Government gazette, British Columbia. Volume 09, supplement (1870). Part 4.

              THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY. 1a
Friday, March 18th, 1870.
The Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I rise to more the adoption
of clause 14. These terms, or rather the terms which come back
from Canada, will o f necessity come before the new electoral bod y,
whose existence His Excellency has shadowed forth, and the par­ticulars
as to the division into districts must be left for the decision
of that House. I t is impossible at present to specify the time.
Hon. Mr . DeCOSMOS—Cannot an approximate time be named;
besides there are other things upon which the country will want
information. Such for instance, as whether the voting for mem­bers
will be by ballot, and what is to be the qualification o f voters.
I think it ought to be fixed. The Dominion law is more illiberal
than that to which the people o f this country have been accus­tomed.
I believe in the ballot, but it will be better to leave it to
the constituencies.
Hon. CHIEF COMMISSIONER—This clause has been left gen­eral,
that it may be settled by the newly constituted Council.
Hon. Dr HELMCKEN—I f there is a qualification for the House
o f Commons it must be general for the whole Dominion. At present
I believe the qualification is that existing in the Provinces before
Union, ultimately there must be qualification for the whole Domin­ion.
Hon. Dr . CARRALL- There is no general law for qualification.
Hon. Mr. HUMPHREYS—The clause is indefinite and danger­ous.
The Dominion qualification will virtually disfranchise half
the British settlers in British Columbia. We are legislating in the
interests o f the people, this ought to be determined at once.
Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS—I believe in British subjects, having a
fixed residence, and of a certain age, voting in British Columbia as it
should be a residential manhood suffrage.
Hon. Dr H e lm c k e n—We cannot deal with the subject now.
It is impossible to divide the colony into districts until we know
how many senators we are to have.
Hon. Mr . HOLBROOK—Mr. Chairman, I move a recommenda­tion
to strike out the words “ i f any.”
Hon. Mr WOOD—I, think the words ought to stand. The Or­ganic
Act says that senators shall be elected lor districts, but it may
be desirable that senators should be appointed for the whole col­ony,
they are nominated, and nominated because they are the best;
men that the Governor can obtain. [No, no, no—Hon DeCosmos.]
I believe the Executive are in the best position to know whether
the principle of appointing senators is best or whether they should
go for the whole colony.
Hon. Mr HUMPHREYS— As this stands it. throws the whole
power into the hands of the Canadians. The Lieut Governor will
be a Canadian and will name Canadians, We ought to know by
whom these appointments are to be made.
Hon. Mr , ROBSON—It i s a great pity that these se ctional dif­ferences
should be allowed to prevail, we ought to consider ourselves
British Co lumbians. The Governor-General, with the consent of
his Council, appoints the Lieut. -Governor; and the L ieu t -Governor,
with the advioe o f his Cabinet, recommends the Senators, [No,no,
Hon Dr Helmcken] Y es, it is s o ; he recommends to the Governor-
General who appoints. I t is a great pity to raise these disputes
about Englishmen and Canadians.
Hon Mr HUMPHREYS—it is all very well to talk that w ay. I
maintain that the Englishmen sitting at this table have said less as
to nationality, than the Canadians. We want to be governed by
British Columbians.
Hon Dr HELMCKEN—We had better drop these nationalities.
Hon Mr WOOD ~The Hon member for New Westminster
should not be angry because we want to provide a g ainst the possi­bility
o f ill feeling by timely precaution ‘Safe bind, safe find.’
When the Governor-General appoints Senators, i f I understand it
right, he appoints the political friends o f his Cabinet. i f we are
to have responsible government there will alw ays be some check,
if not we may be in the position of having members selected by
the Lieut-Governor without the assistance o f any responsible Cabi­net.
[Hear, hear, Hon DeCosmos . ] A Canadian Lieut-Governor
will act with the same sort o f feeling that the English Govern­ment
will. Senators will be selected by favoritism, and supporters
of Confederation will doubtless be selected in this colony unless we
have responsible government and representative institutions in full
vigor. Canadian interests will doubtless be very prominent in this
colony, and power acts injuriously on the human mind—it is one
of the corrupters of the mind.
Hon ATTORNE Y GENERAL—I should be sorry to s e e the
words ‘ if any’ struck out; their retention leaves the matter open.
Hon members seem to have forgotten that Senators must be resi­d
ents of British Columbia. Probably they may be elected on the
ground of their having an appreciation of the whole country
instead of a section only. It may be that Senators will be ap­pointed
for the whole colony.
Hon Mr HOLBROOK.—After hearing the explanations o f the
Hon Attorney-General, I feel more desirous to press my recommen­dation,
to show that we from the Mainland desire to have our fair
share of representation, I think the w ords most objectionable.
Hon Mr DeCOSMOS.—I find by the resolutions passed at the
conference o f delegates in London, that Senators were to be taken
from the Legislative Council. We are told by the Government that
we are to go into Confederation without responsible government,
then we ought to have a guarantee that the first Senators shall be
representative men, and that they shall not be chosen by the Gov­ernor,
and put into office for life without reference to the people.
Hon Mr HUMPHREYS.—I shall move a recommendation that
the first Senators shall be nominated by the Legislature.
Hon Dr HELMCKEN.—The position will be worth $600. The
difficulty will be to get anyone to go there. People are chary o f
going into the Legislative Council now, and they will not be very
anxious to go to Canada. As to choosing Senators from one place
it is out of the question. And it is equally out of the question to
appoint them by the Legislative Council.
Hon Mr HUMPHREYS.—We are here as the agents of the people,
delegates in point of fact, and we are bound to legislate in accor­dance
with the well understood wishes of the people. In reference
to having these Senators appointed, we are bound to see what they
are and whether the people are likely to approve o f our acts.
Hon ATTORNEY GENERAL.— Hon members must remember
that these resolutions will be submitted to the people, a much
abused term, as the Hon member for Victoria District has truly
said, and our common object must be to make the terms accept­able
to the people. They will have to pass upon them in the last
resort, and to say we will or we will not have them.
Hon Mr PEMBERTON.—The objection seems to me to be divid­ing
British Columbia into districts. It is a qualification for Sena­tors
that they must reside in their districts, therefore I think it
will not be desirable to divide the colony into districts. I think
the clause should stand as it is.
Hon Mr ROBSON— One matter deserves attention in con­nection
with this item. I believe that the indemnity to Senators
is six hundred dollars in a lump sum, without traveling expenses.
I think it is now commuted, and this would place British Columbia
Senators at a disadvantage with others. I t is no hardship to other
Provinces, but would be most unfair upon British Columbia, trav­eling
expenses both ways should be allowed.
Hon ATTORNEY GENERAL—My conviction is that mileage is
now allowed. I f I am right ten cents a mile both ways is al­lowed.
Hon Mr BARNARD—I t is the prerogative o f the Governor; we
had better vote for the repeal o f the Organic Act.
Hon Mr DeCOSMOS—Under the proposed constitution Senators
would be chosen by an irresponsible Governor, on the advice o f
an irresponsible Minister; those who own this country do not
want such a state of things to be.
Hon Mr WOOD—I t is better to bear in mind that the Organic
Act applies to three or at the most four Provinces : Canada East,
Canada West and the Maritime Provinces, here we want excep­tion
a l terms.
Hon Mr ROBSON—Hon members seem to assume that we are
going to enter Confederation without responsible government.
This I repudiate. I say we shall enter with privileges equal to
other Provinces. I decline to assume anything e lse. With regard
to the appointment of Senators by the Legislative Council, I would
ask by what council? By this or b y the new House? It would
not satisfy the people that a Council nominated b y the Governor
should appoint, and it is yet to be seen that the new House, as
shadowed forth by the Governor, would be less objectionable than
this one. We are entirely in the dark.
Hon Mr HUMPHREYS — As I understand it these Senators
are to be appointed a fter Confederation, and consequently the
recommendation refers to the new Council. His Excellency says
that he will give a majority to the popular members, and l have
no doubt he means what he says. I believe him to be a most
estimable gentleman, but I have a feeling that he has been misled;
it is not likely that in a few weeks’ travel he could understand
the wants and feelings o f the people ; you must eat, drink and
sleep amongst them to understand a people. I f I were a great
Government contractor I would support the Government, I ask
some reason of rank; it would be very easy to give us a majority
o f two or three popular members, but unless we have a large
majority of Representative members the Government might still
get their own way.
Hon Mr ROBSON — I desire, Mr. Chairman, to answer two
points. I believe we shall fight for and have responsible Govern­ment.
In referring to the Governor’ s speech, the Hon. member for
Lillooet, says the new Council will be ju s t similar to this, that it
will still be unrepresentative. I cannot see why there should be
this doubt about the Constitution of the new Council I f there
were to be only a majority of two or three the Council would still
be unrepresentative, and the people wi ll not be contented with
such a form o f Government. The argument o f the honorable
member for Lillooet refutes itself in the most conclusive w ay. The
people do not want an unrepresentative House, not having their
confidence to elect their Senators.
Hon Mr KING— What have we to do with the Organic Act?
Why should we put ourselves under the iron points o f the Organic
Act, and be dragged under a harrow all the days o f our lives? I f
the act is wrong it must be repealed. Now is the time to express
our opinion.
T he CHAIRMAN put the recommendation o f Mr. Humphreys,
which on division was lost, and o f Mr. Robson, which on division
was lost.
Clause fourteen passed as read.
Hon ATTORNEY GENERAL—Sir : I rise to move the adop­tion
o f clause fifteen, which is as follows:
15. The constitution o f the Executive authority and o f the
Legislature o f British Columbia shall subject to the ‘ ‘ British North
America Act, 1867,” continue as existing at the time o f union,
until altered under the authority o f the said act.
And before touching upon the merits o f the resolution it­self
I wish to explain that the time which must necessarily elapse
before Confederation will allow ample opportunity to procure a
change in the Constitution, and I desire to impress upon Hon mem­bers
that this question o f alteration in the form of Government, is
not necessarily connected with the resolution now before the
House. I make these observations in consequence of observing a
notice of the Hon member for Lillooet on the subject o f responsible
government on the orders o f the day. On behalf o f the Govern­ment
I desire to say that there is no desire whatever to shirk the
full d iscussion o f the question o f responsible government. I throw
the door open and invite the fullest discussion, but as the ques­tion
o f the change of the constitution of this colony is one that
lies between this colony and the Imperial Government, it does
not form an item in these resolutions, therefore I would ask Hon
members to postpone the consideration o f responsible government
and pass these resolutions. On a question o f such importance a
special d a y , irrespective o f these resolutions, should be set apart
for discussion—there is no desire whatever on the part o f the
Government to shirk the question. The matter o f the constitution
is under negotiation between this colony and the Imperial Govern­ment
at this moment. Supposing these resolutions are passed,
other negotiations must take place. First, Canada has to accept
them, then there is reference back to British Columbia to submit
to the popular vote, so that there will be full time allowed for the
new institutions to be inaugurated i f the people say that they do
not want the terms, but that they want responsible govern­ment-,
they will undoubtedly get it. I cannot conceive our going
into Confederation with a Crown Council—we must expect to go in
with fuller representative institutions. I f we do not have Confed­eration
under these terms, we shall nevertheless have representa­tive
institutions and a majority under the Imperial Act will have
the power to change and get responsible government, that is party
government. My point is, that it is not necessary to drag in re­sponsible
government now; it is not necessary to mix it up with
these resolutions. Our vote on this resolution need not be decided
on responsible government, or party government. We shall still
be open to send any other resolution on the subject o f party gov­ernment
to the Governor. I therefore throw out the invitation to
discuss it more fully on a future day. I feel sure that i f this
course is adopted the discussion will be more free.
Hon Mr RING—I think, Sir, that his Excellency’s message, if
I may so call these resolutions, invites us to discuss responsible
government. Sir, we have been in former days favored with re­presentative
institutions, and have been defrauded oi them. I
desire to know what we have gained b y the irresponsible govern­ment
that has for some years past oppressed us. What I ask has
been done about the various questions that have come up—the
2A THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY.
Sisters rocks, the Court o f Appeal—the answer has been, no funds.
Where do the funds come from? From the people. I f the Gov­ernor
heard the views of the people he might, perhaps, change his
views. I ask Hon members here, who have lived under responsi­ble
government in Great Britain, (Hear, hear from Mr DeCosmos)
not to be recreant to their country. Hon members on the other
side say they are against responsible government and refer to a
former House o f Assembly o f Vancouver Island. This is no argu­ment.
I trust that Hon members loving British institutions will
be true to their country, because there are defects in some assem­blys
do not let us run into the abject error o f saying we are not fit
for self government. We have borne this too long; do not let us
hand over to Canada our consent to submit to this degradation; let
us not say we are unfit; that we surrender the question o f self
government. Who, I ask, has examined the people? Who has
tried them and discovered whether or not they are competent to
exercise the privileges o f responsible government? There are
many points in this clause which demand discussion, bu t I am not
going to exhaust myself. I say, however, that the question o f r e ­sponsible
government must be considered. I throw the gauntlet
down
Hon Mr HUMPHREYS—Mr Chairman, as mover of the resolu­tion
on responsible government, I do not think it necessary to take
u p the time o f the House. I am perfectly satisfied in my own
mind that the official members are convinced that the people are in
favor o f responsible government. As a student of history, young
as I am, I begin to realize this truth; that all liberty and improve­ment
has been infused into communities by the shock o f revolu­tion,
or violent agitation. There is no hope o f political improve­ment
in time of tranquility and without agitation. The official
members of this council are remarkable for their profound indif­ference
t o right and wrong. I t is in their interest to postpone the
settlement o f this question o f responsible government. I hold that
there is a great necessity lor this resolution; the question ought to
be settled now and forever. Why should we be compelled, year
after year, to fight these battles for reform over and ever again;
let this question be settled so that we may have leisure for other
things. How gentlemen say the people are not in favor o f respon­sible
government; time will show. I say that they will almost as a
unit insist upon it, a nd I lay down this proposition—no responsible
government, no Confederation; no Confederation, no pensions. In­stead
of tightening the governmental reins they should be slacken­ed.
If responsible government is not granted these officials will
still lose their power; for then in all probability a mightier nation
than Canada will take charge o f us. I am in favor o f Confederation
if it gives us permanent advantages not otherwise. We must have
a free constitution. My conscience tells me that my votes on these
resolutions a re not prompted by selfish motive s ; i f the people get
responsible government I am satisfied. His Excellency admits
that he would not like to extend the liberal form o f government to
this colony. My opinion is that there is no community unfit to
govern themselves; government is not a complicated machine;
there is very little difference between carrying on a government
and carrying on a business. One-half o f the depression in this col­ony
is in my opinion attributable to the despotic form of govern­ment.
Just fancy the head of a mercantile house allowing his
c lerk s to carry on the whole business of the firm a s th ey pleased.
(Hear, hear from Mr DeCosmos). Without responsible government
you will lose Confederation; it is not necessary to say anymore; let
us have something like the government o f Ontario. T h o s e whom
I have the honor to represent sent me here to advocate responsible
government. I will read fr on a petition now in my hands.
Hon Attor ney- General—This is out o f order; I rise to call the
Hon member to order; this is not the t ime to present a petition.
Hon Mr DeCosmos—The Hon member has a right to read from
it.
Chairman—The Hon member cannot read from a petition which
has n o t been presented to and received by this House.
Hon Mr. Robson— Mr. Chairman, I request that you will be care­ful
in ruling on this matter. Hon members have the right to read
from documents to show the views o f their constituents. I t is
alluded to as the b est m eans o f acquainting t he House with the
views of the constituency which the Hon member represents.
Hon Attorney-General—On the other hand I would say that
the r ight o f petitioners must be respected, and i f Hon members are
allowed to read petitions, then petitions can be g ot in by a side
wind
Hon Mr Robson—In my opinion the Hon member has a right
to real from a document o f this kind.
Hon Dr Hel mcken—Saving looked at this document I see i t is
not a petition to this House and may therefore be quoted.
The Chairman having looked at the document decided that it
might be quoted.
Hon Mr Humphreys then read a port;on of the prayer o f the
petition, which purported to be to Her Majesty the Queen:
Hon Mr . Robson—Tne honorable and learned Attorney General
has appealed to those honorable members who are in favor of
responsible Government to postpone the question for the present.
I should be glad to accede to the request i f the honorable and
learned gentleman will meet the objections that present them­selves
to my mind as to that course In my opinion to vote for
this section now will preclude the possibility o f our bringing on the
subject o f responsible Government in the House this session. We
shall be met with the assertion that it has been already discussed
and decided for this session. I am quite sure the honorable and
learned Attorney General does not wish to catch us in a trap.
Hon Attorney General—Certainly n ot. As h on o ra b le m em ­bers
have insisted upon opening the question, I n ow propose to g o
on w ith the discussion.
Hon Mr Robson—I am most anxious to meet the views o f the
Government in this matter, if possible, but as we are asked to vote
aye or no upon this clause, I say that in voting for it we shall be
casting our votes in direct opposition to Responsible Government.
Hon A t t o r ney G en e r a l—The discussion must go on now ; you
have begun it is too late to withdraw ; the lists are closed, and the
gang of battle down.
Mr Robson—Mr. Chairman, I will address myself to the question
before the House, which I feel to be the most important clause in
these terms ; a question, in fact, which underlies the peace, pros­perity
and happiness o f British Columbia; a question which, if care­lessly
or improperly treated now, may eventuate in the most serious
consequences to the Colony : for I believe the people are as ready
now as in earlier days to fight for freedom, and to shed their blood
in defense o f their political rights. I t becomes us, then, to be can­did
with ourselves and with each other, very serious, firm and
dispassionate in discussing this clause, as it might result in most
disastrous consequences. As I read the clause it places it beyond
the power o f the Colonists to obtain the form o f Government which
they, as I believe, really want, and i f we pass it we shall obtain
no more than that slightly more liberal form, which is foreshadowed
in his Excellency’s speech, under the cover o f representative Gov­ernment.
Profoundly impressed as I am, with the gravity o f the
subject we are now called upon to consider, any remarks I may be
enabled to offer will proceed rather from a sense o f duty to my
constituents and to m y country than from any hope o f changing
the views or influencing the vote o f any honorable member.
What is responsible Government? I have been led to believe that
considerable confusion o f Ideas exists upon this p o int; and I was
the more impressed with this upon listening to the remarks of the
honorable member for Caraboo, a few days ago. That honorable
gentleman compared the introduction of responsible Government
into this colony to applying the machinery o f the Great Eastern
to a dairy churn. Now, sir, responsible Government is not a quan­tity
; it is a principle; and as such it is applicable to the Great
Eastern or to a dairy churn, capable of being applied to a tiny
lady’s watch. I t is a principle admirably adapted to the largest
communities in the Old World. It is a principle admirably adapted
to the smallest communities in the New World. It is a principle
that may be worked out in a cabinet o f a hundred. I t is a prin­ciple
which may be successfully worked out in a cabinet o f three.
Without it no Government can, in the true sense, be called a
peoples' Government. All true Governments derive their power
from the people. All true Governments must be responsible to the
people. Responsible Government is, then, a principle which may
be adapted to, and successfully worked out in this community, i f
this proposition is incontrovertible, which I maintain it is, who can
say that British Columbia is not large enough for responsible Gov­ernment,
There are men here o f ability to form a cabinet The
Cabinet o f the day is, under the responsible system, the Govern­ment.
Just so long as it has the confidence of a majority of the
representatives o f the people in the House. In the event o f that
confidence being lost, one o f two courses is open. The Ministers
place their resignation in the hands o f the Governor, who commonly
calls upon a prominent member of the opposition to form a Ministry:
or it they believe that the House does not truly represent the people
upon the question at issue, they advise a dissolution and an appeal
to the country. What would responsible Government have to do
here? In dealing with this question I , o f course, assume British
Columbia to be a province o f the dominion; and I confess, that were
o t h e r wise, were it proposed to remain a separate colony the case
would be different . I do not say that even then I would not advo­cate
the introduction of responsible Government, but that advocacy
might be less hearty and less firm. Regarding British Columbia as
a province o f the dominion, the chief objections are removed by
the removal to Ottawa o f all those larger and mere complex ques­tions
o f legislation which might threaten to crack the brain o f our
embroyo statesmen The local Government would alone have to
deal with local questions, and thus it would h ave very simple duties
to discharge, scarcely more difficult, in fact, than those falling
within the functions o f a large manic parity in Canada. Are the
people in British Columbia fit for it ? And here I would express my
sincere regret that the representative o f her Majesty in this colony
has felt it to be his duty to pronounce an adverse opinion. I will
yield to no one, either in this House or out o f it, in entertaining a
high respect for his Excellency, for his talent, experience, and
honesty o f purpose. But I do say, and I say it with respect, more
in sorrow than in anger, that I cannot think his knowledge of the
people o f this colony was such as to justify him in so early pro­nouncing
upon their fitness for self-government.
Attorney General—The houorable member for New Westmin­ster
will, I am sure, pardon the interruption, but I feel it my duty to
deny that the Governor ever said, or that any member o f the
Government has said or thought that the people o f British Colom­bia
are unfit for self government.
Mr Robson—I thank the honorable and learned Attorney General,
and I appreciate his motives. There is no one less disposed than
myself to speak or write one word calculated to weaken the hands
o f the Government, or cause the well-deserved popularity o f his
Excellency to wane; but yet I cannot conceal from myself the fact
that a mere play upon words will not mend matters. Whether it
is the colony or its inhabitants that has been pronounced unfit for
self-government, the practical results remain the same, and it is
with these we alone are concerned. From my own knowledge o f
the people, and it is the result o f eleven years’ contact with them,
I h ave no hesitation in saying they are pre-eminently fitted for
self government. There are scores o f men in the country with
callused palms and patched garments well fitted by natural en­d
owments, education and practical experience in the working o f
responsible Government in other colonies, to occupy seats either
in the Legislative Assembly or in the Cabinet of Br itish Columbia.
He who would judge o f the intelligence and mental acquirements
o f men in this colony by outward appearance and by present occu­pation
certainly would not judge righteous judgment. The opinion
of his Excellency the Governor to the contrary, notwithstanding,
I boldly assert that the people o f British Columbia are fit for re­sponsible
Government. Do they want it? Doubtless there are
those in this House, possibly even in the unofficial ranks, who will
deny that the people of British Columbia really desire to have
responsible Government under confederation. I t is sometimes
difficult to account for divergence of opinion; but I venture to think
that I have the weight o f both argument and evidence on
my side when I assert, as I do, that the great body o f the
people, certainly an overwhelming majority, do earnestly and in­telligently
desire that form o f government. It is difficult to be­lieve
that any man who has given due thought to the subject can
possibly hesitate. Look at the position this colony would occupy
under Confederation, without the full control o f its own local
affairs—a condition alone attainable by means o f responsible gov­ernment.
While the other Provinces only surrender Federal ques­tions
to the central government, we would s urrender all. While
the other Provinces with which it is proposed to confederate upon
equal and equitable terms retain the fullest power to manage all
provincial matters, British Columbia would surrender that power
—her local as well as her national affairs would virtually be man­aged
at Ottawa. Could a union so unequal be a happy and endur­ing
one ? The compact we are about to form is for life. Shall we
take into it the germ o f discord and disruption ? The people de­sire
change ; but they have no desire to exchange the Imperial
heel for the Canadian heel. They desire political manumission.
I stand here, and, in the name of my ancestors, protest before
Heaven against the surrender o f constitutional rights purchased
by the best blood o f our race—a priceless legacy we have no right
to barter away, even if we would. We owe it to our ancestors to
preserve entire those rights which they have delivered to our care.
We owe it to posterity not to suffer their dearest inheritance to be
destroyed. But, i f it were possible for us to be insensible o f these
sacred claims, there is yet an obligation binding upon ourselves,
from which nothing can acquit u s ; a personal interest which we
THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY. 3a
cannot surrender. To alienate even our own rights would be a
crime as much more enormous than suicide, as a life of civil secur­ity
and political freedom is superior to a condition o f serfdom ;
a n d if life be the bounty o f Heaven, we scornfully reject the
noblest part o f the gift i f we consent to surrender that certain rule
of living and those constitutional rights, without which the condi­tion
of human nature is not only miserable but contemptible. I
know but too well that the people of this colony have, during these
years past, been unjustly and unconstitutionally deprived o f their
rights ; but the perpetration of a wrong in the past can constitute
no argument for perpetuating that wrong in the future ; and it
would appear a most fitting moment, when a new constitution is
about to be offered,, to demand the full restoration o f political
rights of which we have been for some time so unjustly deprived.
A word about the constitution which the Governor proposes to
confer .upon this colony. Regarding it in the dim light shed upon
it by the Executive, it is not unfair to assume that there will be
one more popular member taken into the Executive, and that the
people will have a majority of two in the Legislature. Let us
suppose that the Legislative Council has 20 members, 11 elected by
the. people and 9 appointed by the Governor. Three are taken
from the 11 into the mysterious chamber of the Executive, where
they become—I will not say corrupted—manipulated, educated to
see things somewhat differently from what they saw them before.
In a House so constituted, is it unfair, is it uncharitable to conclude
that, on all government measures at least, the government would
command a majority? Take 3 from 11 and 8 remain. Take 8
from 20 and how many remain to the government? Is it not 12?
Where, then, is the people’s majority under the proposed constitu­tion
? And yet I am constantly told that this is not the proper
time to ask for responsible government—that i f the people want it
they will p ossess, under the new constitution, the ready means of
obtaining it. Sir, I do not see the matter in that light, I see in the
proposed constitution a condition o f things which promises a five
years', possibly a ten years’ agitation for what the people are pre­pared
for now, desire now, are entitled to now All governments
are naturally conservative. All persons holding positions o f
honor, power or emolument are conservative. Think you those
holding off i c e by appointment will favor or promote a change
which would make them responsible to the people—exchange
their commission from the Crown for the more brittle tenure o f
public opinion’? On the contrary, we should find those in power
opposed to the people in their struggle for responsible government;
and how long the struggle might last it would be idle to predict.
Besides, the people o f Canada do not desire to see British Columbia
occupying any such false position. They know too well the value o f
free institutions, and their adaptation to new countries to think of
withholding them from us. These institutions were not won without
a long and bloody struggle, even in Canada; and the prosperity and
contentment o f that people date from the inauguration of responsible
government. The failure o f representative institutions formerly
enjoyed upon this island, is frequently cited as an argument against
responsible government being introduced here. I admit the partial
failure of these institutions. That failure w a s n ’t , how ever , on
account o f the institutions being ‘representative’ , but because they
were not ‘ responsible.’ The essential principle w as w anting
There was no constitutional connecting link—no bond o f sympathy
between those who sat by the will o f the people and those who sat
contrary to, and in defiance of, that will. The system, painted,
though it was, in popular dress, was rotten at the core—proved a
delusion and a sham. The people, sometimes in indifference and
contempt, permitted unsuitable men to be elected, and the whole
thing came t o rack and ruin. I t is to avoid a repetition o f that
unseemly farce that the people demand that any new constitution
which may be conferred upon this colony shall be based upon the
only true principle of responsibility. This question should be
finally settled. The colony desires political rest. To inaugurate a
fresh political agitation with union is most undesirable and might
lead to disastrous results. The possible consequences of a refusal
to grant responsible government coincident with Confederation is a
part o f the subject I almost hesitate to touch I would neither
prophecy, predict nor threaten ; but I would ask the government
to head well and carefully the lessons written in blood in other
countries. Human nature is much the same on both sides o f this
great continent. Has the Anglo-Saxon race become so utterly de­generate
here that it is prepared to barter away for mere money
subsidies those rights which were purchased with so much blood
elsewhere? I utterly refuse to think so meanly of this people
We have seen that even the hall-breeds at Red River have too
much of the of 1 blood in their veins to permit a fancied political
wrong. I am not going to predict a rebellion here. Heaven grant
there may be none But I do feel it my duty to warn the govern­ment
against unnecessarily provoking such a possible contingency.
Why should there be such an unaccountable antipathy to investing
the people of British Columbia with those political powers enjoyed
under the British Constitution ? Why is the present form o f govern­ment
so unpopular with the people ? I will tell you why. It is just
because it is not a people’s government. They had no hand in mak­ing
it. They have none in working it. They can have none in un­making
it. Only let the people have a hand in forming the Govern­ment,
in selecting men of their own choice to rule over them, and we
would find a popular government, a strong government, strong in
the heart and confidence o f the people. The very same gentlemen
who are unpopular now, because ruling without the consent o f the
people would be popular then, because ruling by the act and with the
consent o f the people. The people o f British Columbia are natur­ally
a conservative people Restore to them their political rights,
and no Government would need to fear an undue desire for change.
The people know best how to manage their own local affairs.
Depend upon it; sir, the people are seldom wrong in their opinions;
in their sentiments they are never mistaken. Those now in
power hare a great responsibility resting upon them. Upon the
manner in which they acquit themselves in regard to this very
question may hang the most momentous consequences. Will they
promote everlasting wellbeing? or precipitate untold evil?
Heaven grant that they may do right! I stand here to day to
advise and warn , not to threaten and predict. The Government
has a very g rave responsibility in this matter, and may well take j
a lesson from other countries. The possible consequence o f a
refusal to grant a reasonable request may be a repetition o f the
Red River trouble. Let not the government make a fatal mistake,
or they may f ind themselves in a state o f political agitation that
may lead to the most serious consequences. I believe that, under
circumstances analogous to what occurred in the Red River Ter­ritory,
the Imperial Government would treat the inhabitants of
this colony with even more consideration. I t would not be a
question of bayonets and fleets to coerce this colony; but it would
be a question o f what concessions ought to be made. I say that
the Government have an opportunity now not only o f s hunning
evil but o f doing a great work. Oh ! let not the Government make
the fatal mistake o f saying the people shall not manage their own
affairs. Do not let t hem make the fatal mistake o f compelling
the people to reject these conditions at the polls. Now I have
discharged a duty; I have said all I feel called upon to say at this
stage. I have stated my own views and, I venture to think, those
of an overwhelming majority o f the people o f British Columbia as
well as o f my own constituents. I trust the Government will take
care how they force a vote on this question which affects this
whole community (Hear, hear). This is , in a sense, distinct
from the conditions, and it is probable that the Governor must
obtain what we are now asking from a different quarter. But,
obtain it from where he will, it must, I say, be obtained.
I beg to move the following amendment, as meeting the case
more fully than the resolution offered by the Hon member for
Lillooet.
Whereas no union can be either acceptable or satisfactory
which does not confer upon the people o f British Columbia as full
control over their own local affairs as is enjoyed in the other Pro­vinces
with which it is proposed to confederate, therefore, be it
Resolved. That an humble address be presented to His Ex­cellency
the Governor, earnestly recommending that a Constitution
based upon the principle o f Responsible Government as existing
in the Province o f Ontario, may be conferred upon this colony,
coincident with its admission into the Dominion o f Canada.
Hon Attorney General.—Allow me to observe on this, that the
Hon member is asking the Government to grant what it has no
power to give.
Hon Mr Robson—The Governor has promised to seek the power
to grant us a new constitution. We only ask that in that new consti­tution
we may have responsible government.
Hon Mr DeCosmos,—Mr Chairman, I do not intend to occupy
the House for many minutes. I agree with the Hon member for
Lillooet and I disagree with the Hon member for New Westminster.
I think, sir, that we ought to have representative institutions and
responsible government irrespective o f Confederation The Hon
member for New Westminster’s proposition unites it with Con­federation.
I think this is a mistake, but it is o f no matter so long
as we get it. I look upon British Columbia as a municipality
under the British Crown, Under Canada it will be a municipality
with less power. Anyone who knows anything o f municipal law
knows that it is based upon three principles: Territory, authority
and responsibility. This colony has the first two, and we are now
asking for the third, and the terms sent down to the Council do not
contain the elements of responsibility o f the Executive to the
people. Everything is tending to this point Without respon­sibility,
no matter bow elective the new Council is, it will be a
failure. The people want responsible government and represen­tative
institutions under any circumstances. I think the people
would be traitors to themselves i f they accepted any form o f g o v ­ernment
which had not the element o f responsibility. I would
rebel i f there were enough like me in the colony, and arrest every
member o f the Government that I thought was robbing me o f my
rights. I would go to a further extreme. However, I shall not
trouble the House with a long speech on this matter, as I consider
it o f little use. This question ended, I am contented to leave this
Council and go to my constituents.
Hon Dr Carrall.—Mr Chairman, I should like to ask what all
this breeze is about? I t is perfectly clear to all that as soon as we
enter the Confederacy the people o f this country can have any
form of government they desire, I refuse to take up the issue
without Confederation, in a state o f isolation. We are dealing
with Confederation. I am, equally with the Hon member for New
Westminster, aware og the priceless boon o f responsibility, which
exists in England, which may fairly be called the Standard-Bearer
o f nations and I aam equally aware that the same responsibility does
not exist in the United States. During the late war I was in the
United States’ army, Stanton, the then Secretary o f War, was a
most unpopular man. They wanted to get rid o f him, but he
could not be removed. When I took the ground that responsible
government was not expedient, it was not because I did not ap­prove
of the system. It is, I say, the wisest and best form o f
government, but it is too cumbrous for this colony. I will repeat
my objections; The Council contains no men of influence, the
constituencies are too remote, and the inhabi tants are all engaged
in bread-seeking ; there are few men of independent means who
would take part in responsible government, and consequently the
direction of public affairs would fall into the hands of men who
are not fitted or qualified to govern the country, o r otherwise into
the hands o f Victorians; neither o f which I , for one, wish to see.
How unfortunate it would be for Caribooites i f the Hon senior
member for Victoria (Dr Helmcken) were elected for Cariboo, I
say, then. that it must fall into bad hands, or into the hands o f
Victorians. I offer that argument as a British Columbian. The
Executive Council do not care one fig what sort o f government the
people take. The Executive say the question is one for the people
to decide. We have a measure o f responsibility now. The Hon
member for New Westminster says that His Excellency will do
certain things. I take his speech as it reads, and I have no doubt
that a majority of the people’s representatives will sit round the
board, none know how great the majority will be. (Attorney Gene­ral—
Hear,hear.) Responsible government has never been made a
distinct issue throughout the colony. [It has, Mr DeCosmos.] The
Hon member says that it has ; I say it has not. It has been named
with Confederation but not by it s e l f ; and until it is made a separ­ate
question my advice to the Governor will be not to grant it.
The Governor has left you to choose any government you deem
best. Do you think it would be better to have as permanent
heads o f departments two or three gentlemen who are familiar
with the wants o f the colony, or a moveable ministry going out on
a question o f repairs to Cowichan road, or something of that kind.
These are amongst the things that you have to consider, and if,
after due consideration, the people desire responsible government
they will have it . I am here to state that his Excellency the Gov­ernor
has no wish or desire to keep back responsible government,
if he had any such desire is it likely that he would have reconsti­tuted
his Executive Counc il so as to make it elective? I apprehend
that people do not consider what they are talking about when they
ask for responsible government; they have not probably consider­ed
the failures that have been made in respect of responsible gov­ernment;
there have been some failures, as, for instance, in Ja­maica
and in Victoria. A class o f people get into power under
responsible government whom no person would like to have as
rulers. There are petty interests mixed up with politics in small
communities which prevent the system working so well in them,
as in large countries like Great Britain, where there is a healthy
tone, and a vast population and consequently great questions o f
national importance. I maintain that after Confederation the ques­tions
connected with local affairs will be so small and so entirely
connec ted with particular localities that a staff o f permanent heads
o f department will be far better for the colony than responsible
THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY.
government. I make this statement from conviction. I am per­fectly
free to take any course I like, notwithstanding I am an Exe­cutive
Councillor. My position has not in any way curtailed my
views. I could have advised responsible government i f I had
thought proper, and would have done so if I had thought it desirable
for this colony. I f anyone believes that the Organic Act does not
allow responsible government to be obtained at any time let him
move to make clause 19 specially applicable to this co lony.
Hon Dr Helmcken—It is in the terms already, only it is not
specially named.
Hon Dr Carrall—Well, name it specially and put it in ; I
will support it i f anyone proposes it We know what His Excel­lency’s
intention is with regard to giving representation in the new
Council, but we do not know the measure of it . I f there is an
overwhelming majority for responsible government in all districts,
electors will take care to send responsible government members
to the next Council, i f the people are determined to have this p r ic e ­less
boon, let them send men who will say they will have it. I
feel impelled to administer a soft and gentle rebuke to the Hon
member for New Westminster, who has, I must confess, won my
esteem by his mainly, straightforward support of these resolu­tions;
but I must take exception to his language, it has been too
emphatic—unintentionally o f course—because led away by the sub­ject.
He has used inflammatory language which be had better not
have uttered, language which was not exactly in accordance with
what I conceive to be correct. That clause in the Governor’s
speech which speaks o f our not being fit to govern ourselves. Gov­ernor
Musgrave has never said so; i f he had I should have taken it
as a personal insult. I say, as a British Columbian, I am capable
o f governing myself, and it we can individually govern ourselves it
is fair to suppose that the colony, as a whole, can govern itself. I f
you had the whole population comeatable altogether, so that they
could be parallel like an army, and you could make them give ex­pression
to their views, and out o f that get a government, it might
be practicable; but instead o f that, here we are with a scattered
population, isolated centres separated from each other; the major­ity
are here for the sole purpose of making money, and they don’ t
feel that anxiety that has been represented about responsible gov­ernment;
they want to be governed as cheaply as possible I f I am
wrong, if it turns out at the polls that even a trifling majority are
in favor of responsible government, they can h ave it. The iron heel
o f Canada is all nonsense. Governor Musgrave is the man we have
to deal with, and I say that responsible government is a
relief to any Governor, for it comes between him and the
people Governor Musgrave says that it is his (I paraphase)
my duty with my experience to give fair and frank advice to the
people ; to tell them what I think is for their good. I f they deter­mine
differently to my advice the fault is with them. Supposing
that Governor Musgrave had put responsible Government in as a
condition, and had thrust it upon the people, would not the respec­table
minority who are against it have said, or possibly, and as I
think probably have said, His Excellency had acted unwisely. This
question has been before the people ; they would have been justified
in jumping at the gilded bait o f responsible Government i f the
Governor had not proposed a new system; but as he has done so
the people will do well to consider before they swallow the barbed
hook that lies under the bait. I desire to disclaim speaking in the
interest o f officials their position would, so far as I believe, not be
injured in any way by the introduction o f responsible Government.
Those among them who were commissioned in England (I mean
the heads o f Departments) will be rendered so inde­pendent
that they will be above fighting after their own inter­ests.
I think it unlikely that they will remain here. As to the
balance o f officials, if Canada is as liberal now as of old, or as
liberal as Australia, they will be well provided for whether we have
responsible Government or not. Probably they will be “ utilized,"
since that is the term we are to use. I claim for the system which
His Excellency has foreshadowed, that this more suitable to the
present circumstances o f this colony than any other system which
can be given us Responsible Government has acted well in large
communities, but in small ones I doubt its efficiency. It is like a
painted ship on a painted ocean. If it were obtained in a small
colony like this, there would be a constant game o f battledore and
shuttle cock going on—in to-day, out to-morrow. Fancy the hon­orable
member for Victoria City presiding at the Lands and Works
Department one day, and I, having paid him all the compliments
I could, come over another day to have an interview with the Chief
and find that there has been a change of Ministry, there is another
man in. My ideas may be wrong, it so, they can be corrected at
the polls. If I were a man of property, with a large stake in the
colony, I should decidedly object to responsible Government. I
have given my opinion candidly and honestly. I may never sit at
this Council Board again. I have given my advice to his Excellency,
to this Board, and to my constituents conscientiously. I f I am
wrong the people will correct me. I speak from conviction. No doubt
there is talent in British Columbia: no doubt there is plenty of
administrative ability ; there are many better men than myself, I
am very sure, and that is one reason that I oppose responsible
Government. (Laughter.) But the main difficulty is that the best
men won’ t come here ; the shaft is blown here, the wheat remains
behind.
On motion of Hon. Mr. Drake the debate was adjourned to
Monday.
Monday, March 21st, 1870.
Hon Mr Ring rose to resume the debate, and said: Mr Chair­man,
I feel assured that the House will accord me leave to say
a few words. There have been submitted for the consideration o f
this House two amendments, and in the observations of the movers
two points of argument have been adduced, the first founded on
supposed reasoning, and the second in the way o f threats and
military argument, grounded on the possibility o f the government
refusing to insert this condition. I desire to disengage myself
from this latter argument. When I hear anything tantamount to
a threat from the people against the Executive I desire to repudi­ate
it. Hon members who put such a picture of warfare before us
talk bunkum. I address my humble petition to His Excellency,
but if his judgment is against us, I say to him stand to your point
and do not give way to threats; listen to no arguments as to what
may happen in the nature ol threats; stand to your points. I say
to Executive members, don’ t yield to threats, don’t be moved by
them. I support the principle o f responsible government, but I
do so constitutionally. I say to Executive members, I trust you
will yield to reason and argument but not to threats. I say we
can ask for responsible government without the leave of the Or­ganic
Act; but I say let us repudiate ail connection with Canada
until we have secured responsible government; let us not wait till
we are surrounded by Canadians. With regard to the railway, I
say that in the life o f the youngest amongst us we shall not get it;
but we must make this the main, resolution, without responsible
government let us have no Confederation. Better bear the ills we
have than fly to others that we know not o f Let as not run the
risk of having to ask Canada for responsible government. Make it
the emphatic s in e qua non that we must have responsible govern­ment
or no Confederation.
Hon Mr H umphreys—Out o f deference to the amendment of­fered
b y the Hon member for New Westminster, (Mr Robson,) I
ask the leave of the House to withdraw my motion so that the
amendment, the latter part o f which I like better than my own,
may stand.
Hon A t to rn e y General—I regret very much that a discussion
so inapposite, so totally unnecessary, should have been forced on
by the other side o f the House at a time so inopportune. I am
glad that the Hon member for Lillooet has withdrawn his motion ;
it leaves the Council to deal with the amendment o f the hon mem­ber
for New Westminster, and I deeply regret that the hon gentle­man
did not accept the invitation to give up a special field-day to the
discussion of responsible Government, as suggested by myself after
we bad passed clause 15 of the Terms This I stated at the time
the House was quite competent to do. Then members on this side
of the House might have freely joined in the discussion, perhaps
some might have supported the principle, but n o ! The hon pro­poser
o f the amendment, with the light of battle in his eye, had
refused every suggestion; and afterwards, when he began to find
out his mistake, it was too late, there was nothing for it but to go
on. The melee had begun ; the glove is down ; the visors are
closed, and the lists barred I t cannot be put off. If the hon
member for New Westminster had been opposed to responsible gov­ernment
he could not have devised a coarse more adapted than mix­ing
up the question with terms, for shelving responsible govern­ment
for the session. The point which requires special notice and
correction is that nearly all speakers during the debate seem to
think that the Governor alone could grant any alteration of Consti­tution
t hat may be required, merely for the asking, but this is a
mistake; he cannot The Constitution can only be changed by the
same power that created it—the Imperial Parliament and the Queen
i n Council. The Governor can only recommend. I t is for the
Home Government to say what that change shall be. As to the
able speech of the hon member for New Westminster, the elo­quence
of which I was forced to applaud in spite o f myself, it was
an argument based upon fallacious premises throughout, assert­ing
that we should only have a representative majority o f one,
which could only leal to a false conclusion, and I take it that the
hon member is in favor o f responsible government as a sine qua
n on , else why all this tall talking of blood, wading knee deep in
blood, why this encouragement of rebellion, in defence of our
rights and the l ik e , and yet I understood the hon member for New
Westminster to pay that he does not make responsible government
a sine qua non f or Confederation.
Hon Mr Robson—I said nothing of the kind. I do not choose
to state whether or not I would make it a sine qua non.
Hon A ttorney General—I have an accurate recollection, and
have a note o f it, and I ask, the hon member to state whether he
will make it a sine qua non.
Hon Chief Commissiones—I understood the hon member for New
Westminster to say that Confederation would not be satisfactory to
the colony without responsible government, but that he would not
pledge himself to make it a sine qua non.
Hon Mr Robson—I said further that I did not pledge myself that
the people would not.
Hon Attorney General—I then understand that the honorable
member for New Westminster puts it not as a sine qua non.
Hon Mr R obson—No, Mr. Chairman, I never said that. I
will not be placed in such a position. I refuse to have such an issue
forced upon us.
Attorney General—Either the honorable member puts it one way
or the other; one of two opposites must be true. I can quite un­derstand,
and must prefer the direct and simple issue o f the hon­orable
member for Victoria District, for immediate responsible Gov­ernment
in any case, either with or without confederation. I say,
sir, that the question is in no way connected with the discus­sion
o f this clause.
I said that responsible Government ought not to be considered
until after the Council is reconstituted with an increased represen­tation,
as shadowed forth in his Excellency’s speech. I have said
that we shall have the sole control o f the matter in our own hands
i f we have confederation. I say we, because I identify myself with
this country. I speak on this matter as a citizen. I say that i f we
have confederation we shall have an opportunity of getting respon­sible
Government. I f we have not Confederation then we shall
have increased representation, and under that we can get responsible
Government if the country as a unit goes for it. Honorable members
are complicating this question. I cannot imagine that it was the
intention o f the honorable member for New Westminster to com­plicate
the question. I have too much respect for him to allow
myself to suppose so, it is impossible, and that he wished to force a
negative, is equally impossible. It is an error of judgment in my
opinion. I f it had been left to the Council separately it would have
left honorable members more at liberty to consider the question
freely. I was, in common with other members carried away in
admiration o f the outburst of oratory o f the honorable member.
But there was an allusion—a warning. It is said that it was not a
threat; but there was talk o f shouldering muskets, and of blood
and bloodshed, as if that was the proper way to get civil rights.
I protest against these threats, these turgid speeches which oppress
the ears o f those who wish to listen to argument and reason. As to
the opposition o f the Government members it arises from no dislike
to the system on the part of the head o f the Executive. Respon­sible
Government interposes a barrier between the people and the
Governor, which is most useful to the Governor. I say that we are
not in a position to take advantage of responsible Government. I f
the country thinks it necessary or desirable what is there to prevent
our getting it when we choose to ask for it. The honorable mem­ber
for New Westminster himself told us that the Imperial Govern­ment
were always ready to step in, and yet he hints at violence
and disturbance. When the honorable Chief Commissioner of
Lands and Works proposed a resolution last session, which was sec­onded
by myself, with respect to a change in the Constitution,
asking for a Council with a majority o f one o f representative mem­bers,
honorable members said w e don’ t want the change, and voted
i t down. I f we had secured this we should have been a step further
in advance than we are in constitutional progress. I say we must
hesitate before any body constituted as this Council is, can pass
resolutions o f such a nature. Any such resolutions ought to express
the full and deliberate opinions o f the country. As to the special
merits of responsible Government itself, it is hardly necessary to
argue it here at such an inopportune time. I shall therefore merely
4a
THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY. 5A
say that I think it totally inapplicable at present to the circumstan­ces
of British Columbia, where population is so sparse, and lies at
the circumference of a circle which contains an area of 300,000
square miles, and where representation is so difficult that the form
suggested would be the most expensive that could be adopted, and
instead of preventing agitation will be likely to increase it. Much
of the population is alien, and in any case this Council is not the
proper body to pass u p o n it . If, however, the country is of a
different opinion they can say so at the polls, and there is no power
can prevent their getting responsible Government. But I would
ask what makes the system so particularly attractive to hon­orable
members who advocate it? We are told that it is solely,
because it will be good for the colony, but there is no attempt to prove
the proposition that has been set up. Another thing strikes m e as
coming with a very bad grace from those who support this recom­mendation.
It presupposed a distrust of Canada, and assumes that
men of the large experience of Canadian Statesmen, and so reliable
as they are, are not to be trusted to yield to a general cry from the
country for enlarged representative institutions. I don’t think
that this Is the time to go into the question. I say. then, that
whenever responsible Government is wanted it can be had. I need
hardly refer to the position of official members in this matter. The
terms already passed by the House so far as this question is in any
way connected with Confederation, leave the officials free to
express their opinions. I must, myself, Vote against this recom­mendation,
and I press upon the honorable members to do the same
in order to prevent the complication of the terms with any such
irrelevant question.
Hon Chief Commissioner—I must endeavor in as few words as
possible to state the position ef the Government members upon
the subject now before the House. 1 fully understand that it was
imperative upon some hon members to bring forward this question
of responsibility at some period of the present session, having
advocated it by speech and pen as the specific remedy for the ills
that the colony was laboring under. Consistency demanded that
the question should be brought up by them for discussion; it was
a iogicai necessity. Inexorable state , I say, impelled certain hon
members to advocate responsible government. I h a d , however,
hoped that the hon members who advocated it would have re­served
it for separate consideration, instead of bringing It up as an
amendment to this clause now under consideration (Mr Robson
- no, not an amendment) Virtually it is an amendment. If this
clause had prescribed that any future alteration in the constitu­tion
should have been d e p endent on Canada, then I could see the
desirability of hon members on the other side of the House taking
exception to it; but as it is I confess I am at a loss to comprehend
their position. Although, as I said, inexorable fate compelled hon
members to bring the subject forward, it is a mistake to bring it
up in a Council constituted as this is, especially when the Governor
h as so distinctly expressed his view in opposition to the inaugura­tion
of responsible government at the present time. It would
surely have been much more to the advantage of the cause they
advocate for hon members to have postponed the consideration of
the question for the more representative House shadowed forth in
His Excellency's speech. I say shadowed forth, for on reflection it
must be plain to all hon members that His Excellency was not in a
position to tell what the constitution of that House will be. He
does not know. He has recommended certain changes for Imperial
sanction; they may or may not be favorably considered. His
Excellancy does, however, tell you that the representative element
will be larger, and i think, therefore, that it would have been
wiser on the part of the representative members who advocate
responsible government to have left it to the next Council instead
of bringing it forward while the present resolutions are under
discussion. The subject, if not positively irrelevant, is not cou­nseled
with this resolution, which simply provides, as a matter of
term, power to change the constitution, in accordance with the
Organic Act, when the people desire it. In common with the hon
Attorney General, I am surprised that hon members who cordially
support Confederation should be afraid to trust the Dominion Gov­ernment
upon the question. I a m surprised at the inconsistency
of those who tell you that the people could not get responsible
government under Confederation, and that the wishes of the people
would not be allowed to prevail. 1 am surpr ised particularly at
the hon member of New Westminster expressing any doubt upon
this subject I, as an individual member of this community, would
willingly leave the interest of the colony to the guardianship of
the Canadian Government. If I did not think that that Govern­ment
would exercise whatever power it might nave for the benefit
of the people, instead of, as suggested by hon members, for its
own argrandisement, I would have no Confe deration. If under
Confederation there would be no chance of responsible govern­ment,
how can the hon member expect to get it from a Council
constituted as this is? However, as the subject has been brought
forward for discussion, it behoves us to consider it upon its merits,
These were two propositions before the House. The hon member
for Lilloeet has withdrawn his, which was in reality but a vague
expression of an abstract opinion in favor of responsible govern­ment,
a recommendation in general terms. We have now to con­fine
our attentions to the amendment of the hon member for New
Westminster, the preamble of which states that Confederation
will not be satisfactory to the people without responsible govern­ment.
The resolution itself although embodying the same principle
as the one which has been withdrawn, contemplates a practical
step towards obtaining the subject recommended, by addressing
the Governor. The hon member for New Westminster was care­ful
to reserve his own opinion, but he was very positive that Con­federation
without responsible government would not be accept­able
to the people. Coming now to the subject and matter of the
speeches of the two hon members, I find that the arguments of the
hon member for Lillooet, are simply invoctives, his entire logic is
abuse of the Government and the persons composing it. I have
always understood that assertion is not fact, and that invective is
not argument. It may be that my inability to appreciate the force
of his remarks arises from my not possessing the qualification
which he told us was essential to a proper understanding of the
people and the people's affair. It may be that I have not 'eaten
and drunk and slept with the people,' and cannot, therefore, rightly
estimate the strength of the demonstration which general and indis­criminate
abise pf government officials may convey to some minds.
As to the hon member's earnestness and belief in his care, his con­scientiousness
in the discharge of his duty to his consti­tuents
and to the colony, had we ever had any doubt of it, his
positive and repeated assurances of the honesty of his intentions
in this matter, of his unfaltering determination to do his duty to
upon he prpresents, must have forced convictions upon us, that,
which giving him full credit for singleness of purposes, I must take
leave to remark on his singular mode of recommending the subject
to the favorable consideration of this Council, since his argument
in its favor is to heap general accusation and vitaperation on the
official members of thus Council whom he invites to form with him
by voting in favor of his views, to confirm his view of their utter
baseness and worthlessness. 1 shall not place myself in opposition
to such a line of argument. But, sir, the argument of the hon
member for New Westminster is of a very different character. I
congratulate him and I congratulate the House on the manner in
which the matter was treated by him. and especially as regards
the officials. I acknowledge the courteous manner in which he
touched on these points in his arguments which affected the mem­bers
at this end of the table. I t is inseparable from the discussion
of this question in this House that it must to some extent partaka
of a personal character, it must almost mean a vote of want of
confidence in Government officials. The smallness of the com­munity
reduces it almost to a question amongst individuals. and as
the Government members have been placed, unnecessarily and in­expediently,
as I think, to some extent upon their defence, I
must speak plainly on some points, but in doing so I must depre­cate
any idea of giving offence. I say. then, that responsible
government is not desirable, and is not applicable to this colony
at present, is practicably unworkable. And here I would depre­cate
the impression which is being so studiously instilled i n to
the people of this colony concerning what has been said of the
unfitness of the colony for responsible government. His Excel­lency
the Governor has never said, nor has any member of the
Government ever said that the people are unfit, individually, to
govern themselves. I say that, man for man, this community will
compare favorably with any people on this coast. ( Hear, hear,
from the Attorney General.) Nor is it even the smallness of the
population that I consider to be the great objection . although 1
admit that this is a drawback; but it is the scattered character
of that population. It w ould be practically impossible to organise
electoral districts so that they should properly represent the
interests of the separate parts, and of the whole colony, as
Victoria is the centre of wealth, and intelligence also, if yon will,
under present circumstances the government would be centralized
in the hands of Victorians, who would thus rule the colony, and
this would be objectionable (Hear, hear, from Mr Holbrook,) an d I
say also that there would be a great difficulty in getting proper
representatives to represent the respective districts. 1 do not
agree with the hon member who has stated that only the chaff of
the people is blown Into this House. for 1 say, sir, that this Council,
constituted as it is, has proved that men fit to represent the people
do come here. Responsible government will come as a matter of
course when the community is fit for it, but that form of govern­ment
is not fitted for communities in their infancy. It has nerer
been so considered. Look abroad into the world and you wit! find
large populations without responsible government There is no
necessity to look far off to see whether the Anglo-Saxon race must
necessarily have responsible government Look across the straits ,
where there is a population of, I suppose, 30,000 people, and there
they h ave neither responsible government nor representative in­stitutions.
Look at Oregon , also with no representation until the
population exceeded 45,000 Look at the Red River settlement,
also with a population larger than ours they do not apply for re­sponsible
government. It doe s not follow according to the rule of
Anglo-Saxon minds that this form of government m ust prevail.
1 do not think the sort of responsibility which is advcated would
be suitable to this colony at present, or would promote its true
interests. If 1 did think it desirable I should be found amongst
its most cordial advocates, as this is a matter open for discussion
without Government direction. But I think , sir, that our present
form ol Government is practically a more real responsibility
to the people than that proposed by the hon member f r New
Westminster, this form w hicb the bon member for Lillooet finds it
so easy to animadvert upon. F or w e are in reality if not directly
responsible t0 the people. We, as servants of the crown, are di­rectly
and immediately responsible to the Governor, and the Gov­ernor
i s responsible to the Queen, who is the guardian of the
people's rights. This is no mere idea, for the fact
of responsibility has been, over and over again, prov­ed.
If you have any good grounds of complaint you
know where to lay them and get redress. This re­sponsibility
which we owe is more real, less fluctuating, less
open to doubtful influences, and under it the righs of the whole
country are secured and protected, and not those of the majority
to the prejudice of the minority, as under the so called responsible
government, which really means party government, advocated so
warmly by the hon member for New Westminster, W hy, sir, the
hon member has admitted to you that under that system the
government of the day might come down to pass measures or
unfair means.
Hon Mr Robson—No, I made use of no each words ; what were
my words?
Hon M r Trutcb—The hon member said, and I took down his
words, that under responsible government the government might
come down to the House and carry measures by means not exces­sively
fair. 1 say that this cannot occur under the present sys­tem,
that no corruption can be charged against this g overnment.
1 think the House it capable of being remodelled. I would rather
see a larger element of representative government in this council
with such a majority that the government would have no oppor­tunity
of passing a measure objectionable to the people, as under­stood
by their representatives; such a majority as I advocated
js a resolution submitted to this Council. But the hon members
for New Westminster, for Victoria District, and for Lillooet, tell
you that the people desire responsible government, that they must
have it and will have it. I say, sir, that if they do say so, which
I very much doubt, it is because the population have been edu­cated
up to it by those who have agitated the subject through the
Fress and through speeches; some no doubt press for it from
cooviction and some with a view to serving their own ends, but I
believe, sir, that what the people really want is very much an adminis­tration
of the government as will tend to bring back prosperity to
the colony. You \are told that the present officials have no sym­pathy
with the people, that they are not of the people, that they
move in a different sphere, and constitute a class by themselves,
Is this true- or is it not rather the fact that persons who have ends
to serve have put us in a class by ourselves? The hon member
says that the hand of the benefactors of the people must be callous
with labor. When, I ask, are those throughout the world who have
labored most for the people by speech and pen? I say that the
real statesmen who have come most to advance the truest interests
of the people, have not sprung from the ranks of those whom the
hon member classes as the people. The hon member for New
Westminster says that the present government officials are well
estimable and honest but that they cannot enjoy the confidence
of the people because they are not true officials, they are not elect­ed
by them. And, he as able as we might, and as honest and work
6A THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY.
as we might, and do what we might for the people’s good, we
could not gain their confidence because we are not directly reson­sible
to them. And the hon member sympathized with us for the
position! N o w , sir, is it be true, as he says, that the government
have not the confidence of the community when, he says, they
deserve it. whose is the fault? I say, sir, it is the fault of those
who, by voice and pen, have for years sedulously prejudiced the
public mind of this community against that government, not by
pointing out faults to be remedied, but by genera1 and indiscrimin­ate
fault finding, descending to personal abuse, and even to the
verge of sc u rility. We have striven to do our duty- Hon mem­bers
do not advance arguments but content themselves with saying
that we are unpopular. I tell you why : if false impressions have
gone abroad on this point let the responsibility of those impres­sions
rest where it ought, for I say that it has been the business of
certain persons to prejudice the public mind against government
officials; let them settle the question of motives with their own
consciences and with the people. If the officials in this House oc­cupied
the positions which would be held by officials under party
government, I could understand the persistent course of opposition
offered by some members present; but when I see the changed
position, that there is no responsible government, and that our
mouths are closed and our pen cannot be used in self-defence, I
feel that we have been struck in a cowardly manner, and let the
public defend the motives of those who have attacked us. I invite
all in this Houses or out of it to aid us to carry out the government,
and to act in a reasonable way in promoting the general interests
of the colony. Whether we are to have responsible government
or not I don’t know. I feel that it will come in good time, when
the circumstances of the colony are so changed as to admit of its
adaption— I think sooner with Confederation than without it—but
whether we have it or not, I ask hon members to assist us instead
of endeavoring to complicate matters and retard the progress of
the colony. 1 ask them to give us some credit for good inten­tions.
Now, sir, one remark in conclusion: the hon member for
N ew Westminster, in his powerful oration, has not only allured us
with the prospects of popularity under responsible government,
but he has, I will not say threatened, but warned us of the result
of our opposing him in this matter. He tells us that unless re­sponsible
government be conceded the cause of Confederation will
be ruined, that the people would not have C onfederation without
responsible government, this in fact is embodied in the preamble
of his resolution. Sir, I have cordially supported Confederation
because I honestly believe that it w ill be for the b enefit of the
local interests of this community as well as for the security and
consolidation of Imperial interests ; but I believe that this com­munity
is not ready for responsjble government; I will not. there­fore.
do what I consider w rong that good may come ; I will not
vote for responsible government far the sake of gaining Confedera­tion.
I, for one, say, if the people won't have Confederation with­out
responsible government, if they regard responsible govern­ment
as the main object of Confederation, it they do not appreciate
the real a dvantages of Confederation, let Confederation wait a
while. The Governor has sent down resolutions which he thinks
can be carried out, and we hold that. whether under confederation
or not, this matter of responsible government will ultimately have
to be settled by the vote of the people. When the proper time
comes we shall, I say, as a matter of course, have responsible gov­ernment,
and that time will arrive sooner under Confederation
than without it. I trust the Dominion Government; I do not
think they will go against the will of the people. I believe that in
this, as in other matters, if they exercise influence at all, it w ill be
for the good of the country. A government of liberal institutions
cannot be expected to oppose the wishes of the people in proper
and reasonable matters. Responsible government ought not to be
a condition of Confederation, and I say that in these resolutions it
is very properly left to be settled in a new and more fully repre­sentative
Council, which the Governor has told us he is going to
obtain Imperial sanction to establish. But if Confederation is to
depend on this question of responsible government then I say let
it be the test also of the reality of the supporters of Confederation
Hon Mr R o b s o n—I expect the privilege of a general reply,
but I desire to explain, now that the Hon. Chief Commissioner has
made an unfair use of what I said about "horny hands and patched
garments.” I disclaim h aving used it in that connection attrib­uted
to me, his remarks are unfair
Hon Mr Walkem—I think on an important question of this
kind every member should give a reason for his vote. I have given
the matter great consideration, and had intended entering some­what
fully into the discussion, but the Hon. Chief Commissioner h as
anticipated me. I have been utterly astonished as I listened to
what fell from him. I entirely coincide with him in his argument
and in his views. Indeed, I can hardly h elp but thinking that either
he has copied my notes or his I must congratulate myself on
coming to this conclusion. On the same grounds I congratulate
the H ouse on the good temper, good taste intelligence and ability
with which this question has been launched for discussion. The
main speech for the honorable member for Victoria District did
not deign to express his views, has been that of the honorable
member for New Westminster. As I listened to that speech, sir,
one of the best ever uttered in this House, I almost felt that for
five long years I had been wrong, he almost made a convert of m e,
but upon looking a little more closely into it I find that it is based
u p on false premises ; his arguments are fallacious, and his conclu­sions
wrong. Tbe honorable member says that responsible Gov­ernment
is a principle which may be applied either to the Great
Eastern or to a dairy churn, or to a lady’s watch; that it is a prin­ciple
capable of being carried out by three, or three hun­dred.
This is utterly incorrect; it is not a principle but a form,
one element of w hich is responsib ility to the people It is a form
adopted by the people. But it does not follow as a matter of induc­tion
that it can be used or carried out in every place or by every
community. In 1837 the rebellion in Canada for the purpose of
acquiring responsible Government took place. The rebellion was
raised and the question agitated simply for changing the form of
Government. W hat was the population? It was in the neighbor­hood
of 2,000,000 in 1837, and of 2 500,000 in 1861. Look at the differ­ence
of the population of this colony , after deducting the aliens
and females, there is scarcely a voting population through the
whole colony of 3,000. Have the whole county mapped out and
show me how much further the Goveruor can go in usefully extend­ing
the representation. We have nine members, and out of these
nine, under responsible Government, we should have to elect a
Colonial Secretary, an Attorney General, a Chief Commissioner of
L ands and Works, and probably two other Cabinet Ministers,
altogether five in office and four struggling for power. M ake the
whole number eighteen and you then have a constant struggle for
power, a struggle such as we have not had in this colony before,
and such as I hope we shall not see. There are virtually two ends
of the colony w hich represent all the wealth and property of the
community, Victoria and Cariboo. Cariboo would be contending
for the repeal of road tolls, and Victoria would be contending that
they ought to be paid. It may be said that these general questions
of taxation will be left to the Dominion Government, but there
are many other subjects which will create differences between the
two ends of the colony. The honorable member for New Westmin­ster
says if we gain without responsible Government we shall go
in with agitation. Does any one believe that if we had responsible
Government to-morrow, politicians will have no subject on which
to agitate Political agitation will never cease. Let us go further.
As the honorable Chief Commissioner says we have the United
States advocating responsible Government, and that form of it
which is said to be the best in theory, a form in reality democratic,
but the people are not educated to he extent of the principle itself.
Americans are averse not only to granting small but large territor­ies,
the freedom which we now ask. They say, " You shall be a
Territory until you are properly educated.” For instance, there
is Washington Territory, with a population of 27,000, sends a Dele­gate
to Congress, who has no vote. Tacota, another Territory has
been refused admission as a state until it has a population larger
than it now possesses I am just reminded about Alaska, which is
not even a territory yet. General Thomas reported against giving
it any other than a military form of Government. How can we
then expect responsible Government with our population. I know
that there are honorable members wavering ; their interests tells
them to vote one way, their Conscience points to another I say,
vote according to your conscience. 1 say that a village can never
have responsible Government. I maintain that it would prove a
curse through the agitation that would follow instead of a blessing.
I coincide with the honorable member for New Westminster as to
what he says as to callous hands. I believe there are men with
tattered garments in the upper country quite capable of giving a
sensible vote upon all questions likely to come before a Council in
this colony, but we find that they have too much to do, they have
no time for politics, they have to earn their own b read. I believe
that the honorable member for Cariboo has uttered the true senti­ments
of the great majority of the district. I do not believe that
Cariboo is favorable to responsible Government. Those gentlemen
with the patched garments and callous hands have the same oppor­tunity
that the member for New Westminster has had of coming
into the House. He has told us with pride of his hard work as a
pioneer on the F raser river, and to-day we hear him advocating
with most eloquent language, his views upon this great question.
His voice has had much to do with shaping the councils of this
House, and 1 ask, are these doors shut to any man in the colony
of equal talent with the honorable gentleman who can be found
willing to devote their time to the service of their country? I do
not feel in the servile position of being obliged to vote one way or
the other. I am as free to vote as the honorable member himself.
I shall give my vote to the best of my ability. I believe that no
compulsion has been brought to bear upon any member of this
House, official or otherwise. The latter part of the speech of the
honorable gentleman (Mr Robson) is hardly worthy of the former,
it contains language which I am very sorry he has used, language
which makes me believe that it is not from conviction, but that it
is intended to go for h to the world to s ign up the people ; excellent
stump oratory, if without intending the slightest disrespect I may
use the term. I believe it is not the wish of the property owners
of Victoria to have responsible Government. Do you suppose, sir,
that property owners are going, willingly, to intrust their interests
to persons of whom they know nothing? I do not dread professional
politicians, 1 believe they are as useful as any other professional
men in their way, but I say, as a fact, there are no politicians here
with the exception of those who have devoted their time to politics.
Why, 1 ask, is there so great an antipathy to leaving this question
for the people to decide at the polls? “ Give us,” says the other
side, " an opportunity of educating ourselves, so that our mistakes,
when made, may be remedied ” 1 say that there is no better edu­cation
than this Council in which honorable members have educa­tion
before they come to responsible Government, for under the
scheme foreshadowed by the Governor, the position will be very
little inferior to responsible Government. Depend upon it, if the
Canadian Government think we can manage responsible Govern­ment
they will give it to us, they will be glad to get rid of the
question. I say, however, this question is being agitated at an im­oportune
time. I, for one would not consent to trust my interests
to any such change. I do not believe in the present form of Gov­ernment,
but if the form foreshadowed by the Governor be carried
out, it will give the people a system very little inferior, as I have
said, to responsible Government, and infinitely more workable. I
trust that honorable members will give due weight to the remarks
of other speakers who have preceded me upon this question, and
will well consider their votes.
Hon Mr Drake— Mr. Chairman, I have a strong object on to this
clause being inserted; it never ought to have been in the terms. It
presumes that this Colony is willing to go into Confederation with
the form of Government that we have at present; it seems to have
been put in as a sop to Canada; it ought to have been left out, I
cannot see why it was inserted, or what advantage it can possibly
be to us. If we go into Confederation bound hand and foot with
the same form of government as now, we shall have no power to
change the form. We shall then have Canada as a Queen Regnant;
we shall then have an Executive who will if so directed, vote
against responsible government. This colony would be a preserve
for Canadian statesmen and Canadian patronage ; we shall be no
more advanced then than now. Without going into argument I
may be pardoned, I trust, if I quote three propositions of John
Stuart Mill on responsible government First, " Do the people re­quire
it; or are they unwillinh to accept it?" W e are told that this
has not been made a question; 1 deny this statement. It has been
made, a question, more or less, in Victoria at every election; every
election depends more or less on this point. Second, " Are the
people willing to take the burdens which are imposed on them by
such a form? " I say that we have the answer to this proposition
in the fact of there being people willing to come here where they
are practically useless. Do not persons come forward to represent
the people? A very large majority of the people take part in every
election. Third, " Are the people willing and able to do that
which will enable the government to perform its functions pro­perly?
" This I contend is the condition of the colony. T h e main
argument of the Chief Commissioner in his very able speech, a
broad argument and very well put is that the population is scat­tered
I say this argument cannot be used w ith effect. We are
told that the Government would fall into the hands of Victoria as
the centre of population and wealth; no great harm if it did. Vic­toria
is dependent upon ad parts of the colony and they on her ; the
interests are identical. Another objection that has been raised is
that we cannot get men of proper intelligence and qualification for
THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY,
positions of honor and trust. Looking round this council board we
see men who have come out to this colony to make their own for­tunes
and homes; out of them the present members of the Govern­ment
have been chosen, and out of our present population there
can be found an equal number of men who can properly fulfil the
duties of the Government. I cannot see that it is impossible to
find proper men. If we find men willing to sit in this Council now
we shall find plenty ready and anxious to share in the burdens of
responsible government. The sufficiency or insufficiency of popu­lation
is not an element in this question. The United States has
been pointed out to us as an example. I say. there is no responsible
government in the United States, it is an absolute despotic demo­cracy
absolutely irresponsible to the people except once in four
years. There is n o such thing as responsibility in the form of
government of the United States, the only means of getting rid of
a minister is by impeachment. The hon member for Cariboo, in
his rambling speech, gives us no new argument against responsible
government; he certainly reiterated much that was forcibly put
forward by the hon Chief Commissioner. I c a n well believe that
the wheat was left at Cariboo and the chaff came here.
Hon Mr Humphreys— Sir, I have listened to the speeches of the
hon Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works and to the hon Gov­ernment
Nominee, and I find them difficult to answer because
there is so little in them,; the only w a yv would be to have them
printed and read them, they carry their answers with them. One
non member says that ir rests on numbers; I say that intelligence
is the only qualification for resp onsible government, numbers have
nothing to do with it. If I err l am proud in erring with some ot
the greatest men that England ever produced. The hon Chief
Commissioner has admitted that the population, taken man for
man, is equal to that of any country Then I say we have the
proper qualification; let us have practical and n ot theoretical
means of governing. What is really the case? Under the present
form of government the people have to pay for the privilege and
benefit of a few gentlemen sitting round this board. Take away
this form of government and make it more liberal, and what is the
danger? All the civil wars and troubles have not arisen from the
uneducated, but from the ambition of the so called educated classes.
The people have been the Conservatives who came forward to
keep the country going; take away the so-called intelligent and
educated classes and it will be no great loss, the laboring classes
can always supply men to fill their places; but take away the
working classed and you kill the world, the educated classes can­not
fill their places. I n my opinion, Sir. the people want practical
reality. They have endured too long the law’s delay. and the in­solence
of those in office. Why should we come here, year after
year, to ask for a change in the form of Government? I think that
responsible government should be a s in e q u a n o n of Confederation.
I shall move an amendment to that effect.
H on Dr Helmcken—Gre a t heavens! what terrible things are
said and done in the name of the people. T o hear hon members
talk one would think that they were the people, but the people are
quiet while hon members are very loud. I intend to support the
Government; I do not mean to say much for or against I take
the position that the people can have responsible government
when they want it, and their representatives ought to be satisfied
to take it when the people really and seriously ask for it. Respon­sible
government has been one of the watchwords of a certain set
of politicians who wanted to bring on Confederation, government
of from for and by the people, without regard to the material in­terests
of the Colony—this means government by politicians.
These gentlemen will sacrifice every benefit to the Colony for re­sponsible
government. Confederation to me means terms; to them
it means pickings, office, place and power. This will be represented
I am well aware, as being the result of being in the Executive
Council; it is said that there is a great difference between the at­mosphere
of the two Councils, I acknowledge it. T here with closed
doors people speak the truth without any ad captandum arguments
addressed to the galleries; there people can state what their opin­ions
really are ; here popularity has to be sought. W e are told
that the people will fight for responsible Government That is
mere nothing— words only. The honorable member for New West­minster
in his able speec h erected a very handsome structure, but
like most fancy structures, it will be a very expensive one. He
wants a Government like Ontario, that is a Government of one
House, with eighty members. For a Government of that kind not
less than forty or fifty would be absolutely necessary.
H on Mr Robson—-I never said like that of Ontario, but that
we wanted the principle of responsible Government as existing in
Ontario.
H on Dr. Helmcken — Then why not bring in a scheme em­bodying
it? The true principles of responsible Government can
only exist satisfactorily with forty or fifty members in the House.
It would cost very little short, of $20,000 per annum. That out of
the very small amount, we are to get from Canada would reduce
the amount likely to be available for public works to a fraction.
You must have a large number, to work responsible Government,
or more properly speaking, party Government. If we are to have
it, I would not have the heads of Departments responsible to the
people, at least not the working heads; if any head of a Department
is to be responsible to the people, let it be the political head; but I
would make the working heads of Departments permanent. I have
found from my experience of the 0ld Vancouver Island House of
Assembly, that policy frequently changes and turns round. The
same thing would happen under responsible Government. If I
wished tp oppose Confederation I believe that I could not do a
better thing towards effecting my object than to vote for responsi­ble
Government, but I want to see the more material warns
advanced by Confederation. I know that material interests were
not the pivot, but that it was place, patronage and office,
that was wanted. With regard to the present system of Govern­ment,
it is very easy to say that it is bad, but I have listened to all
the speeches and have not heard one word pf practical fault­finding
with the present government—merely the assumption that
the people desire change. This desire for change they have been
educated to. I acknowledge many faults in the past, but we have
now a new Executive, and we are promised a change in the form
of government; but this is apart from Confederation altogether,
it appears to me that the first thing we have to arrange is the
money question, to get our material interests first settled, to make
sure that this colony should be pecuniarily better off, to make the
question of Confederation now turn upon material interest and
not allow our material interests to be jeopardized by a cry for re­sponsible
government, not to allow responsible government to be
the sauce to m ake the public swallow bad and unprofitable terms.
All members have acknowledged tha t money is the basis of all
governments; let us get that money I would not have the public
vote for responsible government and f orget or put in the back
ground, the money. Place the question upon material terms and
the colony will demand profitable terms ; but mix it up with
responsible government and you get a divided opinion upon it, and
those who think responsible government every thing will vote for
that to the exclusion of a ny terms, or, at all events, with unprofit­able
terms. There are doubtless, many who hope to live upon re­sponsible
government, but, sir, responsible government is not food
and raiment. The people can live without responsible government
but they cannot live upon it. Give them food and raiment first,
the rest will follow in natural succession. These few words will
give you my reasons for consenting to the arrangement proposed
in the conditions. More than this, I am not pledged to responsible
government, but I am pledged to representative institutions. The
latter have been granted. My mission thus far is fulfilled. I have
always asserted that we must take our steps to responsible govern­ment
gradually. Having representative institutions, we can go on
to the ether. No one ever stated that the people were unfit to
govern themselves, all acknowledge that they have talent enough,
but this I do assert, that thus far the people have shown an unwil­lingness
to govern themselves — have taken but little interest in the
matter. It is not that they are unfit, but unwilling; they prefer
looking after their own business, it pays them better. I need not refer
to the difficulty of getiing members, and doubtless some of us sit here
from that cause, and it is no doubt true a s has been said that better
could have been f ound outside. If you have responsible govern­ment
it will fall into the hands of those who wish to make a living
by it. No one has said that it would be economical— it would not
be so. It would require at least thirty members to carry on party
government, for six weeks at least every year, or $150 per diem
for 36 days, which would amount to $5490 and then the mileage
would come to as much more, say,altogether $10 000. Add to these
the salaries of the political heads, say five at $2000 per annum, and
then you have the nice little sum of $20,000 a year. Then, I
suppose, each Min»ster would require a pension when he w ent out.
The real executive officers would remain then as now, and would
have to be paid nearly as much as at present. The truth is there
would be a great difficulty in getting members, and without a large
body of members it could not be carried on. You would find that
the best men would avoid politics, and soon there would be very
great corruption. There is a great deal of talk about voting away
the people’s money, but it must be borne in mind that a part of
that money, under Confederation will come from Canada, and she
will have a right to see it properly expended. There is also a
great deal of talk about hon official members voting their own
salaries, but would not the same thing be done under responsible
government? Have not hon representative members voted them­selves
salaries this present session? H on members say that if re­sponsible
government is not granted we will agitate I thought
that every body was so much in favor of it that the people would
rise, if it w ere not included in the terms, that there would be em­ployment
for every gunsmith in Victoria; and yet we are told we
will agitate?
Hon Mr R obson—I never said that; I said that the people would
agitate
Hon Dr Helmcken—It is much the same thing, the agitators
will ‘beat the bush' once more, and they will perhaps be driving the
birds for other people once again, if the people really desire re­sponsible
government. W hy is there any necessity for all this ag­itation?
1 admit that many of the people of Victoria desire it, and
think that it can be carried out- Ask the scattered districts in the
country and they will tell you that they do not know or c are about
it, political opinion does not run high in the colony. I intend to
support the government upon this clause, but I leave myself per­fectly
free to vote for responsible government if I think proper, I
want to secure the material interests of the colony. Let the people
say whether those material interests will be benefitted by Confed­eration,
but not mix up the question of responsible government wit
it. I a m perfectly willing to abide by the d ecision o f the people
on responsible government, and on Confederation on Terms, sep­arately.
My sole desire is to see this country materially benefitted
if the people want responsibility 1 will not say nay, but we must
have good terms. At the polls responsible government might carry
Confederation with very indifferent terms I am perfectly cer­tain
that the Government have acted wisely in not allowing the
terms to be clogged with responsible government. I say don’t let
responsible government take the place of material benefits.
Hon Dr Carrall— Sir— I rise to take exception to what the hon
and learned member for Victoria City said about being bound
hand and foot to Canada In my remarks he can find no efforts
catch votes, and no clap trap addressed to the galleries, but I ad­vocate
what may be unpopular from conviction.
H on Mr Ba r n a r d—Sir—I agree with the bon Chief Commis­sioner
that it is a pity that this question has been brought up not
for I had m ade up my mind to vote for responsible government
its entirety, but the hon member for New Westminster put to.
the question to tbe hon Attorney-General, who said it must go on.
Hon Attorney General—I said that as the non member for N ew
Westminster and others insisted upon opening the discussion
m u s t g o o n .
Hon Mr Robson—I felt regret that it should be brought up now
but when I asked if we could put it off, the hon Attorney General
said it was too late.
Hon attorney General -I offered the hon members for N ew
Westminster and Lillooet every opportunity for discussing this
important question upon a day to be set apart for the purpose.
Hon Mr H umphreys—W hat 1 did was in consequence of what
the hon Attorney General said at the commencement of the debate
he invited recommendations, otherwise I should not have put my
notice on the board
Hon Mr Barnard—It was fully impressed on: my mind that the
question should not be mixed up with the terms. I am astonished
at the charge against representative members of trying to force
this question upon the House at an inopportune time. I will leave
it to the government to say whether it shall be left for another day
or go on.
Hon A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l—I say, again, now the debate has be­gun,;
now the gauntlet is down, the debate must go on.
Hon Mr Robson -Sir, this course is most unfair on the part of
the government members. Let the House decide whether it will
go on with this question now or postpone it. It seems to me that
the hon Attorney General is resorting to a parliamentary manoeuver
in forcing this matter on. It is a matter that representative mem­bers
only ought to vote on. We s hall have a large majority
representative members on this question and that is all we want.
I say that the Attorney General did not fairly answer my question
as to whether, by passing this resolution, we should shut the
door to further discussion of the question during the present ses­sion
Hon Ch ie f C om m is s io n e r- l should now object to the resolution
being withdrawn, as the question has been discussed let us take a
decision on upon it, it would be unwise to postpone the question.
7A
THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY.
H on Mr H u m p h r e y s—I think, sir, the matter cannot now be
postponed, let us fight it out and have done with it.
Hon Mr R o b s o n—I say, Sir, that this debate may be post­poned,
and if the government vote is given against the postpone­ment
we shall koow the reason.
Hon Mr Barnard—The hon Chief Commissioner said that he
should take no adverse vote on this resolution as a vote of want of
confidence. I don’t want that. Won’t hon government members
help us ?
Hon Dr Carrall—The opposition say that the government
ought not to have put such a resolution on the terms, let us take
that issue.
Hon Mr Barnard—It was not my desire to hamper the govern­ment
; I desired 10 give a hearty support to the government, and,
at the same time, to do my duty to my constituents. I have never
felt the weight of responsibility as I feel it to d ay: I feel that I am
about casting a vote which will affect for weal or woe the destiny of
this fine Province. I am convinced that if a majority of the elect­ed
members of this Council vote ‘aye7 to day on this question, re­sponsible
government will be inaugurated conjointly with Con­federation.
It is beyond a question that the intelligent portion of
the community are in favor of responsible government, but there
is a grave question in regard to its adaptation to the colony. The
words coming from His Excellency are worthy of careful considera­tion.
They contain strong reasons against the introduction of
responsible government. Public opinion is not settled on the
Island. The hon senior member for Victoria city has shown in his
remarks that there is a great want of settled principle in the
colony The principal men of Victoria are averse to taking upon
themselves the duties and labor of legislating for the country.
Men on standing and wealth stand aloof. The merchants, manufac­turers
and professional men take no interest in the matter of legis­lation.
There is a great difficulty in getting good representative
men. There are, I admit, many good reasons which might be
urged against the measure, and I have no doubt that dissatisfac­tion,
to some extent m ay ensue. I agree with the Commissioner
of Lands and Works, in his remarks about the press influencing
the public unfavorably to the government, but the blame is not in
the press but in that system of government which keeps the rulers
silent, the members of the government ought to be in a position
to defend themselves both by pen and speech I have glanced at a
few reasons against the admission of responsible government, but
I will now look at the other side. Look at the fact of all the larger
subjects, under union, being dealt with by the Federal power.
This fact of itself is as strong an argument as we need. What hon
member can go to his constituents and tell them that he thinks the
local business of this colony could be managed better at Ottawa
than it can be by ourselves? The official members or this govern­ment
will no doubt avail themselves of the retiring pension, and
appointees from Ottawa will take their places. Will these latter
officials have to be pensioned off by this colony when we adopt
responsible government? This is a strong objection to entering
the union under a system like the present. This colony m ay be
asked to pension another set of officials. Will the people be satisfied
with this sort of government if we are to have appointees from
Ottawa? There are a class of men w ho oppose Confederation on
this ground. They would prefer remaining as they are with the
officials nominated from Downing-street, rather than from Ottawa.
It is often asserted that this colony is not ready. How long are we
to wait? Canada was told the same story when she had a popu­lation
of 600,000 All the other Provinces were told the same
thing. Must we wait for such an increase, or must we fight as did
Canada? Throw us on our own resources as a colony and we will
soon learn valuable lessons in the science of government. There
were gentlemen of good families and of good education, who
came here in early dsys, who had never suffered privations of any
sort before they came here ; sent out to make fortunes, or, at ail
events, homes for themselves ; their roughing it was rough indeed
bad news had come from the mines, the avenues of trade were
closed there were no agricultural pursuits for them to turn to, the
consequence was that they had to lie round hotels; after failing to
get government employment, for which, as a matter of course, they
applied, some kept bars whilst waiting for remittances. the rea­son
was that they never had been taught self-reliance ; we shall
be in the same position if we are constantly to have rulers from
England, or Canada, but throw us on our own resources and we
shall succeed. Self-reliance is the best means of education in
politics as in anything else. If our rulers are sent us from England
or Ottawa w e will always lack self-reliance. Self-reliance is writ­ten
on every line of the British North American Act. Rely upon
yourselves, is the cry of the people of England. It is better to
grapple with the difficulties now when the issues are small
and comparatively unimportant, and should we make blunders they
will not be so serious w hen our interests are small; and for what
errors we do commit, the consequences will fall upon ourselves.
W e will, no doubt, blunder at first and there may be chaff blown
here. If responsible government will bring the scum to the top,
dross will go to the bottom. The scum will be ladled off —the chaff
will be blown away by the breath of public opinion. The Gover­nor’s
promise of a majority will not satisfy the people, and we
should therefore, urge upon His Excellency to give us responsible
government. I am not in favor, however, of making that condi­tion
a sin e q u a n o n of Confederation. I w ould accept Confederation
with good terms, even without responsible government There
may be a few arguments against it, but there are many in its favor.
Under no circumstances would I like Confederation and responsible
government to go to the polls together. I hope the people will
sever the two. Let us have Confederation and we shall get re­sponsible
government.
Hon Mr Wood—In rising to address myself to the motion now
before this Committee, I do so w ith a double object: I feel my­self
challenged to uphold my opinion on the subject of respon­sible
government as applied to this colony, and I am desirous to
add a few words on the bearing of the subject in ihe matter of
Confederation now before the Council. 1st. With respect to the
subject of responsible government, a s to this, sir, my views have
been for a long time settled, and I shall endeavor to express them
as clearly as I can; the resuit of them is expressed in a few words
I am in favor of the extension of representative institutions little
by little, to the utmost verge of safety. But I am opposed in this
community at least, to the establishment of what is called respon­sible
government. These are my views shortly. 1 believe them to
be the settled convictions of most moderate and experienced men
not bound to flatter popular constituencies. And 1 believe I am
doing a service to society in upholding such moderate views against
the popular error and the popular bias in favor of the rash appli­cation
of responsible government in such communities. 1 will
start, sir, at once from an historical point of view, the hon
member for New Westminster has, as I understand him, asserted
that responsible government is the immemorial birthright of
Englishman, and that the principle of Cabinet ministers going in
and out with votes of a m ajority of the House of Commons is a
principle of ancient date. My understanding of the history of my
country leads to a different conclusion and however much, it may
be clear and obvious that representative institutions are our
natur e and inalienable birthright—however much it may be esta­blished
that the power of self taxation resides and has always re­sided
in the representatives of the country, in the Commons of
England, carrying with it the overwhelming power of the parse—
it is, I believe clearly admitted that the principle of responsible
government, as now understood, has existed for little more than
100 years, say from the accession of George I and the termina­tion
of Lord Bute’s administration, so that I admit the hon gentle­man’s
proposition only so far as this. Representative institutions
are the birthright of the British nations representative institutions
and the privilege of taxing ourselves. Now, sir. I believe the
whole scope of representative institutions to be greatly mis­represented.
It is the fashion for honorable members to say, that
the Government of this or any other community are bound to
govern according to the well understood wishes of the people; that
the vox populi is the vox dei ; that ministries and Governments
are responsible to the people But the true principle, as we all very
well knew, is that Governments and ministries are responsible, not
to the people as a populace, but to the representatives of the people,
properly and reasonably chosen. Governments and ministries are
responsible not to numerical majorities, but to the country. Now,
sir, representative institutions are liable to this obvious and well
known danger. I will quote the words of a well known political
writer, Herbert Spencer. " Whenever the profit accruing to the
Representative individually, from the passage of a mischievous
measure largely exceeds his loss as a unit in the community from
the operation of the injurious law, his interest becomes antagonistic
to that of his constituents, and sooner or later will sway his
vote.” How true and how obvious this is. I might go further
when the private and personal, the direct and immediate interest
or the representative or of the constituents, whose advocates and
delegates they are, is opposed to any matter of legislative action.
The direct and material interest will of a certainty prevail over the
distant and more remote welfare of the community, in all but
very rare instances. This is the danger that threatens all repre­sentative
institutions, and the only safeguard against it is the qual­ification—
the pecuniary and material qualification of the represen­tive,
the pecuniary and material qualifications of the elector, and
accordingly we see representative institutions flourishing and suc­cessful
only when this safeguard practically exists. Let us turn
to the example of England. In England representative institutions
and responsible Government work smoothly. And why? Because
of the notoriously aristocratic and plutocratic character of the
Legislature of Great Britain Political life is a sealed book to any
but the wealthy classes. Every member o f Parliament is a m an
of property, no other can afford the luxury of legislative life, and
society is secure in the hands of representatives whose property
would suffer from the results of vicious or reckless legislation.
I say nothing of the question of peace and war. probably the most
momentous and disastrous subject of vicious and reckless legislation,
a question which will not arise in the colony T he cream of all legis­tion
is taxation, and my solid conviction is that representative
institutions and responsible Government will fail whenever the
working majority is in the hands of an unsubstantial class of
Representatives or of electors. I have thus, sir, treated of represen­tative
institutions and responsible Government somewhat in the
abstract. I will now refer more particularly to its application to
this colony, and this apart from any question of Confederation,
and I will repeat that I am in favor of the extension to the utmost
possible limits of the representative elements of this Council, but
adverse to responsible Government. With respect to the constitu­tion
of the Legislative Council of British Columbia it might, I th:nk,
hardly be necessary in the present condition of the colony, to advo­cate
a second chamber—a Council as distinct from an assembly.
However advisable this may be in an advanced condition of
the colony, advanced in numbers and wealth, few, if any would
advocate such an institution as a second Chamber. The elements for
forming such a chamber are sadly wanting in the present state of
affairs, and the matter may be dismissed without farther comment
—without discussing the advisability in a general way of such an
institution at all, or the constitutional elements of such a body.
But with regard to the Legislature on the supposition of its con­sisting
of one single House, it will be necessary to speak at some­what
greater length of what elements ought such a legislative
body to consist? At present it consists of official members,
heads of departments official members not heads of departments
but representing for the most part different Magisterial districts,
a few nominated members— nominated, I think it is reasonable to
presume, from an impression of their being tolerably
intelligent and moderate— and a few representative members.
It is asked whether the constitution of this Council should be
altered so as to establish direct responsible government, or what
may be looked upon almost as its equivalent, a large working ma­jority
of responsible m embers. I leave out of the question at pres­ent,
all reference to any modification of the constitution ot the
Council in the event of Confederation, and I consider the matter at
present, only in reference to the Council and the Colony in their
actual condition. At present it is obvious, and must be left by all
of us, by official members no less than by independent members,
that our position as a Crown Colony, is what is commonly called a
f a l s e p os it ion . We are individually as well fitted for seif-govern­ment
as our brothers or our cousins in the Old Country or in Can­ada.
I will go further: 1 will say that the community, taken indi­vidually
in this Colony is better qualified to demand and have rep­resentative
institutions. I say taken individually - and I mean it
in its strict sense. Man for man, I believe the Colonist a better
politicia n than his English cousin. The aristocratic class hardly
exists it is true. It is an injustice to presume for a moment that
the Colonist in this, or any other colony of Anglo Saxon origin is in
any way unfit for the enjoyment of the fre est political liberty
Higher class we have none, but the middle and lower classes are, I
do not hesitate to say it, superior to the middle and lower classes at
home. The colonist is more enterprising, and more pushing than
the stay at home Englishman. He has better knowledge of the
world and of human nature, he graduates in a school
in which politics are prominent, and he is free from an
immense amount of ignorance and prejudice which is thought
and written and acted in the old world. But then
comes the consideration, what elements are indispensable
in the community to form the representative body, if as is con­tended,
that element is to be supreme, or what is the same thing
in point of actual power, when that element constitutes the
working majority? I will answer, 1. Local:zed and perma­8A