No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A “Constitutional Crisis” in British Columbia
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
Extract
In his book on the principles governing the exercise of the royal power of dissolution of Parliament, Dr. Eugene Forsey cites as one of the Canadian precedents of grant and refusal of dissolution, the actions of Lieutenant-Governor Thomas R. McInnes in British Columbia in 1898 and 1900. Owing to the pressure of space, the constitutional issues raised in the Pacific Coast province received but scant notice in Dr. Forsey's study. These issues are, however, of the first importance in the constitutional history of Canada, not only because they involved the exercise of the royal power of dissolution in an unusual and arbitrary manner, but because they led, finally, to the intervention of the federal government and the removal of the Lieutenant-Governor from his appointment.
In part, the crisis which developed in British Columbia sprang from the peculiar personality of the Lieutenant-Governor himself. Like Sir Charles Metcalfe, Thomas Robert McInnes was a man with a strong sense of duty—that quality emerges clearly from his correspondence; he was likewise a man of strong views which he held strongly. There was little of the compromiser or mediator about McInnes. He wore no velvet glove nor did he speak with a soft voice. He lacked in great measure that suavity and self-effacement so necessary to the successful incumbency of Government House. One thing he did not lack was courage, an admirable quality, but dangerous when backed by stubbornness rather than by discernment.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , August 1955 , pp. 281 - 292
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1955
References
1 Forsey, Eugene A., The Royal Power of Dissolution of Parliament in the British Commonwealth (Toronto, 1943), 57–8.Google Scholar
2 In two instances only have lieutenant-governors been removed by the federal authorities because it was believed that their actions exceeded the recognized limits of responsible government. For the case of Letellier de St Just who was removed as lieutenant-governor of Quebec in 1879 see United Kingdom, Parliamentary Papers, Cd. 2445; see also Casgrain, P. B., Letellier de St. Just et son temps (Quebec, 1885).Google Scholar Keith, A. B., Imperial Unity and the Dominions (Oxford, 1916), 432 Google Scholar, and Dawson, R. M., “The Independence of the Lieutenant-Governor,” Dalhousie Review, 1922, 239 Google Scholar, refer briefly to the McInnes case. A defence of McInnes will be found in Saywell, J. T., “The McInnes Incident in British Columbia,” British Columbia Historical Quarterly, 07, 1950.Google Scholar
3 Howay, F. W., “Political History, 1871–1913” in Canada and its Provinces, ed. Shortt, A. and Doughty, A. G. (23 vols., Toronto, 1914), XXI, 223.Google Scholar On August 12, 1898, the Daily World of Vancouver quoted Mr. R. Beaven as saying: “The result of the general election has left matters in this Province in a very peculiar position. Practically there are three leaders among the legislative members-elect. Mr. Turner has the largest following—sixteen; Mr. Joseph Martin has nine; Mr. Semlin has eight. In addition there are two members elected as opposed to Mr. Turner, who have not defined their allegiance to either Mr. Semlin or Mr. Martin, and are commonly credited with a preference for Mr. Cotton. Then there are three Independents, making a total of 38 members.”
4 Canada and its Provinces, XXI, 223.Google Scholar Of these all except one were dropped, although 6 members-elect resigned and offered themselves for re-election.
5 Sessional Papers, 1st Session, 8th Parliament of the Province of British Columbia, 1899, 880 Google Scholar: McInnes to Turner, July 14, 1898.
6 Ibid.: McInnes to Turner, July 25, 1898.
7 Daily Colonist, Victoria, 08 27, 1898 Google Scholar: McInnes to Semlin, Aug. 12, 1898.
8 B.C. Sessional Papers, 1899, 881: McInnes to Turner, Aug. 8, 1898.
9 Daily Colonist, Aug. 27, 1898: Turner to McInnes, Aug. 9, 1898.
10 B.C. Sessional Papers, 1899, 881 Google Scholar: McInnes to Beaven, Aug. 8, 1898.
11 Beaven had been Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works in the DeCosmos administration, 1872–6, Minister of Finance and Agriculture in the Walkem administration, 1878–82, and Premier, 1882–3.
12 He had run in the election of 1898 in Victoria City and had been defeated.
13 Daily Colonist, Aug. 27, 1898: McInnes to Semlin, Aug. 12, 1898.
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid.: McInnes to Turner, Aug. 15, 1898.
16 Sessional Papers of the Fifth Session of the Eighth Parliament of the Dominion of Canada, no. 174, 1900: Semlin to McInnes, July 7, 1898, cited in McInnes to the Governor General, March 27, 1900. According to E. C. Prior, M.P. for Victoria City, Martin refused to resign when Semlin asked him for his resignation but said that he would abide by the decision of the Government's supporters; hence the calling of a caucus. The caucus gave its unanimous support to Semlin and Martin resigned. “Ever since that took place,” said Prior, “Mr. Martin—and it will not surprise anyone who knows the gentleman—has been swearing vengeance against his former colleagues.” ( Canada, Home of Commons Debates, 03 6, 1900, 1, 1385 Google Scholar). Martin revealed something of his vanity when he wrote to Semlin “You are … the premier of this province only by sufferance and in demanding my resignation you do not command a majority of the supporters in the House. If my statement upon this point is correct then, instead of me resigning from the government, it is your duty to take that step at once.” (Daily Colonist, July 6, 1899: Martin to Semlin, July 5, 1899)
17 Canada Sessional Papers, 174, 1900: quoted in McInnes to Semlin, Feb. 27, 1900. This correspondence is also to be found in the Daily Colonist, March 2, 1900.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.: McInnes to Scott, Sept. 12, 1899.
20 Ibid.: McInnes to Semlin, Feb. 27, 1900.
21 Daily Colonist, March 3, 1900: Semlin to McInnes, Feb. 28, 1900.
22 McInnes admitted as much in his letter of March 27, 1900, to the Governor General ( Canada Sessional Papers, 174, 1900 Google Scholar) when he wrote, “As I considered Mr. Martin better qualified to meet the situation, and as, moreover, it was Mr. Martin who had caused the final defeat of Mr. Semlin's administration, I felt that his claim to the Premiership was paramount to that of the others.”
23 Daily Colonist, March 2, 1900.
24 Ibid. Lieutenant-Governor McInnes blamed Charles Semlin for this disgraceful episode.
In a letter to the Governor General, March 27, 1900, McInnes wrote, “In connection with the letter of dismissal I would ask your Excellency to observe that although I expressly intimated to Mr. Semlin that he was at liberty to lay it before the House, for its information, he refused to do so, and left members of the House to assume, as they did, that I had treated them with discourtesy. This unexpected conduct on the part of Mr. Semlin was, I believe, largely, if not wholly, responsible for the insulting treatment which the members thought fit to offer me on the occasion of the prorogation ….” (Daily World, June 27, 1900)
25 Although Martin, Smith, and Yates were sworn in on February 27, Beebe was not appointed until March 24 and Ryder until April 3. (See Canada Sessional Papers, 174, 1900 Google Scholar: McInnes to Scott, May 15, 1900.)
26 Daily Colonist, April 5, 1900. One of the ministers was Martin's brother-in-law.
27 This organization was formed in August, 1898, following the dismissal of the Turner Government.
28 Public Archives of Canada, Laurier Papers, 2230. This petition was not presented to Parliament. It was placed in the hands of Sir Wilfrid Laurier by Hewitt Bostock, Member of Parliament for Yale, B.C., on April 2, 1900, with the comment, “I have not presented it to the House as it is not in proper form and also on the ground that it is not a matter with which the House has to deal.”
29 Canada Sessional Papers, 174, 1900.Google Scholar
30 Daily Colonist, June 20, 1900.
31 Canada Sessional Papers, 174, 1900 Google Scholar: Extract from a Report of the Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by His Excellency on June 21, 1900.
32 Scott to McInnes, Aug. 30, 1899. Except where otherwise noted, the correspondence cited in the remainder of this article will be found in the Canada Sessional Papers, 174, 1900.Google Scholar
33 McInnes wrote to Scott, May 15, 1900, “… the attitude taken towards me by some of my old friends and colleagues in Ottawa, at least as represented by the press and private report, has been a genuine surprise to me, and I cannot help thinking that they have been grossly misinformed and misled.”
34 It should be noted that there was an interval of over 3 months between the appointment of Martin as premier on February 27 and the general election on June 9. On April 9 the federal authorities pressed McInnes either to summon or dissolve the Legislature, telling him that “The postponement of such a meeting or appeal [to the people] cannot, in opinion of Privy Council, be justified.” McInnes yielded to this pressure and dissolved the Legislature on April 10. In a letter dated April 12 to the Secretary of State, McInnes said, “My advisers were of opinion, in view of the above circumstances, that June 9, would be the earliest day which [would] be safe to fix as election day, if all uncertainty as to the validity or legality of the general election was to be removed. And my advisers trust that their desire to act in harmony with the opinion of the Privy Council in this matter has been sufficiently demonstrated.”
35 Daily World, June 27, 1900: Laurier to McInnes, June 19, 1900.
36 See supra, note 30.
37 Daily World, June 27, 1900: McInnes to Laurier, June 20, 1900.
38 Published in the Daily World, June 27, 1900.
39 As early as March 6, 1900 E. G. Prior, M.P. for Victoria, drew the attention of Parliament to the situation in B.C. ( Canada, H. of C. Debates, 03 6, 1900, 1382 ff.Google Scholar) Sir Wilfrid replied that it was “not, in my judgement, within the duty of the Dominion Government at this moment to interfere” (1387). On several occassions B.C. members asked for information and urged the publication of correspondence between Ottawa and Victoria (ibid., 1900, III, 7513, 7319, 7989). Laurier refused. The Prime Minister was very disturbed at the action of McInnes in publishing the correspondence in the Vancouver Daily World. He said in Parliament that this was “not official correspondence, but private correspondence between the late lieutenant-governor and some members of the Government” (ibid., 1900, III, 9471). The result was, however, the publication by Ottawa of a portion of the correspondence, in the Sessional Papers, 1900.