George Adam CLARE

CLARE, The Hon. George Adam, P.C.

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Waterloo South (Ontario)
Birth Date
June 6, 1854
Deceased Date
January 9, 1915
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Adam_Clare
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=0fb4a9ee-ace2-43d5-9360-713037a9e146&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
businessman, manufacturer

Parliamentary Career

November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
CON
  Waterloo South (Ontario)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
CON
  Waterloo South (Ontario)
October 26, 1908 - July 29, 1911
CON
  Waterloo South (Ontario)
September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
CON
  Waterloo South (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 25)


March 4, 1915

Mr. GLARE:

It would also appear

to me-my hon. friend need not get excited, it is difficult for two of us to speak at once. I am saying that whether I have come from the shades of Cobden or elsewhere my hon. friend does not seem to know very much yet about this return or about what is going on in the Civil Service. However, I am not going into that. I simply wanted to make the admission I have made, that if the resignations added to the dismissals reduced the disparity between those receiving appointments and those going from the service that, would weaken an argument .used upon this side of the House; but, as far as a man claiming to be honourable, and I claim to be so, understands the meaning of language, that did not justify for one moment the language which was used by my hon. friend (Mr. Rogers); and if I have any knowledge of his character, the moment he sees that he will be the first man in Canada to withdraw the language. That is my opinion of him. It may be misplaced, but I hold it none the less. Nothing that Professor Shortt did justified the language which has been used by my hon. friend. I shall not go further into the question. I think I have cleared myself of the imputation, coming from a source that I was surprised to hear it come from on this particular occasion, of having used strong language. I made a simple statement, or I meant to convey to the House that from the bureau of the Liberal party at the time of the outbreak of war until the moment at which I was speaking, partisan literature had not been issued and that statement I repeat on the authority of those who have read the literature carefully. I am strongly disposed to believe this, because, as I have already pointed out, my hon. friend certainly did not quote any language in justification of his stating the opposite.

I shall not go into what my hon. friend called the progressive administration of this [DOT] Government. We may admit the adjective if he gives it a shade of meaning which I myself would be inclined to attach to it at the present moment. It has certainly been a progressive administration in the matter of appointments to the Civil Service by the most favourable construction upon the figures of that return that could be put upon them, the construction of my hon. friend himself. There has been no extra business done in Canada, and there has been no extra prosperity to justify-even this

gap of 4,000 employees between the time when the late Administration was in power and the present moment. A progressive administration? Well, we are going to speak on the Budget some of these days and we will have something to say about the progress of this Administration and the progress of Canada under it. As I said, I intervened for a specific purpose, and having accomplished it I shall express to my hon. friend the hope that when he introduces a comparatively harmless quotation from anything I have said in the future on an occasion when his own language, which I do not think he has justified, is of the strongest possible description, he will not charge me with having used strong language.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE CIVIL SERVICE-MR. ADAM SHORTT.
Full View Permalink

May 15, 1911

1. Did the government erect a temporary wooden building to be used as a post office -it Three Rivers, or any post office building after the fire at Three Rivers, about two years ago?

2. Of what was the building constructed, and what was the cost of it?

3. Does the government contemplate replacing this building by a permament one at an early date?

Topic:   BOILER FLUE CLEANER AND SUPPLY COMPANY.
Subtopic:   THREE RIVERS POST OFFICE.
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1910

Mr. CLARE.

I have never yet, during the ten years that I have occupied a seat in this House, interrupted any gentleman, and if an hon. gentleman was not in good health, I would do my utmost to assist him. Mr. Speaker, how can we best do our duty to our empire? You know my position now with regard to the navy which is to he constructed in Canada. You know that I do not believe in it. You know that I do not believe that it will be a protection to Canada, or of any assistance to the people of this country. But we should consider and weigh carefully every step that we take in this important matter. The first step is to consult the people of our country; but there may be another duty that we owe before that, and I believe there is. A great many of the people from Europe who have come to this country appreciate the freedom they enjoy in this country from military restrictions and burdens which they experienced in their own countries, and their anxiety is that their adopted country may not repeat the mistakes that those European countries have made. This does not mean that they are not prepared to defend their homes and their country.

Now, is there a way to help the British empire, and do what she asks us to do without committing this country at this time to battleships and to war? I believe there is such a possibility.- The Finance Minister of this country should put into the estimates at once a sum sufficient to build on the Atlantic and on the Pacific, dry-docks for the accommodation of our own shipping trade and large enough to accommodate the largest warships of the British empire. That is what Lord Tweed-mouth at the colonial conference in 1907 asked the colonies to do. He spoke as follows:

Then I would like to say a single word on the further point of the provision of docks; and coaling facilities in the colonies. The enormous development of the modern warship entails important consequences. These great modern warships require large docks to contain them. I think we are getting on well with the provision of docks. At this moment in our own country and abroad, we have, I think, thirteen government docks which will take in our largest ship, the Dreadnought. I think in the course of the next two years, we shall have four more, which will make about seventeen altogether. But it is very desirable that we should have, in all parts of the world, docks which could take such great ships, supposing they were to meet with an accident or were to receive damage, in war.

I ask this government to provide sufficient funds to commence immediately the construction of these great docks, which will no doubt cost a good deal of money, but which will do more for the defence of the empire than the money which the government to-day propose to expend and will at the same time develop our own material resources.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would direct our energies in such a way as to secure for ourselves a foremost position amongst the nations of the world and build upon this half of the continent an active, manly, industrious, intelligent and progressive people, ready to protect their homes, and ready and willing to min with Britain

in the defence of the empire. I believe that the best way of preparing for our defence is by steadily, and rapidly, developing the arts of peace-by peopling the almost boundless virgin lands of Canada with a teeming population, of the best agricultural classes, ready at all times to defend their altars, their institutions, and their homes; to encourage and to build up immense manufacturing industries, which will not only supply the wants of our agricultural population, and afford them a profitable home market, but which will also use up our rich resources of raw material, and export abundant quantities of fully manufactured goods to every quarter of the globe. To this end would bring the wide borders of Canada into closer communication with each other, and with the world, by improving and multiplying our avenues of intercourse-our transportation facilities -by land and water, internally, and by the sea until we should have not only an unrivalled internal transportation system (for which nature has in such generous measure endowed us) but a merchant marine, as well, carrying the products of our farms, our fisheries, our mines, arid manufactures, to the markets of the nations, and successfully competing for a share, and a large share, of the carrying trade of the oceans. To this end, I would especially encourage the development of our mines and the industries incidental to mining, increase harbour and transhipment facilities, build dry-docks, and restore to Canada again in ships of steel, the ship-building industry she enjoyed in the days of wooden vessels. In a word, I would develop the material resources of Canada all along the line, maintaining as far as may be,

. peace within her borders, and food, and raiment, and contentment, within all her homes. Canada within the empire, and of the empire, pursuing peace and giving no ground of offence, but still ready to protect our homes, our country, and our empire.

Topic:   NAVAL SERVICE OF CANADA.
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1910

Mr. CLARE.

*

Topic:   NAVAL SERVICE OF CANADA.
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1910

Mr. CLAEE.

Yes, you can cheer, but 1 believe what I tell you. While the Prime Minister can make you vote as he pleases, he cannot make you think as he please 3 There have been no two speeches delivered on the government side of the House which have not shown greater differences than have been shown on this side of the House. The hon. member for South Huron (Mr. McLean) lias told the Prime Minister and his supporters what he thinks of England. He said that we owe them some respect, but we.owe them nothing else, because they have not paid us more for our grain or our produce than they have paid to the people of the United States. So, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for South Huron says that we owe nothing to England. There is no loyalty in him. He says: I must say nothing for England, and then he tuirns around and says to the people of Canada: I will vote for a large expenditure for a navy which will be no good to this country, which will be no protection to this country and no protection to the British empire. What is this navy going to be for? Is it going to protect us against Patagonia or Uruguay? This navy will never protect us against any self-respecting nation. I have stated, Mr. Speaker, that I believe the majority of the people of this country are loyal citizens of Canada and the empire. I want to say the same thing about the members of this House. I believe as. a whole that the members of this House are loyal Canadians and if there is a doubt on this question, if there is a doubt that there may be a single man who may be disloyal to his country, that doubt has been forced upon me by the Prime Minister himself, in speeches in the United States in which he said he preferred the American dollar to the English shilling. I do not like to talk of these things and in spite of these statements I am ready to believe the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) is an honest man, is loyal to this country and is loyal to the empire. While I admit that he is loyal, I claim that he has^ made many, many mistakes in his public career, and I wish to recite a few of them so that we can afterwards decide whether we are right-in accepting his judgment on the Navy Bill. When the "great statesman, Sir John Macdonald, introduced a Bill for the construction of the Canadian Pacific railway, providing for the building of a road from the Atlantic to the Pacific, where did we find the present Prime Minister? Why, Mr. Speaker, he was opposed to the policy, he did not believe in it. Pie and his party said the road was going through a sea of mountains. The Conservative party and Sir John Macdonald lived in hope and they believed that this enterprise .would be a good thing for this country. They carried it in spite of the opposition of the then

Where do we find the Prime Minister now? He is following in the footsteps of that great Conservative leader, and he is imitating him in the building of a railway across the continent. The right hon. gentleman had no opposition from this side of the House on the question of building that railway, but we differed with him as to the manner in which it should be built, and events have proved that the Prime Minister was all wrong, because we have all seen how woefully he was mistaken- in his prophecy as to what that railway would cost. Then, there was the movement for commercial union, and the right hon. the Prime Minister persuaded the greater part of his followers to support a policy of commercial union as between the United States and Canada and against the empire. I do not know whether that was disloyalty or not, but I do know that it was sailing mighty close to disloyalty. But, I thank God. and I believe the Prime Minister to-day thanks God, that his policy did not prevail.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that I am very sorry to have to point out any defects in the great leader of the Liberal party in this country, for no one admires him as a man more than I do. But, Sir, I feel it my duty to point out these defects and I cannot help saying further, that in this naval policy of his he has made the greatest error of all the errors in his political life. The navy which this government is going to build will not be effective, it will not protect our Canadian shores, and much less will it be of any assistance to the British empire. This navy will be no protection to Canada; it will be an expensive luxury. We have no guarantee from the right hon. gentleman and his eovernment as to what the navy will cost, because, judging by past experience, any estimate they may give is not reliable. In addition to all other defects in the policy, this navy may lead us into difficulties with countries nearer home in a way which we now do not foresee. I read in the newspapers since this Bill was introduced that an application had been made to the government by some of the states bordering on the great lakes to have the privilege of building warships, and the probability is that this is suggested by the example of Canada. I believe, Sir, that if the greatest care is not taken there may be danger of complications between these two nations, and in that way the navy proposed by the government is a menace to us. As to the cost of the navy, we have the statement of the government that in the initial stage it will amount to $15,000,000 for construction, and that the up-keep will cost us ,4,7,000,000 each year. Of course, this cost must increase enormously; Canada will have to keep on building snips and opening, shipyards, and there is no knowing

Topic:   NAVAL SERVICE OF CANADA.
Full View Permalink