'notification' you must
have seen that the names of 'myself and Galt' are omitted, and it was
stated in that notification that it must be 'substituted' for
the 'one' published on the 9th of July last, in which Galt's name and
mine were inserted as C. B. Now, you must recollect that some
months ago I wrote you about a 'confidential communication' of the Duke
of Buckingham to Lord Monck, in order that it should be intimated to me
and Gait, that there was no precedent of a resignation of the Order of
the Bath, and that the only way left for the carrying out of
Galt's wishes and mine would be by 'an order of Her Majesty ordering
our names to be struck off the roll.' The communication of the Duke
having been made to me in a confidential manner, I had no
opportunity to answer it. I had written to Lord Monck to ask the Duke's
leave for communicating to me in no confidential manner the despatch of
the Duke, in order to give me an opportunity to answer it. I never had
any answer from Lord Monck to that request. To my great
surprise, at the end of December last, I received from Lord Monck a
note, accompanied by the copy of a despatch from the Duke, informing me
that a mode had been found to meet my wishes and those of Galt,
which consisted in the publication in the 'London Gazette' of a
'notification' omitting our names, and such notification to be
substituted for the former one of July last.
"The reading of this last despatch more than astonished me, and my
astonishment was greater when I saw by the 'London Gazette' that it was
carried into effect by the notification above alluded
to. I have had no more opportunity to answer the second despatch of
the Duke than the first one, which was marked 'confidential.'
Allow me to add, that the 'Duke' expressed in his 'first communication'
that he did not like to suggest that my name should be struck off the
roll, because an ungenerous construction now and hereafter might be
made against me by those not acquainted with the facts. Now, by
the course followed, as explained in his second despatch, I feel as
badly treated as if the first course had been adopted. In one case my
name would have been ordered to be struck off the roll, and by the
second course followed up, my name was ordered to be omitted in the
second notification. There is not much difference between these two
courses. I have written a letter to Lord Monck to complain of the
second course followed up, inasmuch as there being no reason assigned
for the omission of my name in the second notification, a construction
ungenerous to myself and my children after me could now and hereafter
be made. Excuse me for troubling you so long about that C.B. matter.
Now, with regard to the Hudson Bay matter, not the least doubt
that the speech of 'John A.' was very uncalled for and injudicious. He
had no business to make such a speech, and I told him so at the time -
that he ought not to have made it. However, you must not attach too
much importance to that speech. I myself and several of my colleagues,
and John A. himself, have no intention to commit any spoliation; and,
for myself in particular, I can say to you that I will never consent to
be a party to a measure or anything intended to be an act of spoliation
of the Hudson Bay's rights and privileges. I must bring this long
epistle to a close.
"My kindest regards and respects to Mrs. Watkin.
"Remember me to your dear son, and believe me, my dear Mr. Watkin,
"Yours very truly,
"GEO. E. CARTIER.
"E. W. WATKIN, Esq."
UNFORTUNATE DISCUSSIONS.
These discussions were both unfortunate and embarrassing; in the course
of them, I had suggested that the way out of the difficulty was
generously to offer a baronetcy to Mr. Cartier. During the discussion
Dr. Tupper arrived in England. He cordially agreed with me. He deplored
the mistake made, and, acting from his official position, and with the
great judgment which he has always shown, he was able to assist in the
desired happy solution.
On the 22nd of April I received the following letter: -
"WESTMINSTER PALACE HOTEL,
"April 22nd, 1868.
"MY DEAR SIR,
"The Duke (of Buckingham) showed me (in strict confidence until
after the official announcement here) the copy of his telegram to Lord
Monck, announcing the fact that the Queen had conferred a baronetcy
upon Mr. Cartier, and a C.B. upon Langevin, and was pleased to say that
he was very much indebted to me for having suggested it. I told him
that I was satisfied that his Grace had conferred a signal service to
our country, which would be productive of much good. Knowing how much
pleasure this will give you I cannot forbear mentioning it, of course
in confidence.
"I enclose a letter received to-day from our late lamented friend. Be
good enough to return it to me. Ought I to communicate his wishes to
Messrs. Hurst &
Blackwell? I had a long interview with Mr. Cardwell to-day. He will do
anything in his power to aid in putting matters right in Nova Scotia,
and is anxious that I should see Mr. Bright. Mr. C. takes your view as
to the Union question having been an issue before the people in 1863,
in the strongest manner.
"Yours faithfully,
"C. TUPPER.
"E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P."
I feel assured that Mr. Cartier was moved, solely, by a regard for the
honor of his compatriots.
