirationa of the French Canadian
people to l>e the formation of a great French nation-
ality, not under tlie ^lorioua Uiuon Jack, of which
we hear ao much in tha House from aome hon. gentle-
men who do not aay ao much al)out it in the Province
of Queliec, but under the Tricolor, and he adviaed
the meml>cr8 of lM)th parties to join under the
Tricolor of France, the flag of France, not that
tiicy wished to unite with France ; I quite agree
that it. not th ir aspiration ; the Republic of
France does not suit the French Canadians of that
view in the Province of Quel>ec ; but that they <lid
announce that their nationality was typified by
the French flag, the Tricolor of France. That
that language was uttered at a great meeting of
their fellow-countrymen, that that language waa
uttered by the Premier of Q\iebec in the presence
of the loader of the Oppoaition in thia House,
withcmt demur, without contratliction, without
remonstrance, a^id without reproach, goes without
saying
Mr. LAURIKR. Would the hon. gentleman
permit me to interrupt him ? On the occasion to
which he alluiles I spoke after Mr. Mercier, and I
spoke afterwards in Toronto, quoting word for word
the language I had used in Queliec.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman ia
perfectly right, and yet my statement remains
uncontradicted. The hon. gentleman did speak
in honeyed words, first of nis love for his own
nationality, and secondly of his love for the other
nationalities of the I)omini<iii. What I am cotn-
plainiiig of is this : if that was not the view of the
hon. gentleman, then and tliere, liefore the thou
sands who were assembled, liefore the great liotly
of his fellow II iiiiitrymen, was the time for prompt
repudiation ami not here. But no repudiation
came. Is it possible under these conditions for us
to stand still 'i Have we no other evidence of the
a.spiration8 of the hon. gentleman's party, because
lie is reaping the lienefit of that party, that party
which is his strength in the Province of Quebec ?
It is only a few days ago, certainly only a few
weeks ago, since the hon. gentleman wrote an
open letter calling upon his people, notwitlistond-
ing ie rebellion of the old Liberal Party of which
lie was at one time a memlier, when they rebelled
against this new proposed national cry of the Pre-
mier of the Province of Quebec ; the lion, gentle-
man instead of joining with his own confrtNres,
wrote to the constituency or a prominent member
in it, urging their support to the new party formed
by the Premier of Quebec.
Mr. LAURIER. Against the Tories.
Mr. McCarthy. He had been a Tory or a
Bleu, and he became a convert to the Nationalist
cry and went over to the Nationalist Party against
the remonstrances of the old Liberal Party of the
Province. The hon. gentleman thought tit to
interpose and interfere. Is that all ? When the
hon. gentleman joined in the agitation with res-
pect to Riel, I wonder did he ever think that he
10
would be denouncing a member of t' lis House for
incendiarism? I wonder did he ever think he
would be denouncing a brother member for raising
a cry and appealing to the passions of the people ?
Does the hon. gentleman remember his course
upon that occasion ? Sir, does he remember that
when Riel, after a fair trial, after being ably
defended and impartially tried, was justly uxe-
cuted.
Some hon. MEMBERS. Oh, Oh.
Mr. McCarthy justly executed—yes. At a
meeting in Montreal, led bv the lieutenant of the
hon. member for West Durliani (Mr. Blake) who
sits here for ■western Ontario — influenced by
purely patriotic considerations for the good of the
country — this extraordinary language was used by
the present leader of the Opposition at that excited
time, when a statesman would have naturally used a
language tending to quiet and subdue the disturbed
passions of the multitude. And what were the
words ?
" If he (Laurier) had been on the bankr of the Sasknt-
ohewan when the rebellion broke out, he would have
taken up arms nccainst the Govemmeni.."
He further said :
" It must be well understood by all that this wa!i not. a
war of races, but rather a vindication of the rights of one
race that claimed for the French tbnt which is granted to
all otbernationahties. The crime of Hcsina would still be
avenged, not only by the French, but bv nl\ other races.
They were asking for no favor, but tney only wanted
oommon justice pure and simple. They 'were as iealons
of the liberties of others as of their own ; and if injustice
was done one class, injustice might be done to others."
He further said :
"They cannot bring Riel back to life, but by patrio-
tically uniting together they can drive from power the
wretcnes who had 30 pitilessly put him to death." • •
"Sir John had not had the courage of dealing leniently
by a man who represented a cause which he had not
treated fairly and justly." * • •
" This was a free country and not even the Government
had the right of committing judicial murder."
This was the language of the hon. gentleman, who
has had the hardihood to speak of my moderate
terms as being calculated to arouse angry passions,
race difficulties and troubles. Does the hon. gen-
tleman repent of those words ? No. Hib benches
are filled by his fellew-countrymen by reason of
those words, and although some of them sit there
to-day not following or supporting him, it is simply
by reason of the accident that he did not secure a
majority. The hon. gentleman profits by that
language, and he has no reason to regret it. We
recognize that by means of this cry the then
(iovernmeut of the Pi'ovinee of Quebec, the best
(iovernnient the Province has had since Confeder-
ation was ejected from office. Why ? Because they
declined to vote censure upon the Administration
at Ottawa. Mr. Mercier, taking advantage of the
excited feeling of the Province, gathered together
the Nationalist Party, nationalist in the narrow
sense to which I have referred, and, joining hands
with the hon. gentleman hce, brought about a
result which deprived this House of many suppor-
ters from the French Province for hon. gentlemen
' on this side of the House, and brought strength to
hon. gentlemen opposite. People might not con-
sider the words of politicians of such serious
moment, but we cannot disregard what we see
going on before our eyes. The othev <''iy a yoimg
lady. Miss Mayliee, was sent down to the Post
Office Department in Quebec. She had the misfor-
tune to speak English and to come from Ontario ;
and will it be believed, and yet we know it perfectly
well to be the case, that those supporting the hon.
gentlemaa opposite at once denounced the Govern-
ment and the Postmaster General for making the
appointment.
Mr. LAURIER. And tho Ministerial papers,
too.
Mr. McCarthy. I am astounded at it. I
did not think that matters had gone to that length ;
I have not seen the references, and I will be
delighted if the hon. gentleman will furnish then*
to me. So it now happens, if the hon. gentleman's
statement is correct, and he would not make a
statement if it was not correct, that both French
parties in Quebec object to an English speaking
lady.
Some hon. MEMBERS. No, no.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman admits
it. I repeat that they object to an English lady
being sent down there. I have the words in some
of the newspapers if the hon. gentleman wishes
them. The howl was raised, and it was successful
I am sorry to say. I am sorry to know that the
old politeness of the French race seems to have
departed, for I thought a young lady would have
been favorably received ; but objection was made
by L' Elt.rtf.ivr and another paper. Here are the
words :
" "L' Ev^nement ]oms us in protesting against the nomi-
nation of Miss Maybee to the Post Office Inspector's Office.
The rumor going round, according to what VEvinfment
says, is that we are going to give employment in the Civil
Service at Quebec to a lady of Ontario. As the occupa-
tion of this lady would simply be to run a typewriter in
the post office, we don't see whv we should go so far to get
a typewriter that we could find so easily at nome.
It is not in oar knowledge, and it is not in the know-
ledge, of any person, that they would think for a moment
of bringing a French Canadian girl from Quebec or Mon-
treal to occupy a position of any kind of employment in
Ontario. Are we supposed to be more generous, more
agreable, than our neighbors, especially when we have
persons who are qualified to do the work in question ? "
I can assure the hon. gentleman that if a
young lady is sent to Ontario or Toronto she will
not l>e denounced in the public press, but she will
be received with kinilness, courtesy and considera-
tion. Another article follows, which I need not
trouble the House by reading. That is another
result of these race troubles and race <lifficulties.
But it is not the most serious in my humble judg-
ment that m liavi! to deal with. I find in a Frencii
Eublication of recent date, M. Tarilivel, under the
eading "Anglicism — Behold the Enemy," writes :
" Reflecting a little upon the situation I saw a great
danger for the future of the French Canadian race.
Language is the soul of a nation. If the Basques have
been able so long to preserve intact their ancient institu-
tions amidst the revolutions and the wars which have
oonvuliiod France and Si>ain ; if the Bretons and the
Welsh have remained distinct from the races which sur-
round them, they have their lanffuage to thank for it. If
Ireland struggles in v.iin to regain her independence, it
is because she no longer speaks the language of her olil
kings. Do you wish to cause a people to disappear?
Destroy its language. It is because the^ comprehend
this truth that Russia shows herself so inexorable to-
wards the Polish language, and that Germany socksitu
proscribe the French language of Alsace-Lorraine, jit
is then important for a people, especially a conquered
people, to preserve its language."
The same writer again says :
" I stop here. I make no claim to have axhausted the
subject, far from it. I have simply desirea to utter thi«
note of alarm ; ' Fight the anglifloation of the French
language, ' and at the same time to give some proofs thiit
I tliink
VMtd.
these are
this is th«
if these
meetings
enough to
what DOS
natural o
floor of
me I thinl
speak of
that his
all that
11
im Ontario ;
ir it perfectly
ing the hon.
the Govern-
making the
Btial papers,
led at it. I
J that length;
id I will be
furnish them
1. gentleman's
[ not make a
, both French
jlish speaking
tleman admits
I English lady
words in some
itleman wishes
; was successful
know that the
seems to have
dy would have
ction was made
Here are the
against the nomi-
1 Inspector's Otnoe.
what i:£«£"''K"|
)vinent in the Own
10. Astheoqcupa-
run a typewnterin
luld go 80 far to got
y at home.
L not in theknow-
hink for a moment
,m Quebec or Mon-
of employment in
re generous, more
lly %hon we have
rk in question (
man that if a
Toronto she wiU
iress, but she will
sy and considera-
hich I need not
That is another
- race difficulties,
my humble judg-
I find in a French
irdivel, under the
Enemy," writes :
tiou I saw a great
oh Canadian race,
f the Basques have
■heir ancient mstitu-
S wars which have
,e Bretons and the
the races which sur-
re to thank for It. It
er independence. It
language ot her old
eople to disappear f
ge they comprehend
.,lf so inexorable to- .
it Germany scekslto
Alsace-Lorraine. «lt ■
>eoiaUy a conquered
o have fxhausted the
desired to utter thi?
ation of the Jrench
give some proots tniii
this enemy is rosily to be feared. Let others with more
authority than I posieis continue the combat ; and if one
day those who love the French language decide to make a
grand awault, all along the line, be assured that I shall
not fail to respond to the appeal,"
Mr. LAURIER. What paper is tUat from ?
Mr. McCarthy, it is not a paper at all.
Mr. GIROUARD. Surely we are entitled to
know what the hon. gentleman is reading from.
Mr. FISET. May I <isk the hon. gentleman from
what journal he is rea ling ? I do not understand
that he has told us fro n what paper he is quoting.
Mr. McCarthy, it ib a pamphlet by Tardivel.
Then another writer, Mr. Manseau, in a book pub-
lished in 1881, writes :
" The dictionary gives the technical definition of
Analicimii. Hero follows, in our opinion, a definition
from the heart. It is a spot of blood that shows us through
what place the claws of the British lion have passed; and
these claws (who is there that knows it not) torture and
flag our language until they kill it."
I will not trouble the House witli more extracts
of this description, but I will di aw the attention
of my hon. friends on both sides to the instruction
given in the French schools, and if there is then an
Hon. member who thinks that children so taught
or instructed with regard to this history of our
country can grow up as British citizens, or British
subjects, or as loyal except to their own French
Canadian nationality, or that anything can be
expected from them except the language of La
Vdritd and the language of the Premier of the
Province of Quebec ; then I think that hon.
gentlemen will be incapable of reasoning. In this
history I find the following :
" VTJi. England, fearful of losing Canada, in view of the
menaciiig attitude of the United States, made haste to
grant anew constitution more favorable to the Catholics."
Mr. AMYOT. Hear, hear.
Mr: McCarthy. The hon. gentleman says
"Hear, hear." There is not a shadow of doubt
that this is the teachings in the schools. Every
concession that has been obtained is always pic-
tured to the people of the Province of Quebec as
having been wrung from tyrants and despots and
not granted by the free-will of the people.
Mr. AMYOT. You are a tyrant to us.
Some lion. MEMBERS. Order.
Mr. McCarthy. I quote also another selec
tioii from one of these histories :
" The material forces of New France bad to succumb in
the end, but the providential forces still do their work in
the colony, which is jirobably destined to play on this
continent the part which old France has played on the
Continent of Europe."
I think I have read of similar language in La
Viriti. If this is the tetvching of the schools, if
these are the writings of the different writers, if
this is the language of the Premier of the Province,
if these are the utterances at the great public
meetings held in that Province (and no man is bold
enough to assert a single word of dissent to them)
what possible outcome can there be except the
natural outcome which is here announced on the
floor of Parliament. If my ears did not deceive
me I think I heard the Minister of Public Works
speak of the autonomy of his race, and state
that his nation would live in spite of
all that miglit be done against it. We must
remember that this has been a British colony for
over a century and a quarter, and that within a,,
very short period after the cession — I was nearly
usine the unfortunate word conquest — a distini-
guished French traveller passing through here was
able to announce that the French Canadians were
better treated under the English than they were un-
der their own Kings. We must remember that from
that time to this they have enjoyed a liberty which
they could not possibly have enjoyed under the
Crown of France yet ; notwithstanding this, they
are endeavoring to perpetuate this race and nation
cry mainly by their language, which is the soul of
the nation, as this writer says. If the language Wv.s-
permitted to die out, as it would naturally do, all
this ambition, which must end in delusion, which
can never end in anything but delusion and which
can never lead to any accomplished fact, would soon
disappear. We have no jealousy of the Germans,
we have no jealousy of any other nationality .because-
we know that while they speak in their own tongue,
and for years after they come here are not able to-
speak any other tongue, yet they do not propose to
divide the people of this country by their race crie»
and race feelings. Now these are the problems we
have to deal with. There is no use our going ta
Switzerland or to Austro-Hungary for examples.
We have to deal with the question we have here at
home ; and the practical question is, whether, under
these circumstances, we should permit this kind of
thing to go on. Whatever I might do bye-and-
by, no man is responsible for my acts. The
gentlemen who vote with me now, and the
gentlemen who disagree with me, are not respon-
sible for what I may do bye-and-by. I may state —
as these hon. gentlemen who have done me the
honor of following my utterances with so much
care know well — that I have never pretended to
believe or to say that it was possible to deal witk
the dual language in the Province of Quebec. 1
realise that that is beyond the hope of being dealt
with by any possible legislation. I realise that
that has been allowed to grow into such monstrous-
proportions that we can never hope to cope with it,
except by natural ways and by natural causes
which possibly may work a cure. Not in our day, but
within perhaps a time that one can imagine, it may
work out its own cure. I look forward to the
assimilation that is going on by reason of the
travelling backwards and forwards between the
French Canadians of Quebec and the Eastern
States of the Union. Do what you will, the people
do go and will go to the Eastern States. Do what
you will, they will more or less imbibe the language
of that great country and disseminate it amongst
those whom th«y have left behind. From this
sitle we are taking care that the Province of
Ontario will maintain its character as an Eng-
lish speaking Province. This process is going on,.
I have great hope, and it is a hope which
does no injustice to my French Canadian fellow
citizens, that bye-and-by the difficulty even
in the Province of Quebec may vanish. So
that I have never had the ambition, I have never
dreamed of interfering. I do not say, Sir, that the
time may not come when it will be proper to move-
though in that I do not find much sympathy in this
House — to do away with the dual language in this
Chamber. The time has not come yet, tliat is quite
certain. What we are dealing with now is this
question in the North -West, ana do not let. us mix
12
up questions that have nothing at all to do with it.
One hon. gentleman said I had introduced even a
Teligious cry. Why, Sir, is freedom of speech so
gone in this country that I cannot express my dissent
From the system of separate schools which exists in
my own Province without being told that I am
raising a religious cry ? Is that a question of reli-
gion ? Is not that a question of great state policy
«8 to how our children shall be educated ? And I
do hope that before very long the delegation from
the Province of Ontario will call on this House for
its ai < 1 to blot out the Separate School clause from the
Briti . I North America Act, which limits and fetters
the people of that Province. That clause was carried
'by a majority of French Canadians, ani was imposed
upon the people of Ontario against their will ; and
I am sorry to differ from my hon. leader on that
'question. He tells us — and I never feel more
humiliated than when I hear him speak on that
subject — that he participated in imposing that
.Separate School system upon us. But is it
possible that the free people of Ontario are not to be
placed in the same position as the people by the
sea on both sides of them, in the Maritime Pro-
vinces and in British Columbia? If they could
not ask this Parliament to aid in freeing them from
the restrictions imposed upon them I would despair
of the freedom of this country. But that has no-
thing to do with this question. All these are aside
from it, and will be properly dealt with when they
'Come up and not before. What we are dealing
with now is the question whether this Bill for the
repeal of the dual language in the North-West should
or should not become law ; that and that only is the
•question before us. I am sorry, Sir, that the hon.
member for West Durham (Mr. Blake) has been
compelled by the unfortunate event to which he
.alluded to absent himself from this discussion. It
is not pleasant to speak of an hon. gentleman be-
hind his back, for I cannot quite accept the theory
put forward by the hon. member for East Simcoe
(Mr. Cook), that that gives one a better privilege
to abuse a man ; but, perhaps, I may be allowed to
^flay a few words about that hon. gentleman's pro-
positiim. You will remember. Sir, that he read
us a lecture : he told us how we were not to dis-
turb the harmony that at present existed ; how we
were to l>e careful of raising race cries ; how he
recognised tliat there was a mass of ignorance,
prejudice and bigotry which only required the
hand of an incendiary to inflame it, and he rather
intimated that the hand of the incendiary had
already been laid to that mass ; and then he
wouncl up with a fervent appeal that we sliould
■never interfere with the covenant, as he called it,
made at the time of Confederation. I felt that if
that hon. gentleman had not already surrendered
to French influences of the Province of Quebec
he made his capitulation the other night. But his
most extraordinary statement was tliat we were not
informed of tlie opinion of the people of the North-
West, that their i-epresentatives had no mandate
from them to take up and deal with this question.
Did that lion, gentleman remember that when in the
Province of Ontario he agitated the country from end
to end with regard to rt>e murder of poor Thomas
Scott, he sat in the Legislature of Ontario, whe-e
he had no mandate to deal with that question ?
Did the hon. gentleman remember that on o.ie
•occasion he himself lirought into this House a re-
'- solution which was offensive to a great many of us
with regard to the Irish question, in order that he
might secure the Irish section of our population
and draw them to his atandard, althoiurh he had
no mandate, and although this House had no
authority to speak with regard to Imperial con-
cerns ? Did that hon. gentleman remember that
on another occasion he voted for, if he did not
move, a resolution on the subject of the dis-
establishment of the Trish Church ? And yet
he undertook to as.- that the Legislature of
the North-West had nu right to petition this Par-
liament. We had a right to pass offensive resolu-
tions and send them home to England, notwith-
standing the rebuff we met with from the Imperial
authorities ; but the hon. gentleman ventured to
assert that the representatives of the North-West
hadnorightto petition or toexpresstheir wishes that
this clause should be stricken out of the North-West
Territories Act. I will say no more in the absence
of that hon. gentleman. I now desire, before
closing, to say a word or two on the merits of the
various motions before the Chair. The amendment
of the hon. member for Berthier ( Mr. Beausoleil)
has received but little favor from any of the
English-speaking members. Itisone,Ith'nk, impos-
sible of acceptance. It announces that if we repeal
a clause in the North-West Act, put in under the
extraordinary circumstances to which reference
has been made, and allowed to remain because
attention has not been drawn to it, we shall be
shaking the stability of our institutions and des-
troying the peace and progress of the North-West.
The mere recital of that resolution carries its
condemnation with it. The other amendment with
which wc havQ to deal, and which seems to find a
good deal of favor, is the amendment of my hon.
friend the member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) ;
and before I deal with that I have somewhat of an
apology to make to that hon. gentleman and
to this House. I am accused of interfering
with the prerogatives of the members from
the North-West. Surely, said the hon. Minister
of Public Works, echoed by the hon. Secretary of
State, there were members in this House repre-
senting the North-West whose duty it was to
bring this question to the attention of this
chamber, and there was rather an insinuation
thrown out by tlie hon. member for Assiniboia
himself in his very opening words that my action
was an intrusion on his domain ; and, if you will
pardon me saying so, the bitterness — but that is
too strong a word, for he could not be bitter if he
tried, but the appearonee of bitterness — which
characterised his observation I tliought had its
origin somewhat in pique, that anyone except that
hon. gentleman himself should venture to deal
with questions affecting the people of the North-
West. He and he alone is the guardian of their
interests, the only member who has a right to
speak on their behalf, and any one else wlio at-
tempts to do so must expect to meet with the
castigation administered to me in the opening of
this debate.
Mr. DAVIN. I said you had a right.
Mr. McCarthy. Yes ; but the very observa-
tion rather suggested an apology from me. This
is my excuse, and the only excuse I give— I am
reading from the Qu'Appelle Projiress of 7th Feb-
I ruary inst. : —
!»
■
I
ibserva-
This
-I am
th Feb-
" Dalton McCarthy introduced into the Dominion Par-
liament his Bill to abolish the official use of the French
language in the North-West. He delivered a very tem-
perate and dispassionate speech, f^U of facts and ar^-
ments."
That is not the way my feeble efiPorts were charac-
terised in this House ; but that seems to be the
opinion of the outside world, at all events.
" The second reading is to take place on Wednesday
next, when it is expected there will be a big flght. We
are informed on good authority that all the North-West
representatives will vote against it. If they do so, their
constituents should call upon them to resign forthwith.
We are also informed that Mr. N. F. Davin will speak
against it. West Assiniboia is about the best mis-repre-
sented constituency in the North-West, This country is
almost unanimous in favor of Mr. McCarthy's Bill, but its
representatives all belong to the party machine and must
represent the machine in preference to the country."
That, Mr. Speaker, is my apology for venturing to
introduce this point to the notice of the House.
Now, with regard to the amendment of that hon.
gentleman : what is it ">. My motion is that the Bill
be read the second time. Great fault is found with
the preamble. The preamble is worse than the
enacting clause ; the enacting clause is harmless
and the preamble is something fearful. Well, to
the laymen of the House, perhaps, explanations are
necessary about the preamble. To the lawyers of
the House an explanation is not called for. It is
quite certain, as every lawyer in this House knows,
that tlie preamble neither adds to nor takes from
the effect of the enacting clause. The preamble, in
this case, I quite admit, was unnecessary. While I
do not at all withdraw from the sentiment con-
tained in that preamble, yet as an efifective piece of
legislation I am free to admit the Bill would be
perfectly as good without as with the pi'eamble.
Now, if the hon. gentlemen in this House are
sincere, and I am bound to believe in their
sincerity ; if they desire that ti.'s dual clause
should be expunged or repealed — the hon. member
for West Durham thought "expunge" was a very
improper word to use ; one has to be very careful
of his language and must not use words, no matter
how plain they may be, except with the greatest
care — well, I will call it repeal, or anything you
will. But, I say, if hon. gentlemen are sincere in
their desire to repeal this clause, the way to do
that is to pass the Bill to the second reading, and
those who are opposed to the preamble can tlien
have it struck out. The preamble of a private Bill
is the all-essential portion ; if the preamble be not
carried, the Bill does not pass. Tlie preamble of a
public Bill is wholly unessential ; its only possible
use can be to make an ambiguous portion of the
enacting clause plain, if ambiguity there l)e ; and I
say liere that while I do not withdraw from that
preamble, while I think the statement in it is per-
fectly true, namely :
" Whereas it is expedient in the interest of the national
unity of the Dominion that there should be community
of language among the people of Canada."
Who will say nay to that ? It may not be abso-
lutelj' essential ; that is not tlie proposition. I
say, it is expedient, and every gentleman who has
spoken on this question has admitted its expedi-
ency. Even the hon. member for West Durham
said that if we were all of one race and one
nationality, speaking one tongue, the task before
us would be simpler and easier, and, therefore, the
proposition before us is not incorrect and un-
founded. But to any hon. gentleman who objects
to it, all I can say is, when the Bill goes to Com-
mittee, should it pass the second reading, let him
object to the preamble, and I shall be the first to
withdraw it. I want the body of the Bill, and do
not care for the preamble, and if there lie a member
of this Hou»; who desires the Bill and objects to the
preamble, there s'lall be no opposition, as far as I
am concerned, to this preamble being obliterated,
or expunged, to use any term you please. I will
say more. I did not iii the least dream that the
words should bo taken up in an offensive sense,
and I can only most heartily express my regret
that any of my French Canadian friends should be
offended by this clause in the Bill, or that I should
have hurt the sentiments of French sjjeaking mem-
bers of this House, or the French Canadians
throughout the country — for such was far from my
intention. But what was the proposition of the
hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) ?
It was that the Bill be not now read a second
time. That is, he does not want the dual language
expunged, nor does he want to give the power to
the North-West Territories to expunge it.
Mr. DAVIN. I do.
Mr. McCarthy. Then the hon. gentleman
has not taken the proper course. If he wanted
that, his proper course was to let the Bill be
read a second time, and to move into Committee
that clause 1 be struck out and the words of liis
amendment inserted in its stead :
" That the said Bill be not now read a second time, but
that it be resolved,— That it is expedient that the Legisla-
tive Assembly of the North-West Territories be authorised
to deal with the subject-matter of this Bill by Ordinance
or enactment after the next general election for the said
Territories."
But the effect of the hon. gentleman's amendment
is to kill the Bill. Make no mistake about it. If
the Bill is not read a second time, there it stops.
Then what takes place ? Hon. gentlemen say they
want to repeal the dual language clause, but they
want to do that with as much gentleness and con-
sideration for the feelings and susceptibilities of
the French-speaking people as possible. Then, the
way to do that is to pass the Bill, rejecting the
preamble, and inserting the -ilause of the hon.
member for West Assiniboia as the substantial
part of the Bill. But if you say that the Bill do
not pass, but that it be resolved, &c. , and make that
resolution as long as you please, what follows?
Who is to move ? The Government cannot move, for
they are at sixes and sevens on this subject. There
is the resolution. I certainly would not move it,
as I do not approve of it. The hon. member for
Assiniboia would not move it, because he would
o.. d the powers that be.
Mr. DAVIN. I would move it if necessary.
Mr. McCarthy. Does the liou. gentleman
doubt the necessity ?
Mr. DAVIN. No.
Mr. McCarthy. Then I think the hon. gen-
tleman would have to move, and instead of being
the admired of all his surroun<liiigs, he will oc-
cupy the position I do. He will be belated and
berated, and will fall from the highest stage or
pinnacle of greatness whicli he lias occupied for
the last few days. Do not now rush in where angels
fear to tread ; and I do not think the hon. gentlenum
will make any such mistake. Wliy, let us not
deal with this subject in a simple way. Punish
me if you will ; expel nie if you please ; because I
14
venture to put in this preamble, and to apeak at
the Opera Houae, and Mcauae I ventured to claim
that tne Engliah language ahould rule in thia coun-
try, but paas the BiU. The way to paas the Bill
ia to go to a aecond reading and then to expunge
what ia in the preamble. Do not paa the Bill, if it
-auita your pleasure, but vote the amendment of the
hon. member for Berthier. That ia honeat and
atraightforward, and that, at all eventa, we can
understand. We can underatand the views and
the policy of the hon. gentlemen who are abaolutoly
oppoaed to any change. But hon. gentlemen who
wiah to get rid of thia queation by a side iaaue, who
try to do and not to do it, will not, although they
may deceive this comttrv. That they may depend
upon. I listened to the argument of the hon.
member for Kent (Mr. Landry), and I listened to
the argument of my hon. friend from Rouville (Mr.
Oieault), and no moie atraightforward or honor-
able statement of the case was given on that side of
the House. It contrasted greatly with the state-
ment from the Treoaury benchea of its compatriots
from Quebec ; it was arguments, not abuse. It
was a reason for us to pause in our course, and
was not simply denunciation of those who differ
from the views which those hon. gentlemen both
take. But I say their view is the correct view. It
is this Parliament, and it is this Parliament alone,
which has the power to deal with this queation. It
ia thia Parliament which put that clauae in, imin-
vited. It ia this Parliament which has the
authority to take that clause out. Why should
we abnegate our duties or our functions on
the ground of expediency or to get rid of a tempor-
ary difiBculty ? Will we, in the interest of our
country, be doing a service ? Will we not be
keeping open <'hat runni'ig sore of which the
hon. gentleman from South Oxford (Sir Richard
Cartwright) spoke ? We put the trouble on the
people of the North- West, out, although we should
denude ournelvea of our authority and endeavor to
get rid of thia queation for the moment, it will
remain a burning question in old Canada and in the
new Provinces, more especially, if you postpone
the decision of this question until after the next
general elections. I am commissioned to read the
opinion of a senator who once occupied a seat in
this Houae, and whose voice is now unable to be
heard here.
Mr. DAVIN. Name.
Mr. McCarthy. Senator Perley. His obser-
vations ought to have weight. Writing to me on
the 12th February, he say a :
" My Dkar Sir,— Stand firm for yoar resolution re dual
language in tbo North-West Territories. The North- West
is with you. I get letters by every mail stronxly urginct
me to help you in this matter. Davin's amendment ir
carried might lead to eerious results in some of the oonsti-
tuencicfi, only paralleled by the Hull affair of last night.
Partioulary might thia be the case in those constituencies
where it was stated by Mr. Bits, member of the Legis-
lative Assembly, that so few of the people could read in
any lane;uage and their prejudices so easily excited. I
contend it is wrong to submit a question of such a cha-
racter to the vote of the ^eop'e. Discussion and election-
eering talk on such an issue would tend to disturb the
harmony and good-feeling that is fast being obtained
between the people of different nationalities and creeds
in the North-WostTorritories. I write this advisedly and
with the full knowledge of the responsibility of a repre-
sentative of the people in the North-West Territories
from end to end.
" Tours, &e.j
" W. D. PBBLEY."
Ia not that reaaonable ? Ia it reasonable, when we
have thia matter before us now — a matter which
haa excited, we are told, a ^reat deal of feeling in
thia chamber, a matter which haa excited a good
deal of feeling out of doora, having opiniona fonned
one way or the other about it, having a means of
knowledge denied to the representatives of the
North-West Territories, we, who have this great
duty thrown upon ua here, ahould refuae to dis-
charge it and ask the unfortunate people of the
North-West to have this bone of contention thrown
upon them. That may be ri^ht from a party point
of view ; I venture to say it is not right from a
atateaman'a point of view. Thia Bill may ue wrong,
it may be that the Bill ought to be rejected, but
there can be no juatification for aending it to the
people of the North-West to be dealt with. I deny
that I have gone back upon any viewa that I have
advocated in regard to provincial righta. If the
people cf the North- West did not wiah to have
this measure passed, we might postpone it at the
present time, but the people nave shown that they
are in favor of it, and every newspaper in the
North-West — excepting always the Regina Leader
— haa spoken in favor of the abolition of the dual
language. I cannot look upon the Regina Leader
as an authoritative repreaentative of public opinion
in the Xorth-West. We know that the Reeina
Leader occupies a peculiar poaition in regard to
the exiating state of affaira in the North-Weat. I
am told — I may be wrong — I do not connect it
with any hon. member of thia House, but I
am told that it was owing to the fact that the
Lieutenant Governor of the North-West insisted
upon giving to the Resina Leader the printius of
that Government at a nigher rate than it could be
done for elsewhere, that the deadlock waa brought
about in the North-West Council, that the Lieu-
tenant Governor's advisers refused to agree to
that, and then resigned. Of course, the longer the
dual language is preserved, the better it is tor the
publisher of the Regina Leader, and, therefore, I do
not think that the Regina Leader ia to be quoted
as an authority on this question. Putting the
Regina Leader aside, we have the unanimous opin-
ion of the press of the North-West, as we have the
opinion of the people of the North-West, that they
do not want the dual language. Why should we
ftuae ? Why ahould we heaitate ? I have done,
have endeavored to make my case as plain as I
poaaibly can. I have endeavored to show why this
question should be dealt with at the earliest pos-
sible moment. I have endeavored to show that it
ought to be dealt with here. I have endeavored
to show that, if this resolution which haa
been moved by the hon. member for Weat
Aaainiboia (Mr. Davin) is passed, that is the end of
the Bill, but the end is nc'^ r..ocompli8hed. I have
stated that I am prepared, if any hon. gentleman
objects to the recital in this Bill, that it shall be
stricken out, and every hon. gentleman in this
House knows that, when the Bill reaches committee,
it can then be debated whether it is for us here or
for the North-West to deal with this question ; but,
if the amendment of the hon. gentleman ia carried,
it is a way to do this little Billto death, instead of
ite becoming the law of the land, which is the
desire of the people in the North-West who have
taken an interest in this matter, and I am sure is
the desire of the great majority of the people of the
country. The sooner this question is set at rest,
16
the better. It is a question which is calculated to
disturb us on a question of race cleavage. That
alone should be a reason for dealing with the
matter now. Do^s the House suppose that, if the
Bill is defeated, whether upon the amendment of
the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr.
Davin) or upon the amendment of the hon. mem-
ber for Berthier (Mr. Beausoleil), that would in
any way end the question ? Can any one imagine
that, if I stand alone with my seconder in voting for
this Bill, the same difficulties and troubles which
certain hon. gentlemen profess to lament will not be
brought up again ? Is it not in the interest of the
harmony and the good-will of the people of differ-
ent nationalities that we should deal with this ques-
tion here, this question which is now before us,
and do they not suppose that we can deal with it
in such a manner as to be as satisfactory to the
people as if it were dealt with by the Council of
the North- West ? For myself, I may say that my
political extinction has been prophesied by hon.
gentlemen on both sides of the House. If that be
my fate, in doing what I consider to be my duty,
I shall cheerfully submit to it. I am acting simply
according to my convictions, and not only as one
hon. gentleman has suggested, because of the
debate of the Jesuits' Estotes Act. I wonder that
that hon. gentleman should not have had better
judgment than to introduce that question into
this debate. I have nothing to be ashamed of, I
have nothing to lament in regard to the vote
which I gave on the Jesuits' Estates Act. I did
n . prosecute any agitation on that subject after-
wards, because I realised that the vote of this
House in regard to it was conclusive ; but it is not
conducive to harmony in the party to which I did
belong and to which, to a certain ext«nt, I still
belona, that an hon. gentleman should taunt me
for the fiasco which he says was the end of
that matter. I have been taunted with the
statement that I objected to the preamble of
the Jesuits' Estates Act, and yet I was
making nothing of the preamble to this Bill.
There again the two matters are wholly and ab-
solutely separate. In the Jesuits' Estates Act we
had to take the Bill as it was, we had no power of
amendment. It came to this House and it had
either to be vetoed as it was, or allowed to go into
operation as it was ; whereas a Bill introduced in-
to this House has to undergo the gauntlet of the
first, second and third readings, of a consideration
in committee, to be amended and improved to suit
the opinions of the majority of the House. There-
fore, there is nothing in common between the two
cases. But, as I said before, those who voted with
me on that question had nothing to regret, and I
can only say tliat if a similar occasion arose again,
I should not hesitate to repeat my vote.
Ottawa :— Printed by Bkown GhAMBSRUN, Printer to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty.