William PATERSON

PATERSON, The Hon. William, P.C.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Brant (Ontario)
Birth Date
September 19, 1839
Deceased Date
March 18, 1914
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Paterson_(Canadian_politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=4c0343e7-af09-409c-8b15-82597243d468&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
confectioner

Parliamentary Career

October 12, 1872 - January 2, 1874
LIB
  Brant South (Ontario)
January 22, 1874 - August 16, 1878
LIB
  Brant South (Ontario)
September 17, 1878 - May 18, 1882
LIB
  Brant South (Ontario)
June 20, 1882 - January 15, 1887
LIB
  Brant South (Ontario)
February 22, 1887 - February 3, 1891
LIB
  Brant South (Ontario)
March 5, 1891 - April 24, 1896
LIB
  Brant South (Ontario)
August 25, 1896 - October 9, 1900
LIB
  Grey North (Ontario)
  • Controller of Customs (July 13, 1896 - June 29, 1897)
  • Minister of Customs (June 30, 1897 - October 6, 1911)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
LIB
  Wentworth North and Brant (Ontario)
  • Minister of Customs (June 30, 1897 - October 6, 1911)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
LIB
  Brant (Ontario)
  • Minister of Customs (June 30, 1897 - October 6, 1911)
October 26, 1908 - July 29, 1911
LIB
  Brant (Ontario)
  • Minister of Customs (June 30, 1897 - October 6, 1911)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 563 of 564)


May 7, 1901

Mr. PATERSON.

Topic:   SUPPLY-VALLEYFIELD RIOTS.
Subtopic:   MACKENZIE KING,
Full View Permalink

April 25, 1901

Mr. PATERSON.

so that he can take that out of the appropriation for the province on Ontario. The Minister of Customs should have some knowledge of his department. He claims that he is the only one, apparently, who has any knowledge of it; but he has to go to the hon. member for East Simcoe to get the information that an additional man to perform the work of bonding is required at the port of Midland. Did he not know that himself ? Were not his inspectors, increased as they are now, able to report as to the needs of the different ports of the Dominion ? He seems to lament that he is the only one who has ever understood the work of the Customs Department. We all know that a large portion of the customs service consists in the appointment of preventive officers, that another large portion is the appointing of officers to perform such duties as the bonding of goods through the country, which are not productive of revenue ; and then he tells a harrowing tale about the smuggling down on the lower St. Lawrence, and how he stopped it. It was all stopped before he was in the department.

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE VALLEYFIELD STRIKE.
Subtopic:   APE1L 25, 1901
Full View Permalink

March 26, 1901

Mr. PATERSON.

sition who knows that what I am saying is true, as they do all.

The hon. member for East York (Mr. Maclean), whom it is always a pleasure to hear, who lays down propositions with great force, said that he could not find out exactly where we stood on the tariff question, because, he said, some of the members declared that we had a protective tariff, others declared that it was a free trade tariff, and he was at a loss to describe what kind of a tariff it was. Some hon. gentlemen on the other side declare that we have kept their old national policy, and that it has given the prosperity we enjoy to-day. Others tell us that we have destroyed that tariff, and that we are ruining the industries of the country ; and so the hon, member for East York, listening to the utterances of those around him, became bewildered and unable to decide what our policy was. He told this House what statesmanship was :

Now, in what does statesmanship consist? X wish to direct the attention of hon. gentlemen opposite to this matter.

He was directing attention to this side of the House.

Statesmanship consists in compromising in some way antagonistic principles. There is a principle of free trade, and there is a principle of protection, and each is advocated by certain doctrinaires. But the statesman finds some way of compromising these principles and of doing something for his country by that compromise.

And I expected him to add : When some of my friends tell me that this is a protective tariff the Liberals have, and others tell me it is a free trade tariff, I am forced to the conclusion that it is one of those happy compromises that may be described as statesmanship. Our friends opposite say, when you quote the figures of the exports : Well, that is very true,

there has been a great increase in the foreign commerce of Canada, but that is world-wide, it exists in the United States as well as in Canada. I admit that the United States is a mighty country, but when we institute comparisons between this land and the United States we institute a comparison with a country which, perhaps, taken all in all, has the greatest natural facilities and riches of any country in the world. But we do not shrink from the comparison. If you look up the figures you will find that the exports of domestic produce from the United States, exclusive of coin and bullion, increased last year over the previous year by 14 per cent. Similar exports from Canada increased at the rate of 23 per cent. That is comparing Canada with the United States greatly to [DOT]the advantage of Canada. The grand aggregate trade of the United States for last year increased over the previous year by 13* percent. The same trade in Canada increased by 19 per cent. On the basis of a population of 76,000.000 the foreign trade of the United

States last year was $32 per head, while for Canada on the basis of a population of 6,000,000 it was $63 per head. The grand aggregate trade of Canada increased in 1900 oyer 1896 by 60 per cent, while that of the United States for the same period increased by only 2S per cent. So, I give that as an answer to hon. gentlemen opposite when they think that they can wipe away the effect and force of these figures by declaring that the United States have equally prospered. If the two countries were equal it would be a grand thing for us to be able to say, which we were not able to say, under hon. gentlemen opposite, but, when we have passed them as we have, then, I am glad that we have had pointed to us that country so that we might institute the comparison that we have done.

Now let us look at the preference tariff and ascertain whether it is any benefit to us. Mr. Clancy, or the hon. member for Bothwell-I beg his pardon, for I desire to speak with respect of him as he endeavours to discuss a question of this kind on its merits-in discussing this matter made a statement, which, unfortunately, in the way in which it is phrased in the ' Hansard,' leaves an impression that I am sure, the hon. gentleman does not wish it should leave at all. Speaking of the increased trade with Great Britain under the preference tariff, he proceeded by making a comparison of the increase of our foreign trade with different countries, testing it by percentages and making out that the percentage of increased trade with Great Britain was much less than the percentage of increase with other countries, showing, that, therefore, we had not done so very much in the way of increasing our trade with Great Britain. I might point out that percentages are valuable as means of comparison when circumstances are somewhat nearly similar, while at other times you may institute percentage comparisons that are absolutely misleading and are of no value at all. If the hon. gentleman will pardon me, I am forced to say that I consider this one of the cases in which the remark I last made will apply. He quotes the increase of our foreign trade with Belgium, Italy, Australia, Portugal, France, Germany, other countries not classified, Great Britain, United States, South America, Holland and Newfoundland. He says that our trade increased with these countries to the following extent :

Per cent.

Belgium 1,121

Italy 359

Australia 214

Portugal 176

France 136

Germany 126

Other countries not classified... 71

Great Britain 61

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   '2103 COMMONS
Full View Permalink

March 26, 1901

Mr. PATERSON.

You cannot bring the Intercolonial Railway from Point Levis to Montreal and operate it without having some extra train hands. You cannot enlarge your postal service, and give facilities to different parts of the country without paying for it. There has been an increase, but people such as dwell in Canada will endorse an increase in the public expenditure for the collection of revenue, provided the public revenue has so increaseed as to warrant it. Turn to the Public Accounts, where it gives the cost of collection of revenue in the excise, the customs, the railways, the canals, the weights and measures, the post office, and in 1894-5, which. was the last fair year's

expenditure of the Conservative party

for their accounts in 1896, in my judgment, were not fair accounts-and you will find in the last year's fair expenditure of the Conservative government, that the charges under consolidated expenditure for the collection of revenue amounted to $9,129,416, while the total revenue collected that year was $33,978,129. The cost of collection was therefore 27 per cent. Now, in 1900 the total charge for collection of revenue amounted to $11,044,526, but the total revenue collected was $51,029,994, the cost of collection being 22 per cent, or 5 per cent less than it was under the Conservative government in 1894-5. If the cost of collecting revenue in 1900 had been at the same rate as in 1894-5, the expenditure would have been in round figures $2,750,000 more than it was, and I think that is an answer to the gentleman who charges us with having increased the expenditure.

Before concluding, Sir, I wish to allude to the subject with which the hon. gentleman from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) closed his remarks in which he entered into the question as to whether there had been in the province whence he comes questions of race and creed introduced at the last election. I was glad to hear the words he spoke. They were a rebuke to men-I will not say in this House-but at all events they were a rebuke to a portion of the press which supports the Conservative party in the province of Ontario, and to a portion of the people there. I am glad he uttered these words. I re-echo the sentiment of the leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax) given utterance to in this House on more than one occasion, and I cannot forbear quoting those words of his, which ought to find an echo in the breast of every man who is a lover of his country :

As has been well said by the right hon. gentleman, this is a matter into which party consideration should not enter. This is a 'matter which should be above all party considerations, and I, for one, as long as I have any voice in this House or in this country shall protest against any question of race or creed being introduced into the party politics of Canada. Grand sentiments these. In this debate that hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden, Halifax) dealt

*with this question again, and he used this language :

I think that to stand for the unity ol the people of this country and to suppress any cry of race or creed that may be raised, is a matter of greater importance to any political party in Canada than is the effort to obtain or retain power.

Grand sentiments. He recognizes the fact that ought to he recognized by all : That you may hold to a high tariff or to a low tariff, but that you should strive for a united people ; a people animated with if common desire to advance the welfare of their country, and to promote its progress in every portion of it. Why should these race and religious cries be introduced in a grand country like this ? Why should an attempt be made to separate the people and to obliterate that united feeling which is absolutely necessary : I will not say to the existence of confederation, but to the progress of Canada under confederation. I wish, Sir, it might be said that gentlemen on the other side, each in his place endeavoured to give effect to the noble sentiments uttered by the leader of their party. The hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) said in his speech the other day :

In the debate in this House the other day it was stated that race issues were being raised in North Bruce. I do not know whether 'they have been or not; but North Bruce has evidently remained, according to last reports, true to its old policy. I hope the electors of North Bruce did not vote on racial lines. If they voted on party lines, they had a right to vote as they did, it is a free country.

And here the hon. gentleman from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) arose in his place and said ;

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   '2103 COMMONS
Full View Permalink

March 26, 1901

Mr. PATERSON.

When it was offered, it was interpreted by the speeches of hon. gentlemen opposite to be the same old policy that was adopted in 1876-twenty-five years ago. Here is a party, in this progressive country, this country that is going forward by leaps and bounds, that finds the height of its ambition, finds its course for the future in a policy that was adopted twenty-five years ago, but was since discarded and cast out by the people. I am glad they brought it forward. During the last election contest, I was on many platforms. The ablest financial exponent on the opposition side, Hon. George E. Foster declared their policy to be what the hon. gentlemen have formulated in the first part of their resolution-a reversion to the old policy- the national policy, and the old condition of things that existed in 1878. He gloried in the position. To illustrate it he told a story -he told it on platform after platform- about how the Conservative wigwam stood where it had always stood ; the same winds sighed around it, and the same tunes were played in it as long ago ; and he declared in the fulness of his heart, that he had come out into the country to take the Liberals who, he said, had been deserted by those who formulated the Liberal policy, to take them by the hand and lead them into the old Tory wigwam that had never changed. For my part, I asked every Liberal in this country who, for any cause, felt dissatisfied with his party and its conduct in the past, if he wished to march back into the old Tory wigwam of 1878. No. The Liberal party have moved forward, and the country has moved forward with them. Let these gentlemen who wish to go into their old wigwam go back twenty-five years and dwell there. This country will not go with them, nor will this government or party. Our motto is ' Onward.' Progress is what is wanted in this country. The hon. gentleman taunts us because we on this side of the House do not agree. He longs to see his party in power, that there may be unanimity of sentiment in tne government. We have had some indications of the harmony that prevails, so far as views of public questions are concerned, among hon. gentlemen opposite in their speeches. Their chief financial critic, whose task it was to reply to the Finance Minister, and whose words, therefore, are considered as carrying great weight, made part of his utterance on that occasion-and words spoken on such an occasion are likely to be spoken with care-to the effect that the policy of the party opposite was, that these bonuses to railway lines should cease. But, we have heard from one or two hon. gentlemen opposite-yes, and from more-a most excited declaration, that it was this government's bounden duty to go on bonusing railways- especially in the province of Nova Scotia, said one hon. gentleman from that province. Here is harmony. Where are they in re-

ference to this question ? Where are they in reference to the preferential tariff ? Are they not at sixes and sevens in this respect ?

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   '2103 COMMONS
Full View Permalink