Speech on the Manitoba school question, delivered in the House of Commons.

Mr. FOSTER.--Iventure to ask the House for its consideration for a few moments of some remarks, even at this late stage in the discussion of a pretty thor- oughly discussed subject, even at the risk of repeating and reviewing arguments and facts which probably have not the merit of complete novelty to the members present.I think I shall commence my remarks by being a little unorthodox, and that may be pleasant to my hon.friend (Sir Richard Cartwright) who sits just opposite to me.The remark I shall commence with is this-that I am not of the opinion that the question at present before the House is intrinsically either the most important or the most difficult question that has engaged the attention of this Parlia- ment from confederation up to the present time.My view is that the question, in- trinsically, is a plain and simple one, and that the great difficulty which surrounds it, and the importance which attaches to it at the present time is clue rather to the com- plication with it of side issues, which, in a legitimate sense, do not belong to the question at all.And before I proceed to a discussion of the question proper, I wish to eliminate these, and to make a few remarks upon each. Not a Question of Provincial Rights.The first of these questions which is brought up in connection with the case )roperly before the House is that of provincial rights.The assertion is made in this louse, and. in the country as well, that for the Dominion Parliament to attempt to jgislate on this subject is to interfere with and invade provincial rights.I beg to state my humble opinion that it cannot be fairly maintained either in this House or ' 1 the country, looking to the distribution of powers by the Confederation Act, 'here the jurisdiction is plain and unequivocal, that for this Parliament to exercise its powers, to exercise its jurisdiction is to interfere with any rights that belong to L, ie province in question, at this time, or of any other province, if this question mching any other province, were to come up.This side issue has taken the popular form of a cry, " Hands off Manitoba."In reality it seems to me the proper opinion, "lat contemplated by the constitution, that carried out by the practice of this mntry up to the present time, is not embodied in that cry, but would be better ^pressed in the statement that the majority of Manitoba should have kept " hands )ff " the privileges of a minority, which privileges were given under the constitu- tion, and were supposed to be secured to them by the constitution.Not a Question of Separate Schools.Another side issue that is brought up is the question of separate schools, and ^en range themselves in opposition to remedial legislation, because, forsooth, they lo not believe in the principle of separate schools.Sir, the question whether jeparate schools should, or should not, be established is one which might well have ?endebated in 1863 when that system was adopted for the province of Ontario ; it one which might well have been debated upon principle m 18(37 and 1870 when _iese schools were being perpetuated under the Confederation Acts.But it is not a principle which is at stake to-day in the least degree ; and, for my own part, I believe that I have no right to take my preference on that principle into consideration in 'te least on this occasion, but that am now called upon to deal with the question of a clause of the constitution^and a case*wnich*arises out of it7in whicfcTthafc prifl* ciple was settled once and for all in regard to the minority's right by the fathers of confederation, and embodied in the constitution itself.Not a Crusade for Extension of Separate Schools.7 It is also stated as a side argument, but which influences some people in this House and is meant to influence more people outside this House, that this is but the first step in a separate school crusade, and that if this legislation takes place for the pro- vince of Manitoba, upon that result will be built an aggressive campaign for the adoption of separate schools in the other provinces.That was expressed by my hon.friend from West York (Mr. Wallace) ; that was also given voice to by my hon.friend from Grey (Mr.Sproule), who made, I think, a somewhat important and a somewhat venturesome assertion ; and I call it to his mind now, in the interest of fair and just debate.I find that in his address to this House, as printed in the " Hansard," he made this statement, after advancing the argument that this was but the first step in a crusade for the pressing of separate schools upon the North-west, and then upon he other provinces " The School Bill passed in the North-west assembly has been held in abeyance, and has not yet received the assent of the Dominion Government.Why is it held in abeyance ?Because the clergy do not approve of it."I ask my hon.friend now to give to this House the ground for his assertion as nere made.Mr. SPROULE.-Theground of my assertion is a reply made by Archbishop Langevin at, I think, either Prince Albert or Edmonton, saying that it was not acceptable, and that the same principle was at stake there as here.Mr. FOSTER.-ThenI wish to tell my hon.friend that he never should have made a statement of that kind.The fact that Archbishop Langevin said in the North-west that a school ordinance was not acceptable to the clergy may be a fact that this ordinance was not assented to by the Lieutenant-Governor may be a fact but when my hon.friend puts those two facts together as cause and sequence, I wish to tell him that he is not warranted in doing so by any rule of logic, and I wish to tell him more, that there is

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.