GREAT BRITAIN'S COURSE JUSTIFIED THE session of the Dominion parliament of 1900 was one characterized by vigorous, not to say heated, discussion, principally on the subject of the South African war and the action, or alleged inaction, of the government of Sir Wilfrid Laurier with relation to sending troops from Canada to take part with the rest of the British forces in subduing the Boers. A debate on this subject was precipitated on the motion for the Address in reply to the Speech from the Throne, and special phases of the question were almost constantly before the House for weeks. On the thirteenth of February, the Minister of Finance, the Hon. W. S. Fielding, moved the resolution providing for the expenditures in connection with the sending of the Canadian contingents to South Africa. Sir Charles Tupper, the leader of the Opposition, while approving the resolution, strongly criticized the government's attitude in relation to the war. I followed Sir Charles on behalf of the government. The speech as reported in Hansard has been revised for this work. House of Commons, February 13, 1900. MR. CHARLTON-Mr. Speaker: In the course of the remarks presented to the House this afternoon by the honourable the leader of the Opposition (Sir Charles Tupper) a good deal of time was devoted by him to the task of proving that his past record had not been inconsistent with his present attitude upon the question of imperial defence. I certainly have no disposition to call in question the accuracy of the honourable gentleman's remarks, and it would be far from affording myself or any member on this side any pleasure were we able to prove any inconsistency in that regard. No member of this House, no citizen of this country, will, I apprehend, raise the claim that the honourable leader of the Opposition is not a truly loyal man-loyal to the empire and loyal to Canada. His speech, further, was devoted to an attempt-justifiable perhaps from a partisan standpoint, as the leader of the Opposition to cast a certain measure of discredit upon the government for alleged tardiness in grappling with the great duty which confronted it in connection with the South African war, and for half-heartedness in the course it at first pursued. His criticisms, as regards this alleged lack of readiness of the government, were of a character that I shall deal with in detail later on, and I shall give facts which convince me at least that the government has acted in this matter with prudence, sagacity and dignity. It is to be lamented that an attempt should be made to make party capital part of this matter. This is a question above party politics, above politics in any sense. It is a question which should appeal to the patriotic impulses of every Canadian, and we should never permit an attempt to cast discredit on one party, or to make political capital out of this matter, to be a factor in the discussion now before the House. I propose to enter briefly into a discussion of the question: whether the action of the government is justifiable. Of course we have this wave of patriotic fervour that has swept over the country. The government is unquestionably acting in accordance with the popular will. They have the mandate of the people to warrant their taking the course we are pursuing; but it would be well, perhaps, to calmly and dispassionately examine this subject and satisfy ourselves, if possible, whether, aside from excitement, aside from the general feeling that pre vails in the country, there are really sound and sufficient reasons to justify the conduct of the government. I propose briefly to deal with that question. I propose to do so because there are a great many people in Canada-more perhaps than some imagine-who are a little distrustful as to the propriety of the course the government has adopted, and who, perhaps secretly, hold the opinion that this course is scarcely warranted. In my own constituency, the people are not influenced by the excitement which pervades great centres of population; and in calmly considering this question, when this vote of $2,000,000 is asked, some of these constituents, and citizens in other rural constituencies of this country, may possibly be disposed to cavil at the line of action adopted by the government, the first result of which is so palpable in the asking of this House to vote $2,000,000 to defray the expenses of the contingents sent to South Africa. In looking this matter over, I propose to cover some little extent of ground. I propose, first of all, to inquire into the character of the British title to South Africa. We hear it asserted that this is a war for independence on the part of the Boers, that they are oppressed, that they have gone back into the wilderness and established a state with a government of their own, and that now, when the impingement has come with British population and British interests, they are being trampled into the dust by the superior power of the British nation. I propose, then, to inquire into the character of the British claim in South Africa. If our title is not a good one, of course the arguments which we base upon that title are false. I propose next to inquire, very briefly, as to the importance of South Africa. It may be asserted that this is a barren, inhospitable region, incapable of supporting a great population and that the importance of the country does not justify the exertion necessary to put down this rebellion, pacify the country and make it a secure British possession. I propose next to inquire what our own interests are in Africa. Our own interests there seem to be a somewhat remote matter. We are separated from Africa by the width and length of the |