Evolution of the Dominion of Canada; its government and its politics

UC-NRLF

Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive

in 2007 witii funding from

IVIicrosoft Corporation

littp://www.arcliive.org/details/evolutionofdominOOporrricli

Evolution of the Dominion of
Canada

Its Government and Its Politics

Government Handbooks is a new series of college textbooks
in government prepared under the joint editorship of
David Prescott Barrows, Ph.D., Professor of Political Sci-
ence (on leave) and formerly Dean of the Faculties in the
University of California, now Colonel in the United States
Army, and Thomas Harrison Reed, A.B., LL.B., Associate
Professor of Government in the University of California
and City Manager of San Jose, California.

The series will provide a handbook for each of the European
countries, and one on the Government of American De-
pendencies, treating of the political and administrative
organization. Each volume will have such maps and
illustrations as are needed, and will contain an annotated
bibliography.

The authors of the different volumes are men who combine
a thorough knowledge of the subject and a personal ac-
quaintance with the country and system described.

The volumes now published are: Evolution of the Dominion
OF Canada, by Edward Porritt, author of " The English-
man at Home," " The Unreformed House of Commons,"
and " Sixty Years of Protection in Canada "; Govern-
ment AND Politics of Switzerland, by Robert C. Brooks,
Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College; and
Government and Politics of the German Empire, by
Fritz- Konrad Kriiger, Ph.D., formerly of the Department
of Political Science, University of California. Some of
the other volumes in preparation are: Government of
American Dependencies, by Dr. David Prescott Bar-
rows; Government of France, by Edward M. Sait,
Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Political Science, Columbia
University; and volumes on the governments of Great
Britain, Japan, Spain, Argentina, Chile, and Brazil.

The publishers cordially invite correspondence with regard to
the Series.

Edited by David P. Barrows and Thomas H. Reed

(Bobernmrnt !^antilioofe0

Evolution of the Dominion
of Canada

Its Government and Its Politics

BY

EDWARD PORRITT

AUTHOR OF "the ENGLISHMAN AT HOME," "tHE

UNREFORMED HOUSE OF COMMONS," AND " SIXTY

YEARS OF PROTECTION IN CANADA"

II

YONKERS-ON-HUDSON : : : NEW YORK

WORLD BOOK COMPANY
1920

:a^^ V

^^

M.

Our teaching of politics in the universities, excellent upon
the side of theory, needs to be supplemented by practical
teaching. ... A political theory, detached from the actual
conditions of life, is as worthless as the political economy
of a few decades ago which first assumed a competitive
market which never existed, and then formulated the laws
which would prestunably operate in it if it did exist.
Dream politics have been taught too long. What Ameri-
can students need today is a training which will fit them
to deal with actual conditions, and to be real vital factors
in making them better.

Dr. Robert M. McEIroy, President Wilson's
successor as head of the Department of
History and Politics at Princeton University,
at conference of educators, rooms of Bar
Association, New York, October 14, 1917.

acUM

COPYRIGHT, 19 1 8, BY WORLD BOOK COMPANY

COPYRIGHT IN GREAT BRITAIN • ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

gh: PEDC-a

EDITORS' INTRODUCTION

DESPITE the increased study given in
America to modern government, small at-
tention has been paid either by college teachers
or the general public to the political institu-
tions of the two nations which are the imme-
diate neighbors of the United States, and
whose territory defines our own national
boundaries on both the north and the south.
And yet our relations with these two countries
occupy a very large place in our political
history and continue to be among the most
vital concerns of our nation. In no other
part of the world is it so important to us to
have a thorough accord as on the continent of
North America, and no real understanding is
possible in the absence of a full knowledge of
the character and spirit of the public life of
neighboring states.
In both cases these neighboring countries have been
deeply influenced by our political constitu-
tion and from us both have adopted the federal
form of government, and many of the common
American terms and conceptions of republican
society. As far as the Mexican republic is
concerned the problem of our relations is
admittedly a serious and difficult one, made

[vii]

845822

EDITORS' INTRODUCTION

more so by the lack of knowledge arising from
profound differences in race, speech, and
inheritance. But in the case of Canada a
common derivation, a common speech, a com-
mon literature, and institutions derived from
common sources, somewhat differently devel-
oped, have already gone far to produce in both
countries a common American type of society
and social philosophy. While Canada has
learned much from the experience of the
United States, she is prepared also to teach
much. In the last fifty years Americans
have exhibited slight originality in politics
but have gained a spirit to profit from the
experience of others. While in our state
development, which has added commonwealth
after commonwealth to the American Union,
our constitution drafters and lawmakers
have adhered conservatively to a fixed type
of political organization, Canada can show
a successful experience with single-chamber
legislatures and with centralized adminis-
trations — types of progressive organizations
which American state political leaders have
lacked the courage and vision to attempt.
The administration of justice, of cities, and of
local institutions in Canada shows a clear
superiority over their counterparts in the
United States, which should arouse grave
inquiry in the minds of a people no less for-
tunately situated nor less socially endowed
[viii]

EDITORS' INTRODUCTION

than the Canadians. Assuredly a large part
of American failure in government is attribu-
table to a vicious form of organization which
Canada, influenced by sounder conceptions,
has avoided.
But undoubtedly the most fruitful contrast be-
tween government in Canada and government
in the United States is the different organi-
zation of the executive power. To the presi-
dential type of executive, elected for a fixed
term and above any political control during
the period of office, which prevails in the United
States of Mexico, Canada opposes the parlia-
mentary or responsible executive derived from
England and adopted generally by repre-
sentative governments in Europe. It is by
no means certain which of these two strongly
contrasted institutions will eventually be pre-
ferred by a successful republicanism in the
Western Hemisphere. All the countries of
America except those which are members of
the British Empire have followed the example
of the United States and created presidential
executives; but with the exception of the United
States none has wholly escaped dictatorship
or avoided civil wars occasioned by the abuse
of presidential power. The late President
Madero, at the time when he was a candidate
for the office, informed one of the editors of this
series that he was convinced that constitutional
order in Mexico would never be possible unless

EDITORS' INTRODUCTION

the Mexican presidency was changed to the
form of the presidency of France. A consti-
tutional amendment to effect this change was
introduced into the Mexican congress in igii,
after Maderos election.

Certainly in one respect parliamentary government
is most impressive, and that is in its capacity
promptly to determine the popular will upon
a vital issue. An American presidential
election seldom effects this. The issue may
have already passed into the background before
the vote can be taken, and the large number of
controversies pressed upon the American elec-
torate at the end of each four years confuse
the main issue and render the decision so
doubtful that it is rarely found binding upon
the administration elected to power.

Contrast such delayed and dubious decision with the
dissolution of the Canadian parliament over
the reciprocity issue in iQii, or the election
of 1917 upon the issue of conscription for the
war. In each case the controversy was isolated
and unconfused, a decision was given by the
nation unmistakably and within the space of
a few weeks^ time, and government was imme-
diately reorganized in terms of that decision
and with the designated victors in this contest
to carry out the people^ s will. Such a parlia-
mentary election is a great referendum beside
which an American election is a halting and
uncertain decision.

EDITORS' INTRODUCTION

// would be impertinent to enlarge upon the qualities
of the eminent writer who has prepared this
volume on the Evolution of the Dominion
of Canada: Its Government and Its Politics.
Mr. Porritt's long researches and authoritative
writings in the field of representative govern-
ment, his broad and decided views upon the
economic policies of governments, his long
identification with liberal movements in the
United States as well as in Great Britain and
Canada, make his willingness to perform this
task a cause of congratulation. No one is
better qualified than he to speak for the
American people both in Canada and in the
United States.

The Editors

[xi]

PREFACE

MORE than once I have been asked why I,
an Englishman, long resident in the state
of Connecticut, take so much pleasure in writing
on Canada. The answer to this question is
easy to make. From 1896 to 1914, my work, as
a special correspondent of London, Leeds, and
Glasgow newspapers, took me as much afield in
the Dominion of Canada as in the United States,
as frequently to Ottawa as to Washington.
Canada has also a peculiar interest for me arising
out of long devotion to a particular line of study.
From days of boyhood, when I was serving my
apprenticeship to newspaper work in England,
the study of the history and working of British
political institutions, local, central, and imperial,
has been one of the joys of my Hfe.

In Canada, British political institutions have
been in working since 1758 — working under New
World conditions. As transplanted in the eigh-
teenth century they were as nearly as possible
replicas of English political institutions — as much
so as the institutions, parliamentary, administra-
tive, and judicial, that were established by Eng-
land in Ireland at the end of the fifteenth century.

In the first half of the nineteenth century
there were far-reaching reforms in Great Britain.
The system of parliamentary representation was

[xiii]

PREFACE

modernized and made much more democratic
than it had been for three centuries before 1832;
and within the decade in which this long overdue
reform was effected, the attitude of Great Britain
towards her oversea possessions also underwent
a great and beneficent change.

Responsible government was conceded to the
colonies in which representative government had
already been established; and with the concession
of responsible government the political institu-
tions of Canada went through much the same
process as the political institutions of the United
Kingdom, local and central, had done in the
eighty-two years from 1832 to the beginning of
the war.

In no province in Canada is the political civi-
lization much more than a century and a half old.
But I have found the study of it as fascinating
as that of the much older political civilizations of
England, Scotland, and Ireland. It has presented
much the same four aspects: (i) how the older
political institutions came to be; (2) how they
worked; (3) the forces that impelled their reform
and liberalization; (4) how the newer and more
democratic poHtical institutions have worked.

More ground has been covered in the following
pages than is usual in books concerned with
government and politics. More ground had to be
covered if the government and contemporary
politics of the Dominion of Canada were to be
visualized and comprehended. For conditions

[xiv]

PREFACE

in Canada are peculiar, and peculiar in at least
four respects.

These are (i) the conditions under which the
political development of Canada has proceeded
since 1763; (2) the relations of Canada with
Great Britain and the empire; (3) the enormous
influence which Canada, and in particular the
united provinces of Upper and Lower Canada —
1 840-1 867 — have had on the colonial policy of
Great Britain since 1840; and (4) the position of
Canada arising from the former political connec-
tion of three of the old British North American
provinces with the thirteen colonies that broke
away in 1 776-1 783 from Great Britain and
established themselves as the United States;
the proximity of Canada to the United States;
and the influence that the United States has had
on the political and economic development of
Canada, and on its relations, political and eco-
nomic, with Great Britain and the vast empire
of which Great Britain is the center.

It is to make Canada understandable, and
also to make clear its relations with Great Britain,
and also the potency of American influence upon
it, that so much attention has been devoted in
these pages to the evolution of the Dominion,
and to the National Policy, which, largely owing
to American example and influence, had its
origin as far back as 1858.

Dominion politics from 1867 to the war cannot
be understood without an adequate comprehen-

[xv]

PREFACE

sion of the conditions, political, racial, religious,
economic, and social, within Canada, and also of
some important conditions of external origin
that brought about Confederation, and the
gradual development of the Dominion to its
present-day status of nation. There is also
needed some comprehension of the history of the
National Policy, and its various developments,
and its influence on Canadian politics and on
the day-by-day life of the people of the Dominion,
as well as on the relations of the Dominion with
Great Britain and the other dominions, and with
the United States.

To some degree this preface is characterized
by a personal note. I will end it in the same
key by adding that my interest 'in the history
and working of British political institutions has
been stimulated by the privileges I have enjoyed
since 1894 at the Connecticut State Library,
where the collection of material for the study
of Canadian history and politics is remarkably
large and complete. In this respect the State
Library here is excelled, so far as I can recall,
by only three libraries in England, and all these
three libraries are in London.

Edward Porritt

Hartford, Connecticut, U. S. A.
May 24, 19 18.

[xvi]

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

I. The British Oversea Dominions i

II. The Dominion of Canada — Area, Physical

Features, and Distribution of Population 13

III. The Geographic and Economic Divisions

OF THE Dominion 21

IV. The Evolution of the Dominion of Canada,

1783-1840 59

V. From the Rebellion to Confederation,

1837-1867 89

VI. The Influences and Forces that Brought

about Confederation 180

VII. The Quebec Convention and the British

North America Act 197

VIII. The Dominion a Federal Union 211

IX. The Distribution of Powers between the

Dominion and Provincial Governments . 223
X. The Governor-General and Cabinet . . , 247

XL Parliament: The Senate 267

XII. The House of Commons 305

XIII. The Cabinet: The King's Privy Council

FOR Canada 351

XIV. Parliament at Work: The House of Com-

mons 378

XV. The National Policy of the Dominion . . 430
XVI. The National Policy and the Develop-
ment OF Canada 469

XVII. Provincial Legislatures and Governments 483

Sources and Authorities 507

Index 513

[xvii]

FULL-PAGE MAPS

PAGE

The Dominion of Canada Frontispiece

Economic Map of the Dominion of Canada 39

The Two Canadas and the Maritime Provinces .... 69

The Dominion of Canada in 1867 275

The Prairie Provinces 473

The Great Lakes and the Drainage East to Montreal . 475

[xix]

Evolution of the Dominion of
Canada: Its Govemhicnt

and Its Politics ::•'>...... ,

CHAPTER I

THE BRITISH OVERSEA DOMINIONS

THE oversea possessions of Great Britain, Extent of
other than the Indian Empire — pos- ^ ®
sessions which in the year before the Empire
great war of 1914-1918 were of the aggregate
area of nearly nine and a half million square
miles — have been grouped at the colonial office
in London, since 1907, in two divisions. The
grouping is by political status. It is determined
by the relations of parliament at Westminster
and the colonial office to each of the forty-eight
oversea possessions.

In one group are the dominions, which call for Political
little or no attention from parliament, and, as ff^°"P^
regards their internal concerns, throw no burdens oversea
on the colonial office. In the other group are
the crown colonies and protectorates. These
receive some attention from parliament, in
particular when the annual vote for the colonial
office is before the house of commons and the
house of lords, — a vote on which any aspect of

slons

crottn
colonies

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

crown colony government can be discussed, —

and the internal and external concerns of these

colonies are constantly under the supervision of

the colonial office.

Areaand Th« dependencies under the supervision of

tetiouof ^^^ coHonial office cover on the roughest of

estimates an area of two million square miles.

They have a population of over forty millions,

among whom — including immigrants as well as

children of the soil — are to be found, in the

words of the Book of Daniel, "all people, nations,

and languages that dwell in all the earth." ^

Domin- The dominions are (i) the Dominion of

*°°^ Canada; (2) the Commonwealth of Australia;

(3) the Dominion of New Zealand; (4) the

Union of South Africa; and (5) the Dominion of

Newfoundland. In all these British oversea

possessions there are parliaments or legislatures

elected on democratic franchises, and responsible

governments.

Respon- The term "responsible government" is a

Mvern- comparatively new one in British colonial history.

ment It was not of British political terminology —

certainly not accepted in England as applicable

to colonial governments — until Great Britain in

the period between 1837 and 1850 at last began

to learn the lesson of the American revolution,

and to concede large powers of self-government

to the British North American provinces; next

^ Cf. C. P. Lucas, "The Crown Colonies and Protectorates/*
Manchester Guardian^ March 20, 1917.

[2]

BRITISH OVERSEA DOMINIONS

to Australia, New Zealand, and Cape Colony;
and finally in 1893 to Natal.

The term "responsible government," as now Meaning
used in British political science, means that in °^

1 • • 1 • 1- J respon-

each dommion there is a parhament and an siWe
executive, called the ministry, which, like the ^o^®'^^-

ment

ministry in Downing Street for the last two
centuries, is dependent for its tenure on the
continuous support of a majority in the house of
commons. In the oversea dominions, as in the
United Kingdom, the executive is often described
as the cabinet. The correct term is the ministry;
for it frequently happens, especially at West-
minster, that there are men in the ministry who
are not of the inner committee of the privy
council which is termed the cabinet.

The aggregate area of the five dominions in Area and
IQ14 was in round figures seven and a half million f°^^' ^

M <T-i 1 • 1 • lationof

square miles. The aggregate white population the do-
was nearly fifteen millions, as compared with ^^o"^
forty-six millions in the United Kingdom. West-
ern Australia, a state in the Commonwealth of
Australia, and Natal, a province in the Union of
South Africa, were the last colonies, now of the
dominions, to receive responsible government.

Western Australia was a crown colony until Political
1890. Natal was in the same class until 1893. freedom
With these exceptions, electors in all the domin- domin-
ions, for at least half a century before the world *°^*
upheaval of 191 4, had been as free to govern
themselves in all internal or domestic concerns,

[3]

tive
tariffs

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

and in more recent years also in regard to some
external matters, such as tariff preferences and
trade conventions, as the parliamentary electors
of the United Kingdom.
Proteo- There were no preferences for the oversea

dominions in the tariffs of the United Kingdom
after 1846. From 1859, when the united prov-
inces of Quebec and Ontario established a
protective tariff, each colony or province that is
now of the dominions was free to frame its own
tariff without regard to the industrial or com-
mercial interests of the United Kingdom.
Protec- With the exception of Newfoundland, all the

T^st dominions in the period between 1859 and 1914
imports had availed themselves of this liberty to impose
u^d^^ protective duties on imports from the United
Kingdom Kingdom and from other parts of the British
Empire. It was not until 1897, when the Domin-
ion of Canada made the innovation, that there
were any preferences in the tariffs of the domin-
ions for imports from England, Scotland, and
Ireland.
Domin- Except fot Contributions towards the British

tai^ navy from Australia, New Zealand, South Africa,
expend!- and Newfoundland, none of which was made
*™^®^ earlier than 1887, and some contribution for
several years from the Union of South Africa
towards the expense of maintaining British
troops in that dominion, no dominion makes, or
ever has made, any contribution to the imperial
exchequer.

C4]

BRITISH OVERSEA DOMINIONS

In the year before the war, the British national
debt was seven hundred and sixteen millions
sterling. A very large part of the national debt
that accumulated in the eighteenth century was
incurred in defending and extending British
colonial possessions in North America. Some of
the debt of the nineteenth and twentieth cen-
turies was also incurred in wars which arose
directly out of Great Britain's oversea possessions.
But no dominion has ever paid a contribution to
the interest or sinking fund of the national debt.
These have always been a charge on the tax-
payers of the United Kingdom; and the main-
tenance of the crown, of the colonial office and its
staff, and of the foreign office and the diplomatic
and consular services, have also been charges to
which no contributions have ever been made by
the dominions.

Parliament at Westminster never interferes in
the domestic concerns of the dominions except
at the instance of a dominion parliament, when,
for example, an amendment to the constitution
of a dominion is desired. The imperial parlia-
ment has far less to do with the internal concerns
of the dominions — with those of Canada, for
instance — than congress at Washington has to do
with the internal concerns of the several states.

The presence of the governor-general at Ottawa,
and the lieutenant-governors at the provincial
capitals — Charlottetown, Fredericton, Halifax,
Quebec, Toronto, Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton,

No con-
tributions
to the
British
national
debt

No Inter-
ference
from
parlia-
ment at
West-
minster

Gov-
ernor-
general

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

and Victoria — all representatives of the king,
are about the only manifestations in Canada of
the close connection between the Dominion and
Great Britain.
Appoint- The governor-general is sent out from Lon-
mentof ^^^ j^jg salarv and establishment charges are

governor- • i i i r>v • • t •

general paid by the Dominion. Lieutenant-governors are
appointed at Ottawa. But while the governor-
general is appointed by the king, on the recom-
mendation of the British cabinet, always with
the approval of the executive of the Dominion,
no other civil servants are appointed by the
British government; and there is no interference
from the colonial office with the internal affairs
of any of the dominions.
Crown Crown colonies stand in quite another relation

colonies ^^ parliament and the colonial office. Many of
them have elected, or partly elected and partly
nominated, legislatures, with fiscal and police
powers and comprehensive law-making powers.
They have not responsible government as it
exists in the dominions. Their executives cannot
be dislodged by an adverse vote in the legislature,
ciassifi- At the colonial office crown colonies are
cation of constitutionally grouped into five classes:

crown .

colonies (i) Colonies possessing an elected house of
assembly and a nominated council, e.g. the
Bahamas, the Barbados, and Bermuda; (2) col-
onies possessing a partly elected legislative
council, the constitution of which, as in British
Guiana and the island of Cyprus, does not provide
[6]

BRITISH OVERSEA DOMINIONS

for an official majority; (3) colonies possessing a
partly elected legislative council, the constitution
of which provides for an official majority, e.g.
Fiji, Leeward Islands, Jamaica, and Malta;
(4) colonies and protectorates in which there are
legislative councils appointed by the crown, e.g.
British Honduras, Ceylon, East Africa Pro-
tectorate, Falkland Islands, St. Lucia, St. Vin-
cent, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Southern Nigeria,
Straits Settlement, and Trinidad; and (5)
colonies and protectorates in which there are no
legislative councils or representative institutions,
e.g. Ashanti, Basutoland, Bechuanaland, Northern
Nigeria, the northern territories of the Gold
Coast, St. Helena, Uganda, Weihaiwei, and the
islands under the protectorate of the Western
Pacific High Commission.

Great Britain, at an early stage in the new Attitude
colonial era — the era that may be dated from ^^^^
1840 — determined that the development of towards
these crown colonies, most of them tropical
possessions in which there can never be a pre-
ponderant white population, was a necessity to the
British Empire. It was then realized that such a
development could come only through a partner-
ship between the white and the colored races.

Different methods have been adopted in work-
ing towards the development of these colonies.^

^ "Beyond anything, such success as has attended our
people in dealing with colored races has been the result of
practical good sense, which has not attempted to drill alien

[7]

crown
colocdes

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

General These methods represent a variety of means to a

poUcy single end. They represent stages of constitu-

crown tional and social development adapted to differing

colonies stages of civilization. The general policy is to

adapt to every administrative unit of the empire

the principles that have long been applied in

working out the political, social, and economic

welfare of the British nation, and to establish in

each of the crown colonies the order, stability,

freedom, and justice that are characteristics of

British political civilization.^

Relations Grants in aid are sometimes made to crown

°'. , colonies by the British parliament. Higher civil

colonial 11 r

office with servants, as well as governors, are sent out from
*^*"°^ London; and the supervision by the colonial

peoples on one uniform pattern or to stamp out diversity,
but has utilized the men and the things native to the soil and
familiar to the peoples — the sultan, the headman, the village
community; respecting customs and creeds, letting the peoples
live their own lives in their own way, provided that they abide
by the general rules which distinguish humanity from bar-
barism; gradually leavening them with the British spirit of
freedom rather than inculcating a sense of British domination.
By eschewing uniformity, by adapting methods to diverse
peoples of diverse lands in preference to recasting the peoples
in a strange mold, by ensuring life and property and even-
handed justice, by letting conditions grow instead of forcing
them, the English control many millions in singular content-
ment and goodwill." — C. P. Lucas, "The Crown Colonies
and Protectorates," Manchester Guardian, March 30, 1917.
Cf. Josiah Royce, "Race Questions, Provincialism, and
other American Problems," 22-25.

1 Cf. Sir Charles Bruce, "The Broad Stone of Empire:
Problems of Crown Colony Administration," I, 34-35.

[8]

BRITISH OVERSEA DOMINIONS

office of these oversea possessions — most of
them colonies in which the white population is
largely outnumbered by natives — is usually
close and continuous.

The establishment of representative and re-
sponsible government in the dominions — the
creation of these autonomous states of the British
Empire — was a gradual process. It went on
most quickly and most obviously from 1840,
when the provinces of Quebec and Ontario were
united, until 1893. It did not stop in 1893 when
responsible government was granted to Natal.
Other concessions, all tending to autonomy and
sovereignty, were made after the last of the
dominions became self-governing.

The process, going on almost continuously
since 1840, has been one in which the United
States, quite unconsciously to most Americans,
has had a large and easily traceable influence.
This influence has been due to the political
development of the United States since 1783,
and also to the fact that the old British North
American provinces of Nova Scotia, Prince
Edward Island, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario,
and British Columbia, in their formative period,
were neighbors of the United States, which
greatly influenced their social, political, and
economic life, as since 1867 the United States has
influenced the life of the Dominion of Canada.

There have been four eras in British colonial
policy and history since 1 776-1 783. The first

[9]

Develop-
ment of
respon-
sible
govern-
ment

Inflaence
of United
States on
British
colonial
policy

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Four eras

in British

colonial

policy

since the

American

revolution

Conces-
sions
from
1837 to
1907

Demands
for

colonial
autonomy

extended from 1783 to the Paplneau and Macken-
zie rebellions in Lower and Upper Canada in
1837. The second lasted from 1837 to the
confederation of the British North American
provinces, which was accomplished between 1865
and 1873; and the third was from 1873 to the
great war, from which began a fourth era in the
colonial history of the British Empire.

The process of establishing representative and
responsible government in the dominions — so
far at any rate as it depended on parliament at
Westminster and the colonial office — did not
begin until the union of the provinces of Quebec
and Ontario, an experiment which was a direct
result of the Papineau and Mackenzie rebellions.
It was only as recently as 1907 that Great Britain,
in continuation of the process, finally and fully
conceded to the dominions the much valued
right to appoint their own plenipotentiaries to
make their commercial treaties with foreign
powers.

In this gradual development of self-govern-
ment, statesmen of what are now the dominions
had the largest part. With them, and in par-
ticular with the statesmen of British North
America, originated the successive demands
between 1820 and 1907 for more autonomy and
for less control by parliament at Westminster
and by the colonial office.

Papineau and Mackenzie, in the years from
1820 to the union of the provinces, risked their

[10]

BRITISH OVERSEA DOMINIONS

lives in pressing on the British government the
first of these demands. Gait, the most famous Men who
of the ministers of finance of the United Provinces, |^^®
pressed to success in 1859 the demand for the demands
right of the provinces to make their own tariffs
without regard to the industrial interests of
Great Britain.

John A. Macdonald, Alexander Gait, Charles
Tupper, George Brown, George Etienne Carrier,
Edward Blake, Wilfrid Laurier, Richard Cart-
wright, and WiUiam S. Fielding pressed other
demands from the negotiations which preceded
confederation in 1867 until the right of the
dominions to make their own immigration laws
and their own commercial treaties was conceded
in 1904 and 1907.

Quite sixty years had elapsed, and there had British
been the rebellions in Canada, before statesmen ®*^*®*"

' men at

at Westminster really began to learn the lesson last leam
of the American revolution. Then they gradually ^^g/"
conceded the demands that were made from the i776-i783
colonies that are now of the dominions. They
themselves suggested little. They originated
few of the developments that have contributed
to the autonomy of the dominions. But after
1837 they became more receptive to demands
from colonial statesmen; and except for Galt*s
demand of 1859, for the right of the provinces to
make their own tariffs, and some delay in fully
conceding the demand of the dominions to make
their own commercial treaties, there was no

the links
of empire

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

grudging in conceding these demands after the
lesson of the American revolution had once been
learned.
New After it was realized that as concessions towards

^enW autonomy were granted the links binding the
ens dominions to Great Britain became stronger

instead of weaker, there were no compromises
with the demands. As the result of the colonial
statesmanship that pressed these demands, and
the statesmanship at Westminster that conceded
them, responsible government for all the colonies
that are now of the dominions had been established
for at least two decades before 1914; and its
establishment, and the success which has attended
it in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South
Africa, and Newfoundland, is the greatest political
achievement of people under British rule in the
140 years between the American revolution and
the war between Great Britain and her allies and
the Teutonic powers.

[12]

CHAPTER II

THE DOMINION OF CANADA — AREA,
PHYSICAL FEATURES, AND DIS-
TRIBUTION OF POPULATION

I

N area and population Canada is the largest Areaof
of the dominions. Politically and economi- ^® . .

. Dominion

cally it is, with the possible exception of India, ofCanada
the most interesting of the British oversea pos-
sessions. It embraces the northern half of the
North American continent, with its adjacent
islands in the Arctic Ocean, but exclusive of
Alaska in the extreme northwest, the island of
Newfoundland, and the small islands of St. Pierre
and Miquelon, which are colonies of the French
republic. The total area of the Dominion is
3,729,665 square miles. Of this, 309,000 square
miles are comprised in the arctic islands.

Newfoundland, the oldest of the British oversea Canada
possessions in the New World, has an area of ^^_
42,000 square miles; and the aggregate area of foundiand
these two dominions — Canada and Newfound-
land— is 3,771,665 square miles. This is a little
more than the area of the United States; larger
by 640,333 square miles than the combined area of
the commonwealth of Australia and the dominion
of New Zealand, and not much smaller than the
aggregate area of all the countries of Europe.

[13]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Coast- The Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United

^'* °' States are much straighter than those of the

Dominion Dominion. The Canadian coastHne on both

oceans is much indented with gulfs and bays —

particularly the Atlantic coast. These gulfs and

bays are good feeding and breeding grounds for

fish. They also afford many harbors and havens

for fishermen, thus giving Canada the most

extensive sea-fisheries in the world.

Hudson Hudson Bay — a sea 8cx) miles from north to

®*^ south, and 600 miles in width — is wholly within

the Dominion. For two centuries Hudson Bay

had great influence on exploration and trade in

Canada. With the enormous development of

grain growing in what are now the provinces of

Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, between

1898 and 1916, and with the construction by the

Dominion government in the years from 1910

to 1 916 of a harbor, with wharfs and elevators

for the grain trade, at Port Nelson, and a railway

410 miles long from Le Pas, Manitoba, to this

new port, Hudson Bay is again of importance in

the trade and transport economy of the large

area of Canada that lies between the Great Lakes

and the Rocky Mountains.

Great Canada has a common use with the United

'^'^11 States of all the Great Lakes — Ontario, Erie,

andthe , . , ' '

connect- Huron, Michigan, and Superior; and also a

ing canals common use of the St. Lawrence from its source

in Lake Ontario to the Atlantic Ocean. Since

1854, when by treaty the United States conceded

C14]

rence
River

AREA, PHYSICAL FEATURES, POPULATION

the privilege of free navigation of Lake Michigan
to Canada, and Great Britain conceded to the
United States the navigation of the St. Lawrence,
both countries have had joint use of the series of
magnificent canals — Canadian and American —
that make navigation possible from Lake Superior
to tidewater below Montreal.

The St. Lawrence occupies an even larger st. Law-
place than Hudson Bay in the history of Canada,
particularly as regards exploration and trade,
and incidentally as regards diplomatic relations
with the United States. In the sixteenth century
it opened a route for exploration, colonization,
and trade. It led Cartier, the explorer, in 1535
to the sites now occupied by the cities of Quebec
and Montreal.

In the eighteenth century, after the creation its m-
of the province of Ontario by the Quebec act of ^^^^^
1 79 1, and in the nineteenth century, it was the deveiop-
St. Lawrence, with its importance in inland "®f*°'

111- • 1 Ontario

navigation, that brought into existence the
Ontario cities of Prescott, Kingston, Hamilton,
and Toronto; and with the opening of the
Canadian Pacific Railway from Montreal to
Vancouver, in 1886, there came into existence,
as the most western cities on the lakes and St.
Lawrence route. Port Arthur and Fort William,
also in Ontario, the largest grain ports in the
British Empire.

It is within the power of the Dominion parlia-
ment to organize territories into provinces. Three

C15]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Creation provinces have been so created since Confedera-
of new ^Jqj^ They were carved out of the vast territory

prov- . "^ . -^

inces lying between Lake Superior and the Rocky
Mountains, over which the Hudson Bay Com-
pany ruled from the reign of Charles II until
1869, when its rights were acquired by purchase
by the Dominion government. Manitoba was
created a province in 1870, Saskatchewan and
Alberta in 1905.
Pouticai Since 1905 the Dominion has been politically
div^ions diyijgd into nine provinces and two territories.
Dominion The territories are Yukon and the northwest
territories. Yukon is bounded on the west by
Alaska, on the south by British Columbia, on
the north by the Arctic Ocean, and on the east
by the northwest territories, which extend to
the western shore of Hudson Bay. Both terri-
tories lie north of the sixtieth parallel — the
northern boundary of all provinces west of
Ontario. There were in 1916 fewer than 30,000
people in these territories.
Yukon Only in the Yukon is there any industry —

Territory ^j^^^ of gold mining, of which Dawson, the political
capital, is the center. The Yukon is the only
territory that elects a representative to the house
of commons at Ottawa.
Order in The provinces in the order in which they came
"^^^ into Confederation are: Quebec, Ontario, Nova

provinces 7 n «■ • 1

entered Scotia, and New Brunswick, 1867; Manitoba,

Confed- jg British Columbia, 1871; Prince Edward

eration ' 7/7

Island, 1873; and Saskatchewan and Alberta,

[16]

AREA, PHYSICAL FEATURES, POPULATION

1905. Quebec is the capital of the old French
province; Toronto of Ontario; Halifax of Nova
Scotia; Fredericton of New Brunswick; Winnipeg
of Manitoba; Victoria, on Vancouver Island, of
British Columbia Charlottetown of Prince
Edward Island; Regina of Saskatchewan; and
Edmonton of Alberta.

These are the political divisions which are Repre-
under provincial or territorial government for ^^****°'*
domestic concerns; each, with the exception of pariia-
the northwest territories, with its quota of q^^^*
senators and commoners in the Dominion parlia-
ment — a quota that as regards the house of
commons is determined by act of parliament after
each decennial census.

The area of each of the nine provinces and of Popu-
the Yukon and northwest territories, the popula- ^^^'^
tion of each at the census of 191 1, and the number sentation
of senators and members of the house of com-
mons allotted to each province and to the Yukon
by the redistribution act of the Dominion parlia-
ment of 1914 and as regards the senate by the
amendment to the British North America act
of 191 5 ^ are stated in the accompanying table.*

As the Dominion embraces almost half the climate
North American continent, it has a diversified Canada
climate. On the Pacific coast, with the ocean on beyond
one side and lofty mountain ranges on the other, ^^'^®^*
the climate is moist and temperate. East of the

^ British Statutes 5 and 6, George V, c. 45.
2 Canada Year Book, 1914, 41, 43.

[17]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Province

Area
sq. m.

Population,
1911

Representation
Sen. H.C.

Quebec

705,834

407,262

21,418

27,985
251,832

355,855
2,184
251,700
255,285
207,076
242,224

2,003,232

2,523,274

492,338

351,889

455,614

392,480

93,728

492,432

374,663

8,512

18,481

24
24
10
10

6
6

4
6
6

6S

82

Ontario

Nova Scotia

16

New Brunswick

Manitoba

II
IS
13

,1

12

British Columbia

Prince Edward Island .

Saskatchewan

Alberta

Yukon Territory

Northwest Territories .

I

Totals

3,729,665

7,206,643

96

234

Climate

from

Great

Lakes to

Atlantic

Ocean

Spring

and

summer

in the

maritime

pirovinces

Rocky Mountains, on the high level plateaus of
Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and the north-
west territories, the climate is characterized by
extremes of temperature, but is bright, dry,
bracing, and healthy.

East of Manitoba the extremes of heat and
cold are modified by the Great Lakes. In the
valleys of the Ottawa and St. Lawrence a cold
but bright and exhilarating winter is followed
by a long and warm summer. The Maritime
Provinces, lying between the same parallels of
latitude as France, and with shores washed by
the Atlantic, are equally favored in climate.

The opening of spring in the Maritime Prov-
inces is usually a little later than in Ontario
or in the prairie provinces, and a little earlier
than in the lower St. Lawrence valley. On the
other hand summer lingers longer, especially in
the Annapolis valley. Summer in the Maritime
Provinces is not as a rule quite so warm as in

[18]

AREA, PHYSICAL FEATURES, POPULATION

western Canada. Great heat is seldom ex-
perienced, except very occasionally at inland
places in New Brunswick.

From Alberta to the Maritime Provinces there snowand
is in the winter much snow. It lies deep over ^^l^^^
this area from November or December until tages
March. But the value of this covering of snow
cannot be overestimated. It protects the roots
of trees and herbage during the severe weather,
and east of the Great Lakes it also greatly facili-
tates the lumber industry.

The Great Lakes never freeze over, but ice ice-
closes the harbors from the middle of December *^^°^

ports

until the beginning of April. The average date
of the closing of navigation on the St. Lawrence
at Montreal is December i6, and of its opening
April 21. Harbors in the Gulf of St. Lawrence are
likewise closed by ice during the winter months.

On the Bay of Fundy and the coast of Nova winter
Scotia, harbors are open all the year round, ^^g^^'
Halifax and St. John, by this freedom from ice, Canada
obtain their importance as the Atlantic winter
ports of the Dominion. In particular they owe to
this great advantage over the St. Lawrence ports
their constantly increasing importance on the
national grain route — lake, canal, and rail —
which stretches from Port Arthur and Fort
William on Lake Superior to the Atlantic sea-
board.

The coal fields and coal deposits of the Domin-
ion are the most extensive and best known of its

[19]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Coal mineral resources. The known area underlain
D^mhj' ^y workable coal beds is nearly 30,000 square

miles.
Coal Notwithstanding the vastness of these deposits,

"dmi ^^^ total quantity of coal annually mined in
distri- Canada is less than half of the country's con-
bution of sumption. The coal fields are found principally
lation in the coast provinces — Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, and British Columbia — and in
Alberta. The central provinces, Ontario and
Quebec, — in which in 191 6 four sevenths of the
total population was concentrated, — are without
coal. They are nearer to Pennsylvania, Ohio,
and Indiana than to any of the coal-producing
provinces; and consequently they find it more
economical to draw their supplies of coal —
bituminous as well as anthracite — from these
American coal fields. American coal in large
quantities is also imported by the prairie prov-
inces. Anthracite, and some special bituminous
coals from Pennsylvania, are used as far west of
Lake Superior as Winnipeg and Brandon.

[20]

CHAPTER III

THE GEOGRAPHIC AND
ECONOMIC DIVISIONS OF THE
DOMINION

IT has been customary since Confederation to Four
group the provinces geographically and eco- ^^^^
nomically. There have been, since the prairie and
provinces were organized, four of these geographic ^J^J^
and economic divisions. All of them are well
marked, and generally accepted in political and
economic understanding.

I. The Maritime Provinces

In one group, the oldest and a group that is Provinces
tenacious of its British traditions and its local ^^^
political history, are the Maritime Provinces — sea"
Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward
Island. These three provinces are often collo-
quially described in parliament and in the press
as the provinces "down by the sea."

Before Confederation these provinces had Mari-
many common interests, so many in fact that
in 1864 there was a movement for a legislative i)efore
union. This movement culminated in an inter- elation"
provincial conference at Charlottetown, which had
the effect of greatly facilitating Confederation.

Before Confederation the Maritime Provinces

[21]

time
provinces

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Old free- had tariffs exclusively for revenue. They had

mottaces "°^ followed the example of the united provinces

of Ontario and Quebec in adopting protective

tariffs in 1859, chiefly because they drew their

manufactured goods from England, and there

were no factories in the Maritime Provinces to be

aided by protection. For thirty years after

Confederation the people of these provinces were

opposed to the protectionist policy of the Ottawa

government, and also to the large expenditures

on the canals of Quebec and Ontario, from which

they then derived no direct advantage.

Common In later years their common interests have

SttiT*^ been shipping and fishing, lumber and coal

provinces industries, agriculture, and the general economic

interests of a long-settled and sparsely distributed

maritime population, much less affected by the

cosmopolitan immigration of the years from 1898

to 1914 than any other division of the Dominion.

II. Central Canada
Char- Quebec and Ontario form the second of the

down
by the

geographic and economic groups. These prov-

acter-
istlcs of ,

people of inces constitute what is known as central
Quebec Canada. In general each is inhabited by people
Ontario of a different race, language, and religion and of
differing philosophies of life. Quebec is peopled
by French-Canadians, who are Roman Catholics,
and unambitious and content with the domestic
joys afforded by their homes, their occupations,
their religion, and their province.

[22]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

Ontario is inhabited by people of English or
Scotch origin, speaking English, of the Protestant
religion, energetic and ambitious, and nearer in
temperament and character to Americans of
New England or of the middle west than to
their eastern neighbors in Quebec, or the present
generation of people in England or Scotland.

There is more or less antagonism between these Economic
two peoples — an antagonism which can be traced j^*®^®^*^
back almost to the American revolution. Despite common
these differences in race, language, religion, and
outlook on life, and despite the antagonism
which not infrequently manifests itself at Ottawa,
and at the provincial capitals of Toronto and
Quebec, no other provinces in the Dominion
have achieved so much in common politically,
or have so much in common economically, as
Ontario and Quebec.

It was these provinces that made most of the Ontario
constitutional history of Canada from the Quebec ^^^^g^.
act of 1 79 1 to Confederation in 1867. In this and the
respect no other provinces in any of the dominions ^TrfJ^
have more beneficently affected the colonial colonial
policy of Great Britain. The modern era of ^^^^
colonial policy, the fruits of which were the
loyal, unstinting, and whole-hearted support of
Great Britain in the war with Germany, had its
beginnings between 1837 and 1845 in what are
today the central provinces of the Dominion.

Ottawa, the Dominion capital since Confedera- Ottawa
tion, is situated just within the eastern boundary

C23]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Apro-

vinclal

capital

becomes

the

capital of

the

Dominion

Ottawa:
its

remote-
ness from
the coast
cities

Newer
cities of
the
Dominion

of Ontario, with only the stately and quick-
flowing Ottawa River dividing it from Hull, the
most western city of Quebec.

The original plan was that Ottawa should be
the capital of the united provinces of Ontario
and Quebec. This was the design when it was
selected by Queen Victoria in 1859. But Con-
federation of all the British provinces on the
mainland of North America, long desirable and
long inevitable, was coming into being as the
beautiful parliament building at Ottawa was
rising on its foundations on the bluffs above the
widening out of the Ottawa River, and within a
year from the completion of the parliament
building the senate and house of commons of
the Dominion of Canada were in possession.^

From Halifax to Ottawa the distance by rail
is 940 miles; from Charlottetown it is 914 miles;
and from St. John it is 597 miles. From Victoria
to Ottawa, by the Canadian Pacific Railway,
the distance is 2867 miles; from Vancouver 2783
miles; from Edmonton, 2145 miles; from Regina,
1656 miles; and from Winnipeg, 1299 miles.

Halifax, Charlottetown, and St. John, and
Quebec, Montreal, Kingston, Toronto, and Hamil-
ton, were cities of commercial importance in the
days of the old British North American provinces.
Only two cities west of the Great Lakes, Winnipeg
and Victoria, were in existence at Confederation.
Vancouver was a creation of the Canadian
^ Cf. J. D. Edgar, "Canada and Its Capital," 51-52.

[24]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

Pacific Railway after 1886. Regina and Edmon-
ton were only Hudson Bay Company posts until
the Canadian Pacific Railway — the first of the
transcontinental railways — was pushed across
the prairies and over the mountains of British
Columbia.

Ottawa is not conveniently situated as the Amonu-
capital of the Dominion. As population increases ™®^**^*
it may not remain as the capital. But for British
fifty years Ottawa has served not only as the ^J^^
capital of the Dominion, but also as the most
outstanding monument in the empire of the new
colonial policy of Great Britain, which began
with the union of Ontario and Quebec. Ottawa
was the creation of these provinces, and the
Dominion succeeded to it at Confederation.
Its early history, its transformation from the
little lumber camp and distributing center of
Bytown into the most important political capital
in the overseas dominions, belongs jointly to
Ontario and Quebec.

A share in molding the newer colonial policy Manu-
of Great Britain is not all that the provinces of ^^^^^
Quebec and Ontario have in common. There of
are present-day material advantages of enormous 2j^^°
value, peculiar to central Canada, which these Quebec
two provinces possess in common.

Manufacturing in the two decades that pre-
ceded the great war had been developed in Nova
Scotia and New Brunswick. Nova Scotia is the
largest iron and steel producing province; and

L251

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

like New Brunswick it has several cities in which
the cotton and woolen industries are established.
Some large indigenous industries are established
at Winnipeg, Brandon, Regina, Calgary, and
other cities of the prairie provinces. But Ontario
and Quebec, Ontario in particular, are the manu-
facturing provinces of Canada. The manufac-
tures of these provinces are shipped east and
west — to the Maritime Provinces, and to all
the provinces west of the Great Lakes.
A pre- The predominance of the central provinces in

domi- ^j^g manufacturing economy of the Dominion,
that is which must necessarily be theirs for generations
abiding ^^ come, is easily explained. Quebec and Ontario
were the British North American provinces of
largest population from 1840 to Confederation,
and from Confederation to the war. All through
the nineteenth century Ontario attracted more
immigration from England and Scotland than any
of the other provinces. It first attracted immi-
grants to its vacant lands; and as these were
gradually cleared and occupied and cities de-
veloped, it attracted immigrants to its farms and
to its cities.
Quebec Immigration from the United Kingdom went
and the ^j^j ^^ ^j^g cities of the French province — to
of immi- Quebec, Three Rivers, and Montreal. The rural
^***°° economy of the province — its habitants speak-
ing only the French language, and socially and
industrially sufficient unto themselves, and also
the religious and at times political supremacy

[26]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

of the Roman Catholic Church — repelled rather
than attracted newcomers from England and
Scotland. Those who did not establish them-
selves in Montreal or Quebec pushed farther
west to Ontario, where social conditions were
more akin to those they had left behind.

Until Manitoba was opened for settlement by When
the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway ^^^
across the province in 1884, and in fact until Ontario
after the great immigration propaganda of the
Dominion was begun in 1898, when an Eng-
lishman or Scotchman told his neighbors in the
old country that he was emigrating to Canada
it usually meant that he was going to Ontario.

There was some immigration into the Maritime a
Provinces in the nineteenth century. Between ^^^^
1 81 2 and 1828, 25,000 Highlanders from Scotland some

of the
physical

settled in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia; and Gaelic

is still the language of thousands of men and char-
women in Nova Scotia. But the main stream of fg^^'o^
immigration until the end of the nineteenth cen- England
tury, both from England and Scotland, was to
the St. Lawrence ports of Quebec and Montreal,
and thence into wide and beautiful Ontario, a
province that in some parts is more like the
midland and western counties of England than any
other part of Canada.

The needs of a large and growing population Begin-
gave the first impetus to manufacturing in ^°_
Ontario and also in Montreal, which, as regards facturing
trade and commerce, is nearly as closely inter- Ontario

[27]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Raw

materials
from the
United
States

Influence
of the
protec-
tionist
tariffs
of the
United
States

Coal and
ore from
the United
States

woven in the life of Ontario as it is in that of the
old French province. This impetus came in the
days of small undertakings in manufacturing,
in the days when $10,000 was a large capital for
a manufacturing enterprise.

Some raw materials for manufacturing were to
hand in Ontario. What was lacking could easily
be procured from the United States, on which
Canadian manufacturers, in the Maritime Prov-
inces, as well as in Ontario and Quebec, have,
from the first, drawn largely for raw materials,
and also for partly finished materials to be
carried further in the process of manufacturing.

The United States has influenced manufac-
turing in central Canada, and through central
Canada in the Maritime Provinces, in three
distinct ways. In the forties and fifties of the
last century, American manufacturing develop-
ment, and particularly the development of New
England, served as an example to Canadians.
The adoption by the United States in 1842 of a
frankly protectionist policy impelled the united
provinces of Ontario and Quebec to the adoption
of a similar fiscal policy in 1 858-1 859; and since
1879 successive increases in the protectionist
tariffs at Washington have been followed by
increases in the tariffs at Ottawa.

Finally it was possible for the manufacturers
of Ontario and Quebec to draw on the United
States for coal and ore, for cotton and other raw
materials, and for partly finished materials at

C28]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

less cost in transport than from any other source

of supply.

The transport system of these two provinces Transport

— their railways and their lake and canal naviga- ^y^*®™^

tion systems — are so similar to these systems in Ontario

the states that border on the lakes, the St. Law- ^**^

Quebec
rence, and the boundary line, and they are so

interwoven through the system of bonding

traffic crossing and recrossing the border, that

only the customs houses recall the fact that

Ontario and Quebec are provinces of Canada,

while Maine, Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania,

Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan are states

of the American republic.

There will be more development of manu- con-

facturing in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. f/^°°^

This is inevitable in provinces endowed by favor the

nature with much water power, abundantly ^«°**'^

. provinces

suppHed with lumber and coal, and to which ore
is contiguous, as it is at Belle Island, Newfound-
land, for the manufacture of iron and steel on a
large scale. The war brought two modern steel
shipbuilding plants into existence in Nova Scotia.
There will be further development of manu-
facturing in the prairie provinces. But the
absence of many of the raw materials of manu-
facture, and the long distances that materials
must be carried, will always seriously handicap
manufacturing in the part of Canada that lies
beyond the Great Lakes.

The hold that central Canada has secured on

[29]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the manufacturing economy of the Dominion is,
therefore, likely to be as permanent as the hold
that Lancashire and Yorkshire, and the counties
of the black country, secured in the manufactur-
ing economy of England in the earlier years of
the industrial era.
Ontario The protective policy of Canada originated in

long a Ontario. Before Confederation it was Ontario

protec-
tionist that maintained the protective system of the
province United Provinces. Since Confederation, and
especially since 1897, protection has been sup-
ported by the mining and manufacturing com-
munities of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
But its stronghold today, as for sixty years
before the war, is in Ontario; and this fact
explains the sharp political division between
central Canada and Canada beyond the Great
Lakes.
Trade In comparison with Ontario and Quebec, the

ofthe^^ prairie provinces have few manufacturing in-
centrai dustries. There is no great staple industry
provinces gxcept flour milling; and the people of these
Canada provinces, who are mostly grain growers, must,
beyond f^^ ^^^ manufactures that they need, pay the
Great higher prices which the thirty-five and forty-two
^*^®^ and a half per cent duties of the Dominion tariff
enable the manufacturers of Ontario and Quebec
to exact.
National Predominance in manufacturing, and the lion's
^^ share of the benefits of the protective tariff, are
not the only material advantages due to geo-

[30]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

graphical, economic, and political conditions that
Ontario and Quebec enjoy. British Columbia,
and all the provinces east of the Great Lakes
with the exception of Prince Edward Island, are
largely dependent on the grain-growing provinces
for their prosperity, and in particular for their
industrial development. With the extension of
grain growing in the prairie provinces there is a
larger call for the lumber, coal, fish, and fruit of
British Columbia; for the services of lake steamers
that are on the Canadian register; for the services
of the three railway companies that handle grain
en route from the lower lake ports to tidewater;
for the loanable capital that is concentrated in
Toronto, Montreal, and Halifax; and also for
the output of the factories of Ontario, Quebec,
New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia.

An abounding harvest in the prairie provinces The
— a harvest in which the crop greatly exceeds ®^®^* °'
that of the preceding year — beneficently aflPects harvest
the payroll of every factory from Fort William *° *^®
to Sydney and Halifax, and also the turnover of growing
nearly every wholesaler and retailer in these four ^°^~

. . inces

provmces east of the Great Lakes. But in addi- on
tion to enjoying by far the larger share of the Payrolls
trade in factory-made goods of the prairie prov- the Great
inces, both of the central provinces — Ontario ^"^^^
and Quebec — derive much profit from the
transport business of Manitoba, Saskatchewan,
and Alberta — from the carriage westward of
machinery and other manufactured goods, and

[31]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the transport eastward to tidewater on the St.
Lawrence and to the ports of the Maritime Prov-
inces of grain and flour from the west.
The Three provinces west of the Great Lakes, and

bt^ta^s ^^° ^^ ^^^ ^^^ provinces east of the Lakes, all
of need the transport services of Quebec and Ontario.

Ontario Q^cLin bulks largest in the transport business of
Quebec the central provinces; and it is for this reason
that Ontario and Quebec, for thirty years before
the war, were more interested than any of the
other provinces east of the Lakes in the continued
efforts to divert as much as possible of the western
grain from Buff"alo to Montreal, Quebec, Halifax,
St. John, and Portland.
Place of All the wheat of the grain-growing provinces
Buffalo yggj jj^ Canadian flour mills east of the Great

ontae

grain Lakes, and all the wheat for export across the
route Atlantic, passes through some one of the thirty
elevators at Port Arthur and Fort William.
So far in the history of the western grain trade,
since its beginning in 1884, in each navigation
season more than half the wheat has been carried
to the seaboard from these Ontario ports on
Lake Superior by way of Buff'alo.^ The payment
for its handling and transport, after it had left
the Canadian elevators at the head of the Great
Lakes, accrued to owners of American lake
steamers, American elevators, and American
railways.

1 Cf. Annual Report of the Council of the Quebec Board
of Trade, 1917, p. 63.

C32]

navi-
gation

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

The rest of the wheat for export is shipped Grain
from Montreal, Quebec, Portland, St. John, and ^^^^^^
Halifax — most of it from Montreal. Wheat for Atlantic
Canadian shipment is carried direct from Port qP^^"**
Arthur and Fort William over the lake and Dominion
canal route, or it is carried to Canadian transfer
ports on the lower lakes — Huron or Erie —
and thence by Canadian railways or canals to
Montreal.

There is in normal times no reciprocity between No
the Dominion arid the United States in lake l^^^^S'

city in

navigation.^ Canadian vessels are not permitted lake
by the United States navigation laws to carry
cargoes from one American port to another; and
vessels on the United States register are not per-
mitted by the navigation code of the Dominion
to carry cargoes from one Canadian port to
another. Except for occasional cargoes from
Ogdensburg, a port on the St. Lawrence in the

^ In the lake navigation season of 19 1 7, for the first time
in the history of Canada, there was reciprocity in lake naviga-
tion. Canadians had desired this reciprocity since the old
navigation code of Great Britain — the code that had its
beginnings in the seventeenth century — was remodeled and
made much less exclusive in 1847. Washington, however,
declined all overtures for reciprocity in lake or coastwise
navigation from 1847 until April, 1917, when the United States
joined France and Great Britain and the other allies in the
war against the Teutonic Powers. Reciprocity in lake
shipping was then established as a war measure; and also as
a war measure there was a suspension of the convention of
1818 under which the United States and Great Britain agreed
that no war vessels should be built or maintained on the lakes.

C33]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Impor-
tance to
the cen-
tral

provinces
of the
grain-
handling
business

The port
equip-
ment of
Montreal

Shipyards
of the
central
provinces

State of New York, all the grain from Port Arthur
and Fort William that goes to Montreal, whether
directly by lake and canal, or by way of Ontario
transfer ports, goes in vessels that are on the
Dominion or the British register.

The transport business in this Lake Superior
and Montreal grain trade is thus secured to
Canadian vessels. Ontario ports on the lower
lakes get the transfer and storage business.
Those divisions of the Grand Trunk, the Canadian
Pacific, and the Canadian Northern railways that
are in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec get
the railway haul.

Montreal, with the largest and best grain-
handling equipment of any tidewater port in the
world, gets the tidewater terminal elevator
business; and in normal times the transport of
grain from Port Arthur and Fort William to
Montreal — elevating, storing, and shipping it
thence overseas — puts ten cents a bushel into
the treasuries of the commission, transport, and
elevator companies which handle the business.^

Most of this ten cents — a sum which does not
include oversea freight charges — goes in pay-
ment for labor, for services rendered to the
shippers of grain. It represents mainly payments
in wages to men who are employed on the lake
vessels, on the railways, and in the elevators.
It is this grain business also that finds work for

1 Cf. Cowie, "The Transportation Problem in Canada,"
47.

C34]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

the shipyards of Ontario and Quebec, for the
two large and well-equipped yards on the St.
Lawrence, and for the yards on the lakes at
Kingston, Toronto, Collingwood, and Port Arthur.

There has been an increase in the wheat crop share
of the prairie provinces almost every year since central
1884. In the grain year 191 5-1 91 6, these prov- prov-
inces had 264,000,000 bushels of wheat for ex- ^^^
port. Much less than half of this wheat went business
oversea from Montreal, Quebec, Halifax, and St. ^^^^i
John. The greater part went by way of Buffalo, grain
and was shipped across the Atlantic from Boston, '°"*®
New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Newport
News.

The constantly increasing production of wheat Canals
in Canada beyond the Great Lakes, the value of °g^^
the transport business to Ontario and Quebec, prov-
and the long-established and successful competi- ^'^^^
tion of the Buffalo route, explain why, since 1871,
it has been the continuous policy of the Dominion
government to improve the Canadian canals on
the national grain route. ^ The aim of the govern-
ment at Ottawa in constructing the lock and the
canal at Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario; in deepening
and enlarging the canals; in providing a fourteen-
foot waterway in the Welland and St. Lawrence
canals; in creating a well-equipped transfer port
at Colborne at the Lake Erie entrance to the
Welland Canal; and in aiding harbor boards to

^ Cf. Canal Commission, Sessional Papers, No. 54, 1871,
17-35.

[35]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The

transport
policy-
of the
Dominion
govern-
ment

Montreal

and

Toronto

the

financial

centers

of the

Dominion

equip the tidewater ports with ample elevator
accommodation and grain-handhng facilities, was
to reduce the time and the cost of lake and canal
transport.

For forty years before the great war, canal and
port improvements, conceived on a generous
scale, were the continuous policy of both Con-
servative and Liberal governments at Ottawa.
Its aim was to divert as much as possible of the
export grain business of the prairie provinces
from Buffalo, to the St. Lawrence canals and the
Atlantic ports of the Dominion. In this policy,
as in the policy of deepening the world-famous
ship channel from Montreal to Quebec, the
government at Ottawa, regardless of party com-
plexion, always had the support of central Canada.

Finally in this examination of the geographical
and economic conditions of Ontario and Quebec —
conditions which must be understood, if there is
to be any understanding of contemporary poli-
tics of the Dominion — there is the fact that
Montreal and Toronto are the financial centers of
Canada. These cities are to Canada what New
York, Boston, and Chicago are to the United
States. The head offices of the great banks —
banks with scores of branches in every province —
are in Montreal and Toronto. Those of the
Grand Trunk and the Canadian Pacific railways
are in Montreal.

The great coal companies of Nova Scotia and
Alberta, the iron and steel manufacturing com-

[36]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

panics of Nova Scotia and Ontario, and the tex-
tile companies whose mills are estabHshed in the
industrial cities of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia,
and New Brunswick, and most of the companies
engaged in interprovincial trade, have their
headquarters in either Montreal or Toronto.
There are also stock and grain exchanges in
both cities.

Men who are of bank and trust company Finance
directorates, or concerned in the finance of rail- *°,**

politics

ways and other transport companies, or are
financiers of manufacturing undertakings, have
much influence in Dominion politics. These
men constitute the governing class of Canada,
and their influence is much more potent at
Ottawa than similar influence is at Westminster.
It is greater and more obvious than at Washing-
ton; ^ for the tariff^ and transport policies of the
Dominion government more frequently originate
in Toronto or Montreal than with the cabinet at
Ottawa.

The influence thus exercised by Montreal and Govem-
Toronto, and at times by Halifax, the third *^ ,
financial center, is notorious and of long standing; Canada
and when a rural newspaper with a circula-
tion among farmers or grain growers alludes to
Canadian barons, the editor has in mind not men
who are of the lower tier of the British peerage,
but the men who are dominant in the offices of
the great corporations which have their head-

^ Cf. Clarus Ager, "The Farmer and the Interests," 68.

[37]

The

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

quarters in Montreal or Toronto.^ These two
financial centers, and the social life incident to
them, account almost as much as the long-estab-
lished predominance of Ontario and Quebec in
politics, in manufacturing, and in transport, as
well as in journalism and literature, for the
distinction held by central Canada in the political,
economic, and social life of the Dominion.

III. The Prairie Provinces

What is known by railway men as "the Bridge"
Bridge separates the prairie provinces from the older,
settled area of Ontario. The Bridge stretches
from North Bay, Ontario, an important railway
center on the Grand Trunk and Canadian Pacific
systems, to Kenora, on the Lake of the Woods,
also in Ontario, a lake of singular beauty that is
part of the eastern boundary of Manitoba.^ The
distance from North Bay to Kenora is 920 miles.
The journey over the Bridge takes twenty-one
hours on the Imperial Limited, the fastest train
that travels over the Canadian Pacific from
Montreal to Vancouver.

1 Cf. "Canada's Aristocracy," Grain Growers' Guidey
Winnipeg, June 25, 1913; "Our Canadian Barons," Free
Press, Forest, Ontario, April 27, 1916. "The east is the seat
of the great financial and transport interests, which are
shining marks for many a western brick." — " East and West,"
Quarterly Journal of the Canadian Bankers' Association,
Montreal, June, 1917.

2 Cf. "East and West," Quarterly Journal of the Canadian
Bankers' Association^ Montreal, June, 19 17.

[38]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Physical In these 900 miles of wilderness, where the soil
charac- jg g^ p^^j. ^g ^q warn ofF the settler, there are

teristlcs '^ . . , .

of the only three cities, Fort William, Port Arthur, and
Bridge Sudbury. These cities in 1916 had an aggregate
population of not more than 35,000. Besides
these there are few settlements large enough to
warrant being described as villages. The country
is wild and picturesque. There are indentations
of Lake Superior of bewitching charm, small
lakes, rivers, rocks, and hills.

In winter the temperature on parts of the
Bridge — at White River and at Chapleau, for
instance — is lower than in any other part of any
province of the Dominion. In summer and
autumn the climate is superb. It is as clear and
exhilarating as anywhere on the North American
continent; and there are parts of the Bridge that
are famous all over the world for their fishing
and hunting.
Canada's For the most part, however, the Bridge is a
wilderness with only the railway and passing
railway trains to remind one of the civilization
to the east and west of it. There can be no
country anywhere in the British oversea domin-
ions that is crossed by a railway, except the
Karoo in Cape Colony, that yields less traffic —
passenger or freight — than the Bridge, if Sud-
bury, Port Arthur, and Fort William are left out
of the count.

The Bridge was the great barrier to the opening
out and development of the prairie country at

[40] .

wilder
ness

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

the time of Confederation. It had a value for Barrier
the Hudson Bay Company, which before 1869 ^^^^
was intent only on exploiting the fur trade, and west
unloading its imported wares — textiles, hard-
ware, and tobacco — on the Indians; and conse-
quently did not desire civilization or community
life in its dooryard. It remained a barrier against
immigration and commerce until 1884, when
after fifteen years of effort, first by the Dominion
government, and later by the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company, railway communication was
established between Winnipeg and Port Arthur.

The wilderness from North Bay to Kenora is its
still a barrier. It is a barrier that to a considerable ^'*®'^<^*
extent still isolates western Canada. It adds to economic
the cost of living in the prairie provinces. Com- ^^*"
bined with a fiscal system that originated with
and that favors Canada east of the Great Lakes,
it makes the prairie provinces the most expensive
part of the British Empire in which to dwell;
for Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have
no forests available for lumber, little manufac-
turing, and good coal is mined only in the far
northwest of Alberta.

Canadian flour in normal times is cheaper in Cost of
England than it is in the prairie provinces, jj^^
Canadian bacon, for which Canadians pay from prawe
twenty-two to twenty-eight cents a pound, was ^°^^
sold in England before the war for from fifteen
to twenty cents a pound. It is the same with
fish, lumber, or any commodity that is the

C41]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

product of the natural industries of Canada; and
none of the extra price which Canadians pay-
goes to the grain growers of the prairie provinces.^
The political factors which largely account for
these economic conditions in the prairie provinces
are determined east of the Bridge, in Toronto and
Montreal.
Railways Despite the fact that since 1914 the Bridge has
^'°^^ been crossed by two railways in addition to the
Bridge pioneer Canadian Pacific, — the National Trans-
continental, that extends from Moncton, New
Brunswick, to Winnipeg, where it joins the
Grand Trunk Pacific line to Prince Rupert,
British Columbia, and the Canadian Northern,
which connects all four western provinces with
Toronto, Montreal, and Quebec, — it still ob-
viously influences political, economic, and social
conditions in the prairie provinces.
Area These provinces, sharing in common all the

of the physical characteristics that the word "prairie"
growing suggests, extend from the Lake of ^the Woods to
provinces ^^^ Rocky Mountains. From east to west they
stretch over a distance of 1000 miles. North-
ward they extend from the boundary of Dakota
and Montana to the sixtieth parallel.
Where On the east the grain-growing country begins

grain ^^ Whitemouth, on the Canadian Pacific Railway,

elevators r r» a i -i

beginto 390 miles west of Fort Arthur, and 50 miles east
sS^tat* °^ Winnipeg. Stony Plain and Nordegg, in
Alberta, were in 191 6 the most northwesterly
* Harpell, "Canadian National Economy," 12.
[42]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

towns in the grain-growing area. Nordegg is
1475 miles from Port Arthur and 2951 miles
from St. John, the winter grain port of the Do-
minion. At every railway station in the country
from Whitemouth to Nordegg there are small
elevators — '*Hne" or "country" elevators as
they are termed, to distinguish them from ter-
minal and transfer elevators.

In winter, when lake navigation is closed, grain A grain
is carried from these interior elevators to Fort JJJj®
William and Port Arthur. From these ports it mUeg
is taken over the three transcontinental railways ^°°*
to Montreal, thence to Halifax, St. John, and
Portland, Maine; so that at some seasons of the
year grain from the prairie provinces is moving
to tidewater over an all-Canadian route that is
3000 miles long.

In the fifteen years that preceded the war. Home-
out of the three million immigrants who arrived ^^*^*"
in Canada from the United Kingdom, from the grain
United States, and from the countries of Europe, ^^""^
one and a quarter millions went into the prairie
provinces; ^ and of the immigrants who went
into these provinces to acquire homesteads from
the Dominion government, or to buy land from
the Hudson Bay Company or the railway com-
panies, ninety out of every hundred had em-
barked in grain growing.

The outbreak of the war, coming as it did in
a period of industrial and commercial depression
^ Cf. "Immigration Facts and Figures," Ottawa, 1915, 4.

[43]

industry

crop
country

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The war in Canada that had lasted over two years — a
^ain-* depression more widespread and serious than any-
growing other since the turn of the twentieth century — ■
gave a new impulse to grain growing in Mani-
toba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta.

The result is easily measurable. The average
area under grain in the prairie provinces from
1910 to 1914 was 16,608,000 acres. At the
second harvest after the beginning of the war,
the aggregate area under grain was 19,797,000
acres, of which 11,744,700 acres were under
wheat and 6,290,000 acres under oats.^
A one- There is some cattle ranching in Saskatchewan

and Alberta. The sheep industry also has long
been established in these provinces. As the popu-
lation of Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Calgary,
and Edmonton increased, there were increases
in the acreage devoted to mixed farming. But
the prairie provinces do not supply their own
needs. They import large quantities of potatoes,
butter, eggs, cheese, and fruit.

In fact, from the time railway connection
was established with Lake Superior ports and
eastern Canada, the vast territory stretching
west from Winnipeg to Calgary and Edmonton
has been a one-crop country. It is as much a
one-crop country as the southern states in which
cotton is grown; and nine tenths of the people
in these three provinces — in the cities as well

^ Cf. Census and Statistics Monthly, Ottzwa, Jsmuciry, 19 16,
28.

C44]

eastern
Canada

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

as in the country — are as dependent on the
grain crop as the people in Pittsburgh are on
the iron and steel industry, or the people of Fall
River on the cotton mills.

Economically the prairie provinces are based impor-
on grain growing. Every city in Manitoba, **^°'
Saskatchewan, and Alberta is a monument to growing
the success of grain growing. The cities east of ? da
Winnipeg from Kenora to St. John and Halifax, beyond
and in particular Toronto, Hamilton, and Mont- ^®
real, have grown in importance, extended their Lakes to
municipal boundaries, added to their commer-
cial houses and their factories and to their popu-
lation, as a result of the development in Canada
beyond the Great Lakes.

Eastern Canada of the twentieth century — To
Montreal with its population of 717,000 in 191 5, ^°°*^«*^
Toronto with 534,000, and Hamilton with Toronto
102,000^ — owes much of its growth since 1900,
the larger part of it, in fact, to railway building,
home building, grain growing, and urban de-
velopment in the prairie provinces. This is true
also of Sydney and North Sydney, Nova Scotia,
with the largest iron and steel plants in the
British oversea dominions. It is equally true of
Collingwood, Kingston, and Port Arthur, with
their steel shipbuilding yards.

The prairie provinces realize their economic
importance to Canada. Were there no boundary

^ Estimated. Cf. Griflin, "Canada, the Country of the
Twentieth Century," 20.

[453

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

line, and no Canadian custom-houses, manu-
factured goods that are needed in Manitoba,
Saskatchewan and Alberta, could be more ad-
vantageously supplied from Chicago, St. Paul,
and Minneapolis, than from Toronto, Hamilton,
Montreal, and the manufacturing cities of the
Maritime Provinces.
Attitude Except for transport services and for loans, the
of^in- provinces in the east are of little economic im-
provinces portance to the gram-growmg provmces. Iheir
eas^^oT^ consumption of grain and flour does not affect
the the price of grain. The price that the grain

Bridge grower receives is the same whether the grain
be exported or used in Canada. It is always
based on the price ruling in Liverpool and Lon-
don.^ The western point of view is that Mani-
toba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta could thrive
far better without eastern Canada than eastern
Canada could thrive without the grain-growing
provinces.
Protec- The western country that lies between the

toT^- ^^^^^ Lakes and the Rocky Mountains derives
growing no benefit from the high tariff. British Columbia,
industry ^gfore the war, had no manufacturing. It had
no iron and steel plants and no textile industries.
But it has coal, lumber, fish, and fruit, for which
there is a market in Canada, and it derives con-
siderable advantage from the protective duties on
these products. The prairie provinces, except
for beef, hides, and a little wool, have only grain
^ Cf. Harpell, "Canadian National Economy," 12.

[46:

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

and flour to export, either to eastern Canada or
oversea; and while the tariff does not influence
the price of grain, it greatly increases the over-
head charges of the grain grower and the cost of
his maintenance.

The tariff is consequently the dividing line in Dividing
politics between the grain-growing provinces and Jjl^^^^
eastern Canada. "More and more the east is poutics
given over to manufacture and commerce and
finance. The east has imposed upon the west
a fiscal system which it terms national, but which
the prairie west considers sectional.^" The line
is further accentuated by the fact that so much
of the financial and political power of the Do-
minion is concentrated in Toronto and Montreal
and Halifax.^

Manifestations of the attitude of the prairie Grain
provinces towards eastern Canada, and its domi- ^°^®^^
nance in politics and finance, come almost ex- politics
clusively from the grain growers, who carry most
of the burden of the tariff.^ The grain growers
began to organize locally in 1903. Since then
they have organized by provinces, and also inter-
provincially. They were 65,000 strong in 191 7;
and for five or six years before the war they were
better organized, more articulate, and more in-
fluential in provincial and Dominion politics,

* "East and West," ^uarUrly Journal of the Canadian
Bankers* Association, Montreal, June, 19 17.

* Of. Clarus Ager, "The Farmer and the Interests," 34.

* Cf. "The Farmers' Platform," 3-53.

[47]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

than any other of the social and economic forces
of the Dominion, except the bankers and finan-
ciers and the manufacturers.
Municipal In municipal and provincial politics the prairie
^ir^rship provinces are distinctly radical. They are much
prairie more radical, more disposed to political experi-
provinces n^gnt, than Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and
New Brunswick. Water supplies and sewers
are the only public utilities in eastern Canada
owned by the municipalities. In the prairie
provinces cities own street-car lines, natural-gas
systems, and electric light and power undertakings.
Public The provincial governments own telegraph

utilities ^^^ telephone systems; and in the years from
by the 1910 to 1912 the governments of all three prov-
provinciai Ji^^es, at the urging of the grain growers' asso-
ments ciations, took the ground that country elevators
are public utilities, and legislation was enacted
providing for the public ownership of these
utilities.

The prairie provinces form the most agrarian
division of Canada — a fact that is manifest in
much of the legislation enacted at Winnipeg,
Regina, and Edmonton. It is equally manifest
in the attitude of the grain growers of the three
provinces towards tariflF, fiscal, and railway legis-
lation at Ottawa.^

The economic importance of this geographic
division of the dominion will increase as new
homesteads are carved out of the 25,700,000
^ Cf. "The Farmers' Platform," 6-26, 27-40, and 41-49.

C48]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

acres of surveyed lands that were available for Growing
settlement when immigration into Canada from ^"*^^
England and Scotland and other European coun- tanceof
tries was brought to a standstill by the great *^q,|^^"
war. With the increase of population that the provinces
settlement of these lands will bring, there will
be an increase in the parHamentary representa-
tion of the prairie provinces at Ottawa. The
continued political dominance of Ontario and
Quebec is consequently not assured — not nearly
so assured as their dominance in manufacturing,
transport, and finance.

IV. British Columbia

British Columbia, a province that Canadians Wonder-
like to describe as the wonderland of Canada,^ ^*°^
is the fourth of the geographical and economic Dominion
divisions of the Dominion. The state of Wash-
ington forms its southern boundary. On the
east it has Alberta as a neighbor; on the north
it is bounded by Alaska and the northwest terri-
tories, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean.

Vancouver Island, 285 miles long and from Most
40 to 80 miles wide, is included in British Colum- beautiful

. . . capital

bia. Victoria, on Vancouver Island, has been in the
a political capital since 1850. It has been the ^^^^
capital of the province since the government of
the island and the mainland was united in 1866.
By its situation and environment it is the most
beautiful capital in the British Empire, not even
1 Cf. Griffin, 153.

[49]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

excepting Capetown, where the parliament house
of the Union of South Africa occupies a com-
manding site on the slope of Table Mountain,
with the Atlantic Ocean in view from the windows
of the legislative chambers. The windows of
the legislative building at Victoria look out on
Puget Sound; and from the windows of the
legislative library, one of the best-equipped
libraries in the Dominion of Canada, are visible
the snow-capped mountains of the State of
Washington.
Tide- Two thirds of the population of British Colum-

dtieTof ^^^ — ^^° thirds of a total population of 400,000
British — were in 1916 resident on Vancouver Island,
Columbia ^j. ^j^ tidewater of the mainland. Vancouver
had then a population of 106,000; Victoria,
60,000; New Westminster, 17,000; and Prince
Rupert, the new city created by the Grand Trunk
Pacific, 550 miles north of Vancouver, 3500.^
Cities Rossland, a mining town, and Nelson, Ashcroft,

^^® Kamloops, and Revelstoke, railway and distrib-
uting centers, are the only cities in the interior.
The province is separated from Alberta by the
Rocky Mountains, a barrier almost as great from a
political and economic point of view as the wil-
derness that lies between Kenora and North Bay.
The physical characteristics of British Colum-
bia— its climate, seashore, mountains, passes,
rivers, lakes, and forests; its fruit orchards, coal

1 The last Dominion census was taken in 191 1. These
figures are estimates. Cf. Griffin, 20.

[50]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

and other mineral resources; and its fisheries — Physical
are the pride of the Dominion. It is to Victoria ?^^

* ... tensacs

and Vancouver that men retire m old age after and re-
gaining wealth in the prairie provinces or in ^^^^
eastern Canada. Victoria is the Newport of the province
Dominion. Vancouver is its Narragansett or
Atlantic City.

The social characteristics of British Coulmbia Social
are as well marked as those of Quebec. In British ^^^^^^'
Columbia people of English birth or stock are
predominant. The Scotch have no such hold
on British Columbia as they have on Ontario or
Nova Scotia. From 1850 until Confederation,
the newcomers into British Columbia, other than
Chinese, were from England.

These newcomers were of the English middle immi-
classes; for before the Canadian Pacific con- P^*f

. . Into the

nected Vancouver with Montreal, it was a costly province
undertaking to emigrate from England to British ^°^^^
Columbia. Even after the railway was completed England
in 1886, there was little change in the class of
immigrants; and the great immigration propa-
ganda of the Dominion government of 1 898-1914
had been pushed for ten years before there
was a proletarian immigration from England
and Scotland and from the countries of conti-
nental Europe into the three large cities of Brit-
ish Columbia.

Externally Vancouver and Victoria are the The
two most English cities in the Dominion — Eng- ^^IL^
lish as regards the homes of the people and their cities

[51]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

British
Columbia
from
1850 to
Confeder-
ation

Influence
of British
Columbia
on

Confeder-
ation

setting; English in social life, in particular in
outdoor social life; and English in fashions in
dress and furniture.

British Columbia, like Ontario, takes pride in
its pre-Confederation history and traditions. It
does so with as good reason as Ontario or Quebec;
for between 1850 and 1871, when British Colum-
bia came into Confederation, more constitutional
history was made in the little city of Victoria
than in any other city in the oversea possessions
of Great Britain.

The constitutional history that was made in
Victoria in these twenty-one years did not affect
the dominions as did the constitutional history
that was made between 1837 and 1867 at Toronto,
Kingston, Montreal, and Quebec. It did affect
the terms on which British Columbia came into
Confederation; and these terms greatly influ-
enced the political and economic history of
Canada.

Had Victoria been merely a trading post of the
Hudson Bay Company, like Fort Garry, which,
after Manitoba came into Confederation, became
known to the world as Winnipeg, or had the
statesmen of British Columbia of 1 866-1 872 not
been men of vision, alert, persistent, and resource-
ful, there is no telling how long would have been
delayed the carrying through of the railway from
Montreal to Vancouver.

No group of men in any British colony ever
better earned the title of statesmen than the

[52]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

group at Victoria who were in control after the sritiBh

Hudson Bay Company had been ousted from ^^^^^

Vancouver Island in 1849. They had been in- men

fluenced by the successful movement for parlia- °'*^

. . pre-Con-

mentary reform in England. They had witnessed federa-
the rebirth of English municipal institutions that "°° ^^
followed so quickly the reform of the house of
commons of 1832; and they had, moreover, the
genius for working representative institutions —
parliamentary and municipal — in the English
spirit that became so widespread in England in
the first half of the nineteenth century.

The immigrants to British Columbia from Eng- Political
land of the years from 1849 to 1871, when they ^^°^^
were establishing themselves in what was then early
the most remote and isolated of all the British s®"^®^^

in

North American colonies, knew what political British
institutions would meet their needs. They knew Columbia
what they wanted from the colonial office in
London, in the days when British Columbia was
a crown colony, with no relation to eastern Canada
except that it was on the same continent, under
the same sovereign, and that it had, like eastern
Canada, the United States as its neighbor.
They also knew what they wanted from Ottawa
and from London at Confederation; and in the
long run — in the period from 1849 to 1871 —
they got what they demanded from the British
and the Dominion governments.

Before Confederation eastern Canada knew as
little about Victoria as it did about Capetown.

[53]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The old-
time
Isolation
of British
Columbia

Crown
colony
stage of
British
Coltunbla

Repre-
sentative
govern-
ment
estab-
lished

Twenty
years of
poUUcal
achieve-
ment

British Columbia was then almost as remote
from Toronto or Quebec as Cape Colony. Over-
land it could be reached only through the United
States, by way of San Francisco, which was then
to Victoria much what Boston has long been to
Halifax and St. John.

Political rule at Victoria by the Hudson Bay
Company came to an end in 1849. From 1849
to 1 871 British Columbia was a crown colony;
and there was a period — 1 864-1 866 — during
which there were two British colonies on the
Pacific coast — Vancouver Island, with Victoria
as the capital, and the mainland, with New
Westminster as the capital.

Representative government, with an elected
legislative assembly and a nominated legislative
council, was established for Vancouver Island in
1856. The entire white population of the island
and the mainland was then not more than 450,
of whom 300 were resident at Victoria,^ which
from 1856 to 1 871 was the Athens of the over-
sea dominions of Great Britain.'^

There were only 8500 white men in the whole
of British Columbia at Confederation. Yet such
was the political activity at Victoria between 1851,
when its first legislative council was established,
and 1872, that in these twenty-one years the

* Cf. Begg, 201.

' Cf. Report by James D. Edgar to Secretary of State
for Canada, June 17, 1874, Canadian Sessional Papers, 1880,
page 167.

LS4l

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

people of British Columbia secured for themselves
(i) a legislature with an elected chamber, and a
chamber in which the members were nominated;
(2) a municipal system on the English model for
Victoria; (3) an educational system, free and
unsectarian, over which no church — Protestant
or Roman CathoHc — was permitted any control;
(4) a ruling by the legislative assembly which
defeated an attempt to make the assembly
bilingual, as was the legislature of Ontario and
Quebec at this time, and as parliament at Ottawa
has been since Confederation; ^ and (5) the
right of the colony to make its own protective
tariffs, to pay bounties to encourage local indus-
tries, and the liberty to apply to Washington
for inclusion in the Elgin-Marcy reciprocity treaty
of 1 854-1 866.

All this progress towards autonomy had been conces-
made before the negotiations which preceded the 3°^^^°
entry of British Columbia into Confederation were Columbia
begun in 1869. As a result of these negotiations J^^^^,
with the colonial office in London, and with erauon
Ottawa, British Columbia secured (i) the right
to responsible government, to a status similar
to that of the five provinces of eastern Canada;
(2) liberty to abolish the bicameral system and
substitute a single-chamber legislature, with all

* "A petition was brought forward, but being in French it
was turned back, as the house cannot receive petitions written
in any foreign language." "MS. Journals of Representative
Assembly," August 24, 1858.

Lssl

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Crown
lands

Slow
economic
develop-
ment of
British
Columbia

Its members directly chosen by the electors; ^

(3) pledges from the government at Ottawa for
the construction of a telegraph line and a rail-
way from eastern Canada to the Pacific coast;

(4) a representation in parliament of three sena-
tors and five members of the house of commons;
and (5) complete control of the vast area of
crown lands within the province.^

In respect to crown lands, British Columbia has
an advantage over Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and
Alberta, the provinces which were brought into
Confederation by legislation originating and en-
acted at Ottawa. Crown lands in these three prov-
inces remain under the control of the Dominion
government — the only lands in provinces that
are so controlled; for at Confederation Ontario,
Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince
Edward Island, as was the case with British Co-
lumbia, retained control of their crown lands.

From Confederation to 1914 the economic de-
velopment of British Columbia, and its growth
in population, were comparatively slow. Until
1907-1908 central Canada and the prairie prov-

1 "The two-chamber system in these young countries is a
superstition which grew out of the social conditions of Eng-
land — a social condition which has no counterpart in her
colonies." — British Colonist, October 19, 1871.

2 "No wonder, then, that Governor Musgrave (Sir An-
thony Musgrave, governor of British Columbia, 1869-1871)
should have stated publicly that he was amazed at the con-
cessions granted by the Canadian government." — Edward
Blake, house of commons, Ottawa, March 28, 1871.

[56]

GEOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DIVISIONS

inces absorbed the great stream of immigration
that flowed into the Dominion. The population
of British Columbia in 1901 was only lySjCXX),
including Chinamen and Indians.

The Canadian Northern and the Grand Trunk An era
Pacific railways were constructed across British °^,

. . . . railway

Columbia, and their termini established at New buuding
Westminster, Vancouver, and Prince Rupert, in ^^^'
the years between 1907 and 1914. The great immi-
increase in the population of the prairie provinces, ^**^°"
and this railway construction, aided the develop-
ment of British Columbia. Lumber, coal, fish,
and fruit were in increasing demand in the grain-
growing provinces.

In these years, with improved railway com-
munication and with prosperity all over the
Dominion, British Columbia became increasingly
the pleasure ground of Canada; and the first
boom in its history — a boom at the height of
which prices for real estate in Vancouver and
Victoria mounted as high as prices for real estate
in central London — continued until within a
year of the war.

The resources of British Columbia are lumber, a pro-
coal, fish, and fruit. It exports all these products *®*=^^s*
oversea. In the decade before the war it marketed
lumber, fish, and fruit in the prairie provinces,
and to some extent also in eastern Canada.
British Columbia was a protectionist province
in the pre-Confederation era. It was almost as
protectionist as Ontario; and as a result of the

C57]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

protection of its lumber and fruit-growing indus-
tries by the Dominion tariff, it is politically
allied with central Canada and Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick, and not with its neighbors
immediately east of the Rocky Mountains — the
agrarian, radical, and free-trade provinces of
Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba.

C58D

CHAPTER IV

THE EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION
OF CANADA. I783 TO 184O

T

HE loss of the American colonies ended one a new
era in British colonial history and began ^^^
a new one. It began the eventful and beneficent colonial
era that extended from 1783 to 1914 — an era ^**°'^
parallel to, and greatly influenced by, the era
of constitutional reform and progress towards
democracy in Great Britain that extended from
1832 to the outbreak of the war.

British colonies at the end of the American British
revolution were Canada, Newfoundland, the ^^^
British West Indies, Australia and New Zealand, sions at
and a number of smaller possessions now in the ^^^^^
crown colony division of the colonial office. India American
in 1783 was under the control of the East India j"^^
Company. It was not transferred to the im-
perial government until 1858.

At the beginning of the new era there were no Canada
British settlements in either Australia or New ^^"^^
Zealand. Canada included the vast territory
under the rule of the Hudson Bay Company;
Quebec, which then extended from the Detroit
River to the western boundary of what is now the
province of New Brunswick; Nova Scotia; and
Prince Edward Island.

LS9l

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Popa-

lation

of the

British

North

American

provinces

at the

end of

American

revolution

The only white inhabitants of the country
west of the Detroit River were the factors or
agents and other employees of the Hudson Bay
Cornpany. In Quebec the white population did
not exceed 113,000, of. whom it was estimated
15,000 were of British origin. Nova Scotia,
which then included New Brunswick and Prince
Edward Island, had a population of 42,700.^

In Newfoundland there were about 10,000
inhabitants. In all the oversea possessions of
Great Britain at the end of the American revolu-
tion, the white population was not more than
170,000, more than half of whom were French-
Canadians.

Impelling
forces
towards
coloni-
zation
in 1783

I. Influence of the American Revolution on
British North America

Enthusiasm for colonial possessions was damped
by the loss of the American colonies; and a period
of indifference and stagnation in regard to them
might have begun in 1783 had it not been for
two conditions which arose out of the war with
the American colonies. One of these conditions,
the convicts in England, who during the war

^ For these statistics of population I am indebted to
Mr. William Smith, secretary to the board of publications,
public archives of Canada, Ottawa. The United Empire
Loyalists, about 15,000, are not included in the population
statistics for Canada. In those for Nova Scotia, the then
recently arrived United Empire Loyalists, as well as disbanded
troops, in all 28,000 men, women, and children, are included,
as are also 400 Acadians.

[60:

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

had been temporarily detained in hulks awaiting
penal transportation oversea, created a seriously
embarrassing domestic problem. The second
condition, the obligation of the British govern-
ment to the Tories or United Empire Loyalists
of the revolution, existed in the United States,
in Canada, and in Nova Scotia; and after the
peace of 1783 presented a problem that admitted
of no delay in solution.

Convicts had been sent out from England to Convict
the American colonies from as early as 161 8 to ^®"^f-

. , -. ments in

1776. They were commg at the rate of 400 or Australia
500 a year in the decade which preceded the.
revolution. At the end of the war the British
government determined to establish a convict
settlement in Australia.

Seven hundred men and women, and boys The first
and girls, condemned to transportation under JjfBriti\
the revoltingly brutal code of the eighteenth cen- colonies
tury, were sent to Port Jackson, the present site ^^?^
of Sydney, New South Wales, in 1787; and be- revoiu-
tween then and 1830, 25,000 convicts were trans- **°^
ported to New South Wales and Van Dieman's
Land. The successful revolt of the American
colonies thus led almost immediately to the
colonization of AustraHa; for in 1788 New South
Wales was formally proclaimed a British colony.
It was under crown colony rule until 1855; and
convicts were transported thither until 1841.^

* Cf. "The Oxford Survey of the British Empire — Gen-
eral Survey," VI, 152-153.

[61]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

United A large immigration of United Empire Loyal-

Empire jg^g £j.Qj^ ^j^g United States to the British North

Loyalists

as wards American provinces, and the Quebec act of 1791,
«.?!. were the developments in the solution of the

British r 1 1 • •

govern- second of these problems arising directly out
°**"* of the war of 1 776-1 783. The United Empire
Loyalists became the wards of the British gov-
ernment after the treaties of Versailles and Paris;
and they remained the peculiar care of the Brit-
ish government for a decade after the revolution.
The British government arranged for and
financed the transportation to Canada of all the
United Empire Loyalists who wished to leave the
United States. It oflFered them houses and lands
in Nova Scotia and Quebec. It maintained many
of them while they were reestablishing them-
selves; and it also appointed a royal commission
to award compensation to them for the material
loss they had incurred in the American revolu-
tion. Most of the United Empire Loyalists were
too poor to go to England. Canada seemed to
them the most hopeful country of refuge.
Exodus to The exodus to Canada — an exodus regarded
by Canadian historians as comparable with the
exodus of the Huguenots from France ^ — had
begun before the treaty of peace was signed at
Versailles. Nine transports sailed from New
York for Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia, in April,
1782. Another company of 7000 men, women,
and children sailed from New York in April,
^ Cf. Wallace, "The United Empire Loyalists," 3.

[62]

Canada of
1783-1784

into
Quebec

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

1783. Half of them went to what is now St.
John, New Brunswick, and the other half to
Port Roseway, Shelbourne County, Nova Scotia.

By the end of September, 1783, 18,000 of the Move-
loyalists had reached Nova Scotia; and as late ™^^q^,
as January, 1784, they were still arriving at St. scotia
John. Canadian historians compute that the
total immigration of 1 782-1 783 into what are
now the Maritime Provinces was about 35,000.^

There was an immigration of loyalists into inroad
Quebec as early as 1776. A stream of immigra-
tion began after the defeat of Burgoyne, at Sara-
toga, in 1777. By the end of that year 3000
loyalists were in the province — most of them in
the neighborhood of Three Rivers, where "every-
thing in reason was done to make the unfortu-
nates comfortable."

After the treaty of peace had been concluded,
the stream of immigration overland to Quebec
greatly increased in volume. There were nearly
7000 United Empire Loyalists in the French
province in the winter of 1 783-1 784; and the
resources of the British government were strained
to the utmost to provide for the necessities of the
thousands who had thus flocked over the border
line from the United States.^

At the time the exodus from the United States
began, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward
Island were the only organized provinces in
Canada. In only two of them. Nova Scotia and

1 Cf. Wallace, 63. « Cf. Wallace, ibid.y 92^3.

[63]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

PoUtical

status of

the

British

North

American

provinces

in 1783-

1784

Quebec
constitu-
tion
of 1774

Prince Edward Island, was there organized civil
government in which the colonists had any part
through elected legislatures. In 1758 a legisla-
tive assembly had been established at Halifax,
for the province of Nova Scotia; and there had
come into being a legislature which today has
the distinction of being the oldest law-making
body in any of the British oversea dominions.^

Prince Edward Island had been created a
separate colony in 1769, at a time when there
were only about 150 families on the island; ^ and
in 1773 a legislature, with an elected assembly,
had been established at Charlottetown.

The wide but sparsely populated province of
Quebec was administered at this time, and until
1 791, under a constitution framed by the British
government, and enacted by parliament at West-
minster in 1774. Under this constitution, which
had aroused much opposition from Chatham,
Burke, Townshend, Dunning, and Barrie, and
the Whigs as a party, all power was vested in the
governor. There was a nominated legislative
council, with extremely restricted powers — with
less legislative power than is exercised today by
Canadian municipal councils.'

It was a nominated council, because as North

1 Cf. Burpee, "Sandford Fleming, Empire Builder,'

271-275.

2 Cf. Weaver,

A Canadian History," 125.
2 Cf. Egerton, " Historical Geography of the British Colo-
nies," Vol. V, pt. ii, 12, 13.

[64]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

told the house of commons in 1774, there was at
the time not a sufficient number of English people
in Quebec to elect a legislature similar to that
which had been established at Halifax. No pro-
vision was made in the Quebec constitution —
a constitution which Chatham declared "tore
up justice and every good principle by the roots"
— for habeas corpus, or for the trial of civil cases
by jury.^

The constitution recognized and continued the Position
Roman Catholic church in Quebec as an estab- ^^^
lished church, collecting tithes and church levies, cathoUc
and enforcing its own decrees as to marriage and Q^^^g^.^
the nullification of marriage. These were great
advantages for the church, especially when they
were compared with the constitutional disabili-
ties which were the lot of the adherents of the
Roman Catholic church in England, Ireland, and
Scotland in the last quarter of the eighteenth cen-
tury. They were advantages that partly account
for the hostility of the church in Quebec to the
American revolution; for it was realized by the
clergy that all these valuable privileges enjoyed
under the constitution of 1774 must come to an
end if Quebec became a state in the American
Union.

French-Canadians, and in particular the hier-
archy of the church, from 1783 to 1791, had no
complaint against the constitution of 1774. It
was the large inflow of United Empire Loyalists
» Cf. W. R. Riddell, " The Constitution of Canada," 9-14.

C65]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

United
Empire
Loyalists
demand
a new
constitu-
tion for
Quebec

Potency

of

American

influence

in the

years

from

1784 to

1791

that made a new constitution imperative. A
government with an elected legislature had been
established for New Brunswick — a province
carved out of Nova Scotia — in 1784, almost
before the stream of immigration of United
Empire Loyalists to the St. John River country
had come to an end.

Before the Quebec act of 1774 was passed by
parliament, English colonists at Three Rivers,
Quebec, and Montreal had urged the establish-
ment of a legislative assembly. There were
agitations for an assembly in 1769, and again
in 1773; for military rule, such as existed from
1763 to 1774, never commended itself to colonists
of British origin.

II. Upper and Lower Canada under the
Constitutions of lygi

For 130 years America has influenced political
and economic thought in Canada; and this
influence can be traced almost from the time the
loyalists settled in Quebec. These newcomers of
1 778-1 784, joined as they soon were by many
loyalists who had first emigrated to New Bruns-
wick, soon began to demand such British institu-
tions as they had been accustomed to in the
American colonies.

In particular they desired (i) an elected legis-
lative assembly; (2) trial by jury in civil cases;
and (3) the division of Quebec into two provinces,
an English and a French province. The larger

[66]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

number of United Empire Loyalists had settled
west of the Ottawa River, in what is today the
province of Ontario, and they were desirous that
this should be an English province.

The first colonial constitution of the new era First
in British colonial history — the era of 1783- *^°^°^^*^

r XT r» ' X constitu-

1914 — was that of 1784 for New Brunswick, tions
The second constitution, much more elaborate, °^ *^®

new era

was that embodied in the Quebec act of 1791.
This aci created the political divisions of Upper
and Lower Canada, which were continued under
these names until the reunion of the two prov-
inces in 1840.^

The constitutions of these provinces were
similar. Each provided for (i) a governor and
executive council; (2) a nominated legislative
council; and (3) a popularly elected legislative
assembly.

The qualifications for electors of the legislative QuaUfi-
assembly, it was provided by the act of 1791, ^^^°^^
were to be the same as those in England at that electors
time for electors of knights of the shire. In
counties of Lower and Upper Canada, the elect-
ors were the owners of land of a rental value
of forty shillings a year. There was at that time
no uniformity in England as regarded the quali-
fications of parliamentary electors in the bor-
oughs; but it was provided that electors in the
three towns of Lower Canada, and the two of

1 Cf. Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," Note XVI,
45-

C67]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

No

exclusion
of Roman
Catholics

Wages
for

members
of the
legis-
latures

No

property
qualifi-
cations
for
members

Upper Canada, should be the owners .of houses
of a rental value of five pounds, or occupiers of
houses of which the rent was not less than ten
pounds a year.

In England and Scotland in 1791, and until
1829, the oath against transubstantiation ex-
cluded Roman Catholics from the exercise of the
electoral franchise, and also from parliament. No
such oath was imposed by the constitution of
1 791 on electors in Upper and Lower Canada,
or on members of the legislature.

Wages had not been paid to members of the
house of commons in England since the seven-
teenth century, and the system of paying the
traveling expenses of members to and from
parliament had been in desuetude for a much
longer time. In Upper and Lower Canada wages
and traveling expenses were for many years a
charge on the electorates.

Property qualifications were necessary for
members of the house of commons at West-
minster from 1710 to 1858.^ There was no
provision in the Quebec act for property quali-
fications for members of the legislative assembly;
nor was there any provision that members should
be resident in the constituencies from which they
were elected.

Two departures in colonial constitutions char-
acterized Pitt's Quebec act of 1791. The first

^ Porritt, "The Unreformed House of Commons," I, 168-
178.

[68]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Pitt's was an attempt, long persisted in, to establish a

attempt connection between state and church, such as

estabUsh exists in England — to establish the Church of

E^eU h England as a state-supported church in Lower

church in and Upper Canada. The second was an attempt,

Canada |^^^ nothing more than an attempt, to create a

and to ^ . ^ ' . ,

create an nereditary aristocracy and a governmg class
aristoc- similar to that which then existed and still exists

m England.
Clergy By the thirty-sixth section of the act of 1791,

reserves provision was made for reserving out of all
grants of public lands an allotment for the sup-
port of a Protestant clergy. The allotment was
to be equal in value to the seventh part of the
lands granted. These allotments were known as
the "clergy reserves." The rents and profits
from them were to be applicable solely to the
maintenance and support of a Protestant clergy.
Provision was also made for the endowment of
rectories out of the proceeds of the sale of public
lands.
Sixty In the first half of the nineteenth century these

years of provisions in the act of 1791 were prolific of
strife bitter political and sectarian strife in Upper
Canada. The setting aside of the clergy lands
in the settlement of townships caused great hard-
ship to pioneer homesteaders. It retarded the
development of Upper Canada. It divided the
inhabitants both in town and country into two
hostile camps. It was one of the contributing
causes of the rebellion of 1837. It entailed much

[70]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

trouble for the legislatures of Upper Canada,
and of the United Provinces, and also for the
colonial office and parliament at Westminster.
The clergy reserves were persistently disturbing
issues in Canadian politics until Pitt's attempt
of 1791 was finally abandoned in 1854.^

From every point of view — economic, social, a mis-
and political — Pitt's attempt to create an estab- j°^®
lished church was unfortunate. It was especially Episcopal
unfortunate for the Episcopal church in Canada, ^^'^^
which did not begin to make the appeal, of which Canada
it is eminently capable, until the great im-
migration from England of 1901-1914. By that
time the disturbing controversies of 1 820-1 854
were forgotten, and the clergy reserves were a
memory with only the elder generation of
Canadians.2

Pitt's plan for an aristocracy and a governing pitt's
class was that the dignity of membership of the ***«™p*
legislative councils was to be coupled with every a gov-
title of honor conferred in Canada by the crown. ^ ®™^^
Pitt knew little of England outside London. He
knew nothing of social conditions in a new coun-

1 Cf. Stimson, " History of the Separation of Church and
State in Canada," 27, 28.

* Cf. "The Days of the Glebe," Globry Toronto, November
23, 1911.

' "There was a very curious provision in the act of 1791,
which might have proved mischievous. This right was never
exercised, and the Canadas fortunately escaped an heredi-
tary second house of parUament." — Riddell, " Constitution
of Canada," Note XVII, 46.

C71]

class

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Family
compacts
of 1820-
1840

Present-
day gov-
erning
class
of the
Dominion

try like Canada^ where there were hundreds of
thousands of square miles of unoccupied land and
consequently no renters and no rural laborers
to support an aristocracy.^

Canada since the American revolution was
never long without a governing class. It first
emerged from the United Empire Loyalists and
the first generation of their descendants. These
men formed oligarchies known at Toronto,
Quebec, Halifax, and Fredericton, from 1820
to 1840, as the "Family Compacts." ^

Since Confederation, and especially since 1879,
the governing class of the Dominion has been
composed of the bankers, the railway magnates,
and the manufacturers who have their head-
quarters in Toronto and Montreal. Pitt's plan
of 1 79 1 for an aristocracy was no factor in the
creation of either the governing class of 1820-
1840 or in that of 1 879-1914.

From as early as 1829 knighthoods were some-
times bestowed on judges of the higher courts.

* "The history of the thirteen colonies was full of evi-
dence to show that an executive and an upper house inde-
pendent of popular control in colonial constitutions were
fruitful sources of conflict, disorder, and even of the paraly-
sis of government. There was evidence also to show the
impossibility of a colonial hereditary nobility." — George
Burton Adams, "The Influence of the American Revolution
on England's Government of her Colonies." Report of
American Historical Association, 1896, Vol. I, 375-389.

2 Cf. Boyd, " Sir George Etienne Cartier," 7.

' Cf. Egerton, Vol. V, pt. ii, 158-164.

[72]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

The title of knight lapses with the death of its Heredi-
holder. Only baronetcies and peerages are he- ^
reditary; and the Quebec act of 1791 had been on Canada
the statute books for over sixty years, and had
been superseded by the constitutional legisla-
tion of 1840, before there were in Canada men
sufficiently wealthy to assume the family, social,
and financial responsibilities of a hereditary
title.i

It was 1854 before a baronetcy was conferred
on a Canadian. It was 1891 before a Canadian
received a peerage.^ Long before the first baron-
etcy was conferred on a Canadian, Pitt's plan
of 1 79 1 had been forgotten; and today member-
ship of the nominated senate at Ottawa, and of

^ Only three peerages were bestowed on native-born
Canadians between 1783 and 19 17. Commenting on a peer-
age bestowed on a Montreal newspaper proprietor in Febru-
ary, 1917, N. W. Rowell, K. C, leader of the Liberal party
in the province of Ontario, said: "I venture to think that in
the free democracy of Canada we are not improving condi-
tions by importing hereditary titles, passing from father to
son. I hope it may be the last. I think when we are fighting
the battle of democracy the world over the tendency will be
in the Old Country to bring themselves into hatmony with
our spirit of democracy rather than for us transplanting part
of the old feudal system into Canada." — Gazettey Montreal,
February 16, 1917.

2 Sir John Beverley Robinson, chief justice of Upper
Canada, 1829-1863, was the first Canadian to receive a baron-
etcy. The first Canadian peer was a woman. Baroness Mac-
donald of EarnsclifFe, widow of Sir John A. Macdonald, who
at the time of his death in 1891 was premier of the Dominion.

[73]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the nominated legislative councils of Quebec
and Nova Scotia — the only provinces in which
legislative councils or upper houses survive —
is not affected by baronetcies or peerages con-
ferred on Canadians.
Five The Quebec act of 1791, by the division of

N^rth* Quebec into Lower and Upper Canada, increased
American the number of British North American prov-
^I°n^?^ inces to five.^ It remained at this number until

of 1791-

1861 1 85 1, when British Columbia was organized as

a province.
PoUticai In the period from the incoming of the United
develop- Empire Loyalists to Confederation, Nova Scotia
Nova and New Brunswick each made some contribu-
Scotia |.Jqj^ ^q ^l^g constitutional development of the

and New j^ . . y • tt /^ i i

Bruns- Dominion. In each, as in Upper Canada, there
was a struggle, finally successful, against efforts
to establish and maintain a privileged position
for the church of England.^ It was, moreover,
the conference in Charlottetown, organized by the
Maritime Provinces in 1864 for the purpose of
establishing a legislative union of these three
provinces, that brought Confederation of all
the British North American provinces within the
realm of practical politics in Canada and at
Westminster.

* Cape Breton was organized as a separate province in
1784. It was reunited with Nova Scotia in 1820. As an
island province it had no particular part in the constitutional
history of Canada.

* Cf. Egerton, Vol. V, pt. ii, 156-159.

[74]

wick

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

Joseph Howe, the editor of the Nova Scotiauy struggie
of Halifax, in 1835, was the defendant in a crimi- ^' *
nal proceeding for Hbel; and by his successful press
defense he achieved a victory which established
freedom of the press in Nova Scotia. In New
Brunswick in 1844, the printers of the Loyalist,
Doak and Hill, fought to a successful issue in
the law courts the claim of the legislature at
Fredericton to interfere with the liberty of the
press, and thereby rendered a service to all the
British North American provinces as great as
that rendered by the printers of the Public Ad-
vertiser, in England, in their memorable contest
with the house of commons in 1772, over the
reporting of the debates.^

British Columbia, in the years from 1851, Political
defeated an attempt to establish state-aided *<^*^®^®-
sectarian education, and also an attempt to make of upper
the legislature at Victoria bilingual. But gen- ^
erally speaking the constitutional advances from Canada
1791 to Confederation, which beneficently af- ^J^^^
fected all the British colonies which are now of confed-
the dominions, were achieved in Lower and ®"^**°°
Upper Canada.

The first legislature of Upper Canada assem- Early
bled at Niagara in September, 1792; but in !®?^"
1794 York, now known as Toronto, became the
capital. Quebec continued to be capital of the
French province. The first legislature assembled

* Porritt, "A Century and a Half of English Journalism in
Canada," 125-126, 133-134.

[75]

lative
councils

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

there in December, 1792. The governor-general
was estabhshed in the citadel at Quebec. At
Toronto there was a lieutenant-governor. Both
these officials were appointed by the colonial
office. Each new governor came out with de-
tailed instructions, prepared by the colonial office,
as to the policy which he was to follow.
Legis- At each capital the governor-general or the

lieutenant-governor chose the executive council;
nominated the members of the legislative coun-
cil; and had at his disposition all political pat-
ronage.^ At Quebec the legislative council,
according to the terms of the constitution, was
to consist of not less than fifteen members. In
Upper Canada it was to consist of not less than
seven members. The legislature was to be called
together once in every twelve months. The dura-
tion of the elected legislative assembly could
not exceed four years.

III. The Legislatures of 1792-18^7

Proce- The earliest legislatures established in Canada,

dure and ^j^^^ ^^ HaHfax in 1758 and that at Fredericton

usages , .

of West- in 1784, were organized for business as nearly as

°^^*®' possible on the model of parliament at West-

Ushedin minster. The throne was placed in the cham-

Canada ^^^ ^f ^^xt legislative council. The presiding

officer of the legislative council, as in the house

of lords, was appointed by the government. All

1 Cf. Rules and Regulations for Her Majesty's Colonial

Service, 19.

[76]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

communications of the council with the assembly
were carried, with the old world formalities,
either by a master in chancery, or by black
rod, whose official costume was patterned to the
last detail on that of black rod at Westminster.

In the legislative assemblies, at the meeting The
of a new legislature, the first business was the ®p®^®'
election of speaker. The procedure at this elec-
tion was similar to that at the first meeting of a
house of commons. The clerk of the house and
the sergeant-at-arms were appointed by the
government.

The formalities attending the opening of a Speech
session were the same as at Westminster. The Jf**™ ^^

throne
Speech was read from the throne by the governor,

with the speaker, the sergeant-at-arms, and

members of the assembly in attendance at the

bar of the council chamber. Back in their own

chamber, for the consideration of the speech

from the throne, the first proceeding after the

speech had been read by the speaker was to give

a first reading, pro forma, to a bill, in order that

the assembly might assert its independence of

the crown, and exercise its right to attend to its

own business before concerning itself with the

business to which the sovereign had directed its

attention.

The rules of debate and procedure on bills — Proce-

introduction and first reading, second reading, J^

committee stage, and third reading — were all

as at Westminster.

[77]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Epoch- The legislature of Upper Canada held its first

"^'^^ session in 1792, at Niagara, in a log cabin with

measures i y ^ , ° ' .

of the only one door and two windows.^ Only eight
f'i* members of the assembly were in attendance.

legls- -'

lature of But there was a speech from the throne ^ and
Upper ^i^g formalities and procedure were as at West-

Canaaa . . / ...

minster. This parliament m miniature, more-
over, earned distinction in British colonial history
by two of its proceedings.
An It declared British law with regard to property

^"" and civil rights to be in force in Upper Canada;

law and it passed an act ^ forbidding slavery in the

province — another early instance of the influ-
ence of the United States, direct and indirect, on
the political, economic, and social development
of Canada. "It has the honor," writes one of
the most sympathetic of its historians, "of being
the first assembly in the British Empire to for-
bid the terrible wrong of slavery." *

An anti-slavery law was necessary if slavery
were not to be established in Upper Canada; for
at Westminster, in 1790, in the session immedi-
ately preceding that in which the second Quebec
act was passed, a remarkable amendment^ had

1 Cf. Weaver, "A Canadian History," 145.

* John Graves Simcoe, Lieutenant-Governor, in his speech
from the throne, at the closing of the session of 1792, assured
the legislature that the constitution of the Province of Upper
Canada was "the very image and transcript of that of Great
Britain." — Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," Note XVIII,

47.

^ 33 Geo. Ill, c. 7. * Weaver, 146. * 30 George III, c. 27.

[78]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

been made to the old navigation code of Great
Brita^in. It was an amendment which was re-
garded as a concession to the colonies in America.
By virtue of it immigrants arriving in any of
the British North American provinces were per-
mitted to import their "negroes, household
furniture, utensils of husbandry, and clothing"
duty free.

The legislature which met for the first time
at Quebec, in December, 1792, was also organized
for business after the model of parliament at
Westminster; and in no province of the Dominion
have the old-world formalities and ceremonial
usages of parliament been more tenaciously ad-
hered to than in Quebec. The French-Canadian
has a natural love for the pageantry of state.

The urban and rural population of the French
province in 1792 was much larger than that of
Upper Canada. The cities — Quebec, Three
Rivers, and Montreal — had an aggregate repre-
sentation of ten members in the assembly. There
was also a member for the town of Sorel.

The other members were knights of the shire,
usually two from each of the counties into which
Lower Canada was divided. These members
were girt with sword at the time the sheriff de-
clared their election, as was the custom in Eng-
land until after 1885, when English counties lost
their ancient parliamentary identity by partition
into modern electoral divisions.

The total number of members of the Quebec

[79]

French-
Cana-
dians
and the
pagean-
try of
state

Knights
of the
shire

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

assembly in 1792 was fifty. Sixteen were of
British origin. This proportion was never ex-
ceeded in the forty-five years from 1792 to the
rebellion in 1837, which for thirty years made
an end to a separate legislature in Quebec.
French The elective legislative assembly at Quebec,

language ^^ -^^ gj.g^ session in 1792, made history by
adopting the rule that the French and English
languages should stand on a footing of complete
equality in debate and in the introduction of bills.
Today both languages are used in the Quebec
j legislature, which was reestablished at Confedera-
' tion in 1867. Both are also used in parliament
at Ottawa, in debate, in the printing of bills and
acts, and in government documents. This usage
at Quebec and Ottawa can be traced back to the
rule adopted by the legislative assembly in 1792.
Restricted The powers of the assembly, both at Quebec
^![®" and at Toronto, were restricted. It had no power

ofthe . '. M r L • •

legis- over appropriations until after the constitution
^**^® of 1702 was amended in 183 1. In these fort^

assem- ' ^

bues years, the assembly had no such power over
appropriations as was exercised by the house of
commons. Vote as it might, the assembly, at no
time between 1792 and 1837, could influence the
policy of the executive, if the executive was
determined to pay no heed to the will of the
majority of the assembly. Act as it would, the
assembly could not dislodge the executive.

The assembly, when it initiated legislation, was
always confronted by two powers at Quebec that
[80]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

could override it, and in practice veto any bills Three
that it might pass. These were (i) the legislative °^®^
council, whose members had no constituents to powers
whom they were responsible, only the governor
who had appointed them having any power to call
them to account; and (2) the governor, who had
power to accept or reserve a bill which had passed
both houses of the legislature, to reserve involv-
ing the transmission of the bill to London for
approval by the colonial office. Moreover, even
after a bill had run the gantlet of the assembly
and the council, and after it had been accepted
by the governor, it could be vetoed in London
at any time within two years.

These were the days of the old commercial oid
policy of the British Empire. England was under ^™gj^
a protectionist system. The old navigation code, poUcy
which had its beginnings in the days of the Crom- ^^^^
wellian protectorate, was in force until 1847; and Britain
the aim of the commercial system was to build g^JJ*^
up British trade with little regard to any develop- force
ing manufacturing industries in the colonies. None
of the North American provinces was at liberty to
frame its own fiscal system. No British colony
enjoyed this freedom without restriction until
1846. None exercised it to the full until 1858.

Lower and Upper Canada were consequently
not permitted to impose other than revenue
duties on manufactures from Great Britain. All
imports from Great Britain must come into the
provinces in British vessels; all colonial exports

[81]

start

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

to Great Britain had also to be carried in ves-
sels on the British registry; and there were no
free ports until 1822.

IV. The Dreary Period of the New Era in
British Colonial History

Political It cannot be affirmed that the governments
fj'^p' established at Toronto and Quebec in 1 792-1 793
almost worked well. There was' jobbery and corruption
from the fj-Qm as early as 1795 — corruption in the collec-
tion of the revenue; and jobbery, with the con-
nivance of the executive council at Quebec, in
the allotment of public lands in Lower Canada.^
Conditions became worse in the first decade of
the nineteenth century; ^ and between 1812 and
1820 there began the most dreary period of the
new era of British colonial history — the era
from 1783 to 1914.

The dreary period lasted from 181 2 to 1840;
and, like the Quebec act of 1791, and the ham-
strung legislative assemblies created by this act,^
1 Cf. Egerton, Vol. V, pt. ii, 61-64.- 2 cf. Boyd, 34.

* "It is difficult to conceive what could have been their
theory of government, who imagined that in any colony of
England a body invested with the name and character of a
representative assembly could be deprived of any of those
powers which in the opinion of Englishmen are inherent in
a popular legislature." — "Lord Durham's Report on the
Affairs of British North America." Lucas, Vol. II, y6. " While
the French-Canadians had been given representative parlia-
mentary institutions, those institutions had been practically
rendered inoperative. The people possessed the shadow with-
out the substance of parliamentary government." — Boyd, 35.

[82]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

it furnished abundant proof that British states- Briush
men had not learned the lesson of 1 776-1 78<?, s*^*«^

. ' ' I J^ men fail

and were not disposed to learn it until forced to to learn
do so by the rebellions of 1837. Causes for the J^®
popular discontent existed in London as well as at 1776-
Toronto and Quebec; for some petitions to the "®^
colonial office from Canada were ignored; others
were long in bringing any results; and when con-
cessions were made to the reformers of Upper and
Lower Canada they were grudging and inadequate.

At Quebec power under the constitution of Govem-
179 1, exercised through the executive and legis- ^*^j^^*
lative councils, was monopolized by the com- Canada
mercial classes of the city and of Montreal. The
men of the mercantile interests, most of them
newcomers from Britain, were at this time the
governing class of Lower Canada; and between
the British and the French-Canadians there was
keen and politically disturbing antagonism.

Political power at Toronto, exercised, as at FamUy
Quebec, through the executive and legislative ^°^p*<^*
councils, usually with the sanction of the lieu- Upper
tenant-governor, was in the hands of the Tories ^^^^^
of the Family Compact. Here again American
example and tradition influenced Canadian politi-
cal conditions. At this time — 1820-1837 — this
American influence was adverse to popular gov-
ernment in Upper Canada; though in the long
run, in the years from 1820 to 1837, it made
indirectly for constitutional advance and the prog-
ress of democracy in Canada.

[83]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Bourbon
Toryism
of Upper
Canada

Tradi- The Tories of this period were mostly United

HoMof Empire Loyalists, or descendants of loyalists,
American who, influenced by experiences in the American
revolution revolution, or by family tradition of these ex-
periences, and by ill-feeling engendered by the
invasion of Upper Canada by American troops
during the war of 1812, cherished an assertive
and aggressive hatred of democracy or republi-
canism in any shape or form.

The dominant political cliques in Upper Canada
at this time developed a cult of Toryism which
has never been matched in any other part of the
English-speaking world/ It was more Tory even
than the American Toryism of 1776-1783. It
was even more Bourbon and unyielding than the
Toryism of England that was developed by the
wars with France of 1793-18 15; for it was in-
flamed by a struggle to hold on to a monopoly
of all political opportunities, and by the strife
attending a finally unsuccessful endeavor to es-
tablish a privileged political position for one
division of the Christian church.

Governors from 1792 to 1837 were notoriously
partisan. Nearly all of them were, or had been,
army officers. They were imbued with the Eng-
lish Toryism of the period. A new governor, as

Partisan
governors

*"A junto of oligarchs, who, however odious and tyran-
nical they might become, could not be punished or brought
to account for their conduct." — John Charles Dent, "The
Last Forty Years: Canada Since the Union of 1841," Vol.
I, p. 19.

[84]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

soon as he arrived, fell into the arms of the little
group of officials in control, and could hardly
escape the influence of the ruling clique. From
the point of view of the elected legislative assem-
bly, the governor was an opponent from the day
he arrived at Quebec or Toronto. Governors
openly interfered in elections, and always against
the popular or democratic group in the legislative
assembly.

The last governor of Upper Canada before the Pork-
rebellion of 1837 — - Francis Bond Head — in 1836 ?*"®^
. . *^ appro-

committed the province, which had then a popu- priations

lation of only 350,000, to an expenditure of four
million dollars on roads, bridges, and wharfs,
chiefly to carry a general election. Head thereby
began a practice which has continued and flour-
ished up to the present day; for in the house of
commons at Ottawa annual pork-barrel appro-
priations for post offices, customs houses, armo-
ries, wharfs, and dredging, with the bribery of
constituencies and the local jobbery inherent in
these appropiations, are as notorious as they are
in congress at Washington.

Offices and patronage at Quebec and Toronto Patron-
were the monopoly of the Family Compact groups, ^f®^^
Plural office holders were numerous. The legis- office
lative assemblies were crowded with office holders. ^°^**®"
Protestant and Roman Catholic bishops were of
the legislative councils; and so were judges.

Bills originating in the legislative assemblies
were rejected mechanically and wholesale by

among
friends?"

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

"What's the legislative councils. If a member of the
wnstitu- assembly was persona non grata to the ruling
Hon clique, he was ejected without regard to his indi-

vidual rights or the rights of the constituency
by which he had been elected. If the constit-
uency ventured to petition for redress it was
publicly snubbed by the governor, whose atti-
tude can best be expressed in the words of an
American boss, who exclaimed. "What's the
constitution among friends?"

V. Crown Colony Rule at Its Worst

Political The questions at issue in the decade which
ofm'o- preceded the rebellions of 1837 were (i) the
1837 clergy reserves; (2) responsible government —
the demand for an executive dependent upon a
majority in the assembly, as was the constitu-
tional usage in England; (3) full control by the
assembly over taxation and appropriations;
(4) an elected instead of a nominated legislative
council; (5) the exclusion of judges from the legis-
lature; (6) the system under which judges held
office at the will of the government; and (7) the
abolition of the system of plural office holding.
Govern- Cartier, the best-equipped statesman the
Sit were ^^^ench ptovince ever gave to the Dominion, was,
oUgarchic in his youth, associated with Papineau in the
TO^pt rebellion in Quebec. He always insisted that it
was a rebellion, not against British authority, or
against the British connection, but against the
vicious system of government which existed in
[86]

EVOLUTION FROM 1783 TO 1840

Lower and Upper Canada for a generation before
1837.^ It was a rebellion against governments at
Quebec and Toronto that were Bourbon in out-
look, oligarchic, and corrupt.

"Narrow-minded and tyrannical," is Eger-
ton*s characterization of the government at
Toronto.2 These governments bore down ruth-
lessly on all attempts at reform from outside; and
the colonial office in London made no attempt
either to check or to reform them.

From the American revolution until responsible Crown

government was conceded to all the British ^°j°°y

North American provinces in the forties of the the

nineteenth century, Quebec and Ontario, Nova ^^^^^^

Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward enceto

Island were under what would be described to- °'®*"^®*

posses-
day as crown colony rule; and from 1820 to 1837 sions

crown colony government was seen at its worst
in Toronto and Quebec.^

It was crown colony rule of the era of indif-
ference to colonial expansion, of the days when
Wellington * was willing to turn over Ceylon to
the East India Company; when George Corne-
wall Lewis ^ confessed that he was unable to see
what possible advantage England derived from
the possession of Canada; and Peel ^ was quite

* Cf. Boyd, 66. 2 Egerton, Vol. V, pt. ii, 127.

' Cf. Egerton, Vol. V, pt. ii, 68-78, 1 16-123, 124-132;
Lucas, " Lord Durham's Report," Vol. I, 33-72; Vol. II, 7-
185; Boyd, 27-44.

* 1828. 6 1837. « 1841.

C87]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

willing to see Canada separate from the British
Empire.
New era It was, however, an era of crown colony rule
of crown ^j^^^ j^^^j nothing but the name in common with
rule the new and beneficent era of crown colony
government that began in the first decade of
Queen Victoria's reign. The fundamentals of
this modern crown colony rule are (i) that the
principle of government must be determined by
parliament at Westminster, as interpreter of the
spirit of the British constitution; (2) policy de-
termined by the colonial office, subject to the
control of parliament; and (3) practice deter-
mined by the governor, sent out from London,
subject to the control of the colonial office.^

* Bruce, "The Broad Stone of Empire," Vol. I, xix.

[88]

CHAPTER V

FROM THE REBELLION TO CONFED-
ERATION. 1837 TO 1867

PAPINEAU was the leader of the rebellion Leaders
in the French province. William Lyon °*^*
Mackenzie was the leader in the much less san-
guinary rising in Upper Canada. There seems
to have been only a sympathetic connection be-
tween the two revolts. But in each province
there were adequate causes for the rebellion.

Both leaders were subject to fierce criticism
and abuse by contemporary writers whose sym-
pathies were with the ruling cHques at Quebec
and Toronto. Each has also received some
harsh criticism from some Canadian historians.
Little importance now attaches to any of this
criticism; for Papineau and Mackenzie between
them started a new and beneficent era in British
colonial policy.

Louis Joseph Papineau was born at Montreal Papi-
in 1786. He became active in politics in 1809, °®*"
and was elected to the legislative assembly in
18 1 2. He was a man of attractive personality
and commanding presence, and was an effective
speaker in the assembly and on the platform.
He was also a man of the highest character.
French-Canadians were always in a majority in

C89]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Pamell
of French
Canada

Papi-
neau's
poUtical
platform

the legislative assembly at Quebec; and Papi-
neau was elected speaker in 1815, and held that
office until the rebellion.

In these twenty-five years — 1812-1837 —
Papineau was the political leader of the French-
Canadians. The issue was whether the British
minority or the French majority should rule at
Quebec; and in these years the hold of Papineau
on the French people was quite as great as the
hold which either O'Connell or Parnell had on
the Nationalist movement in Ireland in the
nineteenth century.

Before the rebellion there was nothing disloyal ^
or treasonable in Papineau*s platform. What
he desired was stated by him in a speech in the
assembly in 1835, at a time when the assembly
was harassing the government at Quebec by
withholding supplies, and rendering it necessary
that measures in relief should be passed by par-
liament at Westminster.

"The government I long for," said Papineau,
in this speech of 1835, "is one composed of
friends of legality, liberty, and justice — a gov-
ernment which would protect indiscriminately

1 Private advices received in Montreal last night an-
nounced the death in action of Captain Talbot M. Papineau,
M.C., of Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. In
April, 1915, he was awarded the Military Cross for con-
spicuous gallantry at St. Eloi, on February 28. Captain
Papineau was the great grandson of Louis Joseph Papineau.
He was a Rhodes scholar at Oxford. — GazetUy Montreal,
November 3, 1917.

C90]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

every proper interest, and accord to all ranks and
to each race of inhabitants equal rights and privi-
leges. We demand for ourselves such political
institutions as are in accordance with those of
the rest of the Empire, and the age we live in."*

William Lyon Mackenzie was a Scotsman, Macken-
born at Dundee in 1795. He emigrated to Upper ^®
Canada in 1820. He was a man of some educa-
tion and of good family. Like Papineau he
understood the working of government by par-
liament and cabinet at Westminster. He was
persistent and resourceful as an agitator. He
was also impetuous, with a tinge of the theatrical
in his make-up.

Immigrants into Canada from England and
Scotland at this time had many of them come
under the influence of the movement for parlia-
mentary reform, and were permeated by its
radicalism. Political conditions in Canada were
even worse than political conditions in England
before 1832. They aroused the indignation of
these newcomers, whose influence, along with
the effect of the success of parliamentary reform
at Westminster, helped to give force and per-
sistency to the movement for reform in Upper
Canada.

Mackenzie soon identified himself with this Upper
democratic movement. In 1824 he established ^Q^gf
at Toronto the Colonial Advocate; and attained dread of
province-wide fame in 1826 through a stupid and

1 Boyd, 37.

[91]

a free
press

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

ill-conceived riotous attack, made by the younger
Tories, on his printing plant, during which his
hand-press was thrown into Lake Ontario.
Macken- In 1 828 Mackenzie was elected to the assem-
ferii*^^ bly. There he made himself objectionable to
latureat the Tones by assailing the appointment of an
Toronto Episcopalian chaplain to the assembly; by his
opposition to the presence of an Episcopal and
a Roman Catholic bishop in the legislative coun-
cil; by assailing the executive for crowding the
assembly with office holders; and by publishing
the division lists in his newspaper.
Pubu- For publishing the division lists, a practice

cation which had been established in connection with

of

division the house of commons at Westminster since 1689,
lists Mackenzie in 1832 was expelled from the assem-

bly at Toronto. Four times he was reelected.
Then the assembly, without any constitutional
warrant, declared him incapable of serving as a
member; and on presenting himself he was
ejected by the sergeant-at-arms.
A partisan His constituents presented a petition to Head,
governor ^j^^ ^^g ^|^gj^ govemor. The only answer to
this petition, which was presented to the gov-
ernor in person, was, "I have received your peti-
tion"; and no redress was forthcoming at Toronto
either for Mackenzie or for his constituents.

A landmark in the constitutional history of
Canada of interest to all the dominions was set
up by Mackenzie during his first session in the
legislative assembly. He drafted in 1828 a

C92]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

statement of the grievances of the colonists of First

Upper Canada, which was forwarded by the re- ^®°^^<^

formers in the assembly to the colonial office respon-

in London; and it would seem that in this mani- ^'^^®

. . govem-

festo the first claim for responsible government ment
for any British colony was made. Papineau,
in his speech of 1835, pressed the claim; but it
was one to which seven years before 1835 the
reformers in Upper Canada had directed their
efforts.

I. The Rebellions in Lower and Upper Canada

The rebellion in Lower Canada broke out on inter-
November 6, 1837. The rising in Upper Canada j^y®'''^®
began at Toronto on December 4. The imme- pariia-
diate cause in Lower Canada developed out of ^®***
the popular agitation, led by Papineau, against West-
a resolution passed by Parliament at Westmin- °^ster
ster, providing for the payment of salaries of
judges in Lower Canada, after the legislative
assembly at Quebec had persistently refused to
vote supplies for these payments.

Meetings to protest against this legislation by Gosford
the British parliament were prohibited by Gos- ^°'
ford, the governor-general, in June. But they protest
went on, nevertheless, from June to October. ™««t^«8
The crisis came in November. There was a riot
in Montreal on the 6th. Seven of the leaders
were arrested. These men were taken out of
the custody of the military; and the fighting
began when the soldiers attempted to arrest one

[93 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of Papineau's associates at St. Denis. There
the rebels fortified a stone barn. In attempting
to take the barn, Colonel Gore, who was in
command of the military, lost six men killed,
and ten were wounded.
Three Between the 6th and the 22d of November

Sr ^^^^^ w^s fighting at St. Charles, St. Eustache,
kiUed and Benoit. Two thousand soldiers were en-
gaged. The fatalities were mostly on the side
of the rebels. Three hundred of Papineau's
followers lost their lives. Papineau fled to the
United States, and was a refugee there until 1845.^
Fiasco at The rising at Toronto involved no great loss
Toronto ^f jjjpg Mackenzie's plan was to seize govern-
ment house. His followers, who numbered at
most not more than 750 men, assembled at Mont-
gomery's tavern on the outskirts of the town.
They were quickly dispersed by 1200 volunteers.
Five of the rebels lost their lives.
Mac- Mackenzie fled to Navy Island in the Niagara

River. There he issued a proclamation; set up
a provisional government; printed paper money —
and otherwise introduced a touch of burlesque
into the rising. He was soon dislodged from
\ Navy Island, and fled to the state of New York,

where, after serving a term in prison for viola-
tion of the neutrality laws of the United States,
he was an exile until a general amnesty act was
passed by the legislature of the united provinces
of Quebec and Ontario in 1849.

1 Cf. Boyd, 45-76.
[94]

kenzie
In exile

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

There was never any prospect of military sue- a
cess for rebellion in either Upper or Lower Canada. J®^®^°**
But if a revolution is a rebellion that succeeds, effected
the rebellion of 1837 was a revolution. In its ^^«^°^"-
way it was as successful as the American revolu-
tion. It was the only time after 1783 that Brit-
ish troops were in action against armed white
British subjects in any of the British colonies;
and all that is beneficent in the modern era of
British colonial government dates from the Papi-
neau and Mackenzie rebellions, and the epoch-
making mission of the Earl of Durham to
Canada, by which the rebellions were immedi-
ately followed.

The Melbourne administration of 183 5-1 841 wiuiam

was in power in England at the time of the re- ^^'^coo-

bellions. William IV died in June, 1837. The of

death of the king gave the administration a ^°^°^^^
. . . govern-

freer hand m coping with the serious problems ment

of Canada.

William IV's conception of colonies, and of
the relation of the sovereign to them, was very
similar to that of George III. When Lord
Gosford was sent out to Quebec as governor-
general in 1835, the king told him that he would
never consent to the establishment of an elective
legislative council. The king held that control
of the legislative council, by nomination, was
one of the prerogatives of the crown. *'It was,"
he said, "a safeguard for the preservation of the
wise and happy connection between the mother

C95]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Qtteen

Victoria
and the
new era
in British
colonial
policy

Legis-
lation at
West-
minster

Character
of .
Durham

country and the colonies, which it was both his
duty and his inclination to maintain."

The development of the British cabinet had
not reached its present stage in 1835. William
IV was the last sovereign to assume an attitude
of this kind towards his ministers; and for the
United Kingdom, as well as for the colonies, an
era of less monarchical rule began with the ad-
vent of Queen Victoria.

II. Durham s Mission and the Durham Report

The rebellions necessitated immediate legisla-
tion at Westminster. Accordingly on January
16, 1838, a bill was introduced in the house of
commons suspending the constitution of Lower
Canada for four years, and authorizing Durham,
the new governor-general, in concert with an
executive council of five members, to frame ordi-
nances for the province. Durham was further
authorized to investigate and report on condi-
tions in all the British North American provinces,
and his commission constituted him governor-
general of all the provinces except Newfoundland.

Durham was in his forty-sixth year when he
was intrusted with this mission to Canada. He
was a man of great wealth, derived largely from
coal mines in the county of Durham; and he
was son-in-law to Grey, the Whig premier of
reform bill fame. He was one of the most aggres-
sive members of the cabinet during the crises
over the reform bill of 1830-183 2; always ready

[96:

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

to force the struggle with William IV; always
ready to fight for the bill either in the cabinet
or in parliament; and the politically courageous
part Durham had in framing and carrying the
reform bill would have given him a conspicuous
place in British history even if his achievements
of 1 830-1 83 2 had not been overshadowed by
his contribution of 1838 to the inauguration of
the new era in British colonial policy.

Durham's famous report has been more fre- Durham's
quently reprinted, more frequently edited and J^^j^^
annotated, and more widely read over the English- widely
speaking world than any other British state paper ^^^^
of the nineteenth century.^ He was in Canada paper
only from May 29 to November i, 1838. He ""^^
resigned and returned to England,^ because the teenth
Melbourne government, holding that he had ^^"^^^^
exceeded his powers, disallowed an ordinance of
June 28, 1838, banishing eight rebels to Bermuda.
He was succeeded in August, 1839, by Poulett
Thomson, afterwards Lord Sydenham, who as a
colonial governor ranks second only to Durham
in the history of the estabhshment of responsible
government in the dominions.

Condemnation of the entire system of govern- '
ment at Quebec and Toronto was the burden of
Durham's report. It substantiated nearly every j
allegation of the reformers in Canada and of the

^ The authoritative edition is edited, with an introduction,
by Sir Charles P. Lucas, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1912.
« He died July 28, 1840.

[97]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Durham's
condem-
nation
of the
govern-
ments at
Quebec
and
Toronto

Share
of the
colonial
office in
misrule
in Upper
and
Lower
Canada

Friction

between

Upper

and

Lower

Canada

radicals who had supported them in parliament
at Westminster. It demonstrated that oligar-
chies had ruled in both provinces; that there
was no system of municipal government — that
in this respect Lower and Upper Canada com-
pared badly with the New England states; that
there was no system of education; that justice
was badly administered; and that the manage-
ment of crown lands was characterized by job-
bery and fraud.

The colonial office in London was also con-
demned; for Durham recalled that there were
eight colonial secretaries from 1827 to 1837, and
that the policy of each secretary had been more
or less different from that of his predecessor. In
a word, Durham stigmatized the whole system
as vicious. He rejoiced that it had broken
down.

In Lower Canada much of the trouble was due
to race antagonism. In addition there had been
friction between Upper and Lower Canada aris-
ing out of a common use of the St. Lawrence;
for Upper Canada was entirely dependent on the
tidewater ports of the lower province. This
friction had been so serious that at one time
there was a plan to create a third province out
of the Island of Montreal. In Montreal the
English were in control; and such a plan would
have ended the dependence of Upper Canada on
ports that were under the control of French-
Canadians.

[98]

auto-
cratic

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

American influence on political conditions in
Canada in the years from 1783 to 1837 has already
been noted. More evidence of this influence is
contained in Durham's report, and in his recom-
mendations as to the system of government that
should be adopted at the great crisis of 183 7-1 840.

The suggestion was put forward, in plans pro- An
posed to Durham for the government of Lower
Canada, that as a permanent or as a temporary govem-
and intermediate scheme, the government of the ™®°*
French province should be constituted on an en- gested
tirely despotic footing, or on one that would vest ^°^
it entirely in the hands of the British minority.

"It is proposed," wrote Durham, "either to dut-
place the legislative authority in a governor, with
a council formed of the heads of the British party, dem
or to contrive some scheme of representation by
which a minority, with the form of representation,
is to deprive the majority of all voice in the man- ^estion
agement of its own aff'airs." ^

The adoption of such a plan would have meant " cana-
the indefinite continuation of the dreary period ^^
of colonial history of 1 791-1837. But at this, neigh-
the greatest crisis in British colonial history be- *^'"
tween 1783 and the great war, the influence of
what the late Sir Richard Cartwright, for forty-
five years a member of parliament at Ottawa,
liked to describe as "Canada's only neighbor,"
again made itself felt on the destinies of what is
now the greatest British oversea dominion.
* Cf. Lucas, II, 296-297.

[99]

ham's
con-

nation
of this
sug-

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Influence It was an influence not of the government at
opSon^" Washington, but of the people of the United
inthe States, indirectly rather than directly exercised.

United i^. turned the scale with Durham. Durham's

St&tes

report turned the scale with the Melbourne gov-
ernment, and through the government with par-
liament at Westminster.

Durham thus described American influence,
and how, in his opinion, it would affect Canada,
if a despotic government were established at
Quebec:

The maintenance of an absolute form of government on
any part of the American continent can never continue for
any long time without exciting a general feeling in the United
States against a power of which the existence is secured by
means so odious to the people; and as I rate the preserva-
tion of the present general sympathy of the United States
with the policy of our government in Lower Canada as a
matter of the greatest importance, I should be sorry that
the feeling should be changed for one which, if prevalent
among the people, must extend over the surrounding prov-
inces. The influence of such an opinion would not only act
very strongly on the entire French population, and keep up
among them a sense of injury and a determination of resist-
ance to the government, but would lead to just as great dis-
content among the English.^

Legis- The experience in Canada of a government not
lative responsible to the people did not, in Durham's
Upper and Opinion, justify a belief that an absolute govern-
Lower ment in Lower Canada would be well adminis-

Canada

urged by tered. Durham was confident that the great

Durham

^ Lucas, II, 297.
[100]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

reforms in the institutions of the French province,
which must be made before it could be a well-
ordered and flourishing community, could be
effected by no legislature which did not repre-
sent a great mass of public opinion. He was con-
vinced that tranquillity could only be restored
by subjecting Lower Canada "to the vigorous
rule of an English majority, and that the only
efficacious government would be that fci-med by
a legislative union." ^ ...

At this time the estimated population of Uppet
Canada was 400,000. The number of English
and Scottish people in Lower Canada was 150,000,
and of French 450,000. If these estimates were
correct, Durham believed that the union of the
provinces would not only give a clear English
majority, but one which would be increased every
year by immigration from the United Kingdom.

Durham was convinced, moreover, that the
French, when once placed in a minority by the
legitimate course of events, and the working of
natural causes, "would abandon their vain hopes
of nationality''; for he held that the union of
Scotland with England in 1707, and the union of
Ireland with Great Britain in 1800, taught "us
how effectually the strong arm of a popular legis-
lature would compel the obedience of a refrac-
tory population,^ and the hopelessness of success

1 Cf. Lucas, II, 307.

2 Sir Charles Lucas notes that the history of Ireland from
1838 has hardly borne this out. Lucas, II, 308, footnote.

[lOl]

Popu-

latioa

of Upper

and

Lower

Canada

in 1888 ^

Durham
and the
national
aspira-
tions of
French
Cana-

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

would gradually subdue the existing animosities,

and incline the French-Canadian population to

acquiesce in their new state of political existence." ^

Advan- Union of the provinces, according to Durham,

tagesof would result in two advantages. The British

union to . .

Upper would conttol the new legislative assembly, as
Canada ^^jj ^g ^.j^g legislative council; and union would
end for Upper Canada, for which there was no
-suggestion of despotic government, the disputes as
to the division, or amount of revenue, collected on
imports into Canada at the St. Lawrence ports.

Lower Canada in the twenties and thirties of
last century, as in the second decade of the twen-
tieth, was the most self-sustaining area of the
North American continent. French-Canadians
imported little from the United Kingdom or from
the United States. The needs of the British
population in Upper Canada were greater and
more varied. Their importations from the United
Kingdom — clothing and other manufactured
articles — were comparatively large.
Import All import duties levied by the legislatures of

duties ^Y\e British North American provinces until 1858
revenue were for revenue only, and most of the revenues
°^y of the provinces were raised by these duties.

The disputes between Upper and Lower Canada
were as to the division of the duties.

Realizing that most of the duties were finally
paid by the people of Upper Canada, this prov-
ince was long aggrieved by the division of the
1 Lucas, II, 308.
[102]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

money collected by the customs officers of Lower
Canada at Montreal and Quebec. Durham be-
lieved that with union the surplus revenue of
Lower Canada would meet the deficiency of
Upper Canada, and that Lower Canada would
be placed "beyond the possibility of locally
jobbing the surplus revenue." Upper Canada
would, by union, also secure access to the sea;
and Lower Canada would pay its fair share to
the cost of the canals in Upper Canada, which,
as Durham rightly insisted, were as much the
concern of one province as of the other.

The saving of public money which would be influence
effected by the union of the governmental estab- ^^^ ^^
lishments would, Durham contended, supply pariia-
the means of conducting the general government ™®^*
on a more efficient scale. "And," he added, in west-
summing up the advantages of union, "responsi- °^^*«'
bility of the executive would be secured by the
increased weight which the representative body
of the United Provinces would bring to bear on
the imperial government and legislature."

Durham was wrong in the assumption that where
with the union of the provinces race antagonism ^'.^
and the struggle of the French-Canadians for assump-
nationality would gradually disappear. It was ^°°^
race antagonism, and the deadlocks which ensued wrong;
from it, that forced on Confederation in 1864- ^^^^
1867. He was wrong also in assuming that econ- were
omy, coupled with greater efficiency, would result ^^^
from union. But he was absolutely right when

[103]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

he assumed that the increased weight of the
representative body would have influence with
the imperial government; for it was the legisla-
tive assembly of the United Provinces that in
the years from 1841 to 1849 forced the conces-
sion of responsible government — an executive
dependent on a majority in the assembly — and
again it was the assembly that in 1 858-1 859
insisted on the concession by Great Britain of
liberty to the United Provinces to frame their
own customs tariff, regardless of British manu-
facturing interests.

III. The Legislative Union of 1840
Con- The Melbourne government acted on Durham's

rfijMo^^ recommendation that Upper and Lower Canada
1867 should be united in one province. By the act of
1840, which established this union, there was
created the constitution of 1 840-1 867. The bill
was introduced in the house of commons by Lord
John Russell. Neither in the commons, nor in
the lords, was the discussion in general from the
Whig or Conservative standpoints.
A In spite of appeals from the Duke of Welling-

«,o<.c,,rA ^Qj^i only eight or nine Conservatives in the
house of commons opposed the bill. Gladstone
was still a Conservative in 1840; but he and
Stanley and Peel, also Conservatives, were as
anxious as Russell and his colleagues of the Whig
administration that Canada should have a better
1 Cf. Parker, "Sir Robert Peel," III, 379.
[ 104 ]

supported
by both
political
parties
at West-
minster

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

form of government than experience had demon-
strated was possible under the constitution of 1791.

The debates at Westminster were character- Con-
ized by frequent expressions of the conviction ^^"^^
that Great Britain could not long hold colonies colonies
with large white populations; and that Canada "^^^^
would break away when it was ready. Peel inde-
and Gladstone gave expression to these convic- pe«»<ie«^
tions. They were anxious, in the meantime, that
Great Britain should do all that she could to
establish a beneficent political civilization for
the colonies.

Further legislation for Canada was enacted in The
the session of 1840. A bill was passed empowering f^'^
the legislature of the United Provinces to deal serves—
with the clergy reserves without interference from l^^f„
parliament. The plan was to divide the money the new
received from the sale of the clergy reserves among J*^
the churches. The Episcopal church was to have
the largest share; next was to be the Presbyterian
portion; and smaller shares were to be assigned
to the Methodist and other churches.

This plan was adopted at once by the legisla- The
ture of the United Provinces. It was in opera- ^^^^^

^ reserves

tion until 1854, when the clergy reserves were from
secularized. From 1841 to 1854 each church was JfJJ*^
free to expend the money it received at will,
whether for the support of its clergy, the erec-
tion of places of worship, or for education.^

1 Cf. Stimson, " History of the Separation of Church and
State in Canada," 56-57.

[lOi]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Legis-
lature
of the
United
Provinces

Urban
develop-
ment in
Upper
Canada
from
1791 to
1840

Urban
constitu-
encies
Intiie
new
repre-
sentative
system

The new constitution for the United Provinces
that was enacted by parliament in 1840 provided
(i) for a legislative council, nominated like the
legislative councils at Quebec and Toronto, the
members to hold office for life; and (2) for a
legislative assembly elected on the s^me fran-
chises as the assemblies of 1 792-1 840. For mem-
bership of these assemblies there had been no
property qualification; for membership of the
new legislature ownership of landed property of
the value of £500 was a prerequisite.

In the period from 1791 to 1840 eight towns
had come into existence in Upper Canada. These
were Toronto, Kingston, Hamilton, Brockville,
Cornwall, Niagara, London, and Bytown —
known since 1854 as Ottawa. With the excep-
tion of London and Ottawa, all these towns —
now cities — are on Lake Ontario, a fact which
indicates the importance of water transport in
the early settlement of Canada. By the imperial
act of 1840 two members were assigned to
Toronto, and one each to the other seven towns.

Urban development in Lower Canada had pro-
ceeded more slowly than in Upper Canada. The
French-Canadian is usually not a town dweller.
Sherbrooke, in the eastern counties of Lower
Canada, — counties that were settled between
1800 and 1840 chiefly by immigrants from the
United Kingdom, — was the only new town suffi-
ciently important in 1840 for separate represen-
tation in the assembly.

C106]

council

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Sherbrooke was assigned one member. Two
each were allotted to Montreal and Quebec, and
one to Three Rivers. There were, therefore, in
the new legislature fifteen representatives of
urban constituencies.

To each province were allotted ten members /Legis-
of the legislative council. To each province also ^J^^
there were allotted forty-two members of the
assembly — a provision that for ten years was
a distinct advantage to Upper Canada, and a
grievance with Lower Canada. In the fifties
and sixties, when immigration had given Upper
Canada a population larger than that of the
French province, the position was reversed;
and out of this reversal of the position at the
time of the union of the provinces there was
developed the agitation in Upper Canada for rep-
resentation by population — one of the most
vigorous and persistent agitations of the decade
preceding Confederation.^

There was a provision in the constitution that French
the legislature might add to the number of mem-
bers of the assembly. In 1853 the total number the
of members was increased from 84 to 130. The ^®'
census of 1852 had shown that the population in the
of Upper Canada was then 60,000 in excess of J^^^J"
that of Lower Canada. But 65 members were assembly
apportioned to each province; and the French-
Canadians had so easily the upper hand in the
legislative assembly that the reform demanded
* Cf. Qarke, "Sixty Years in Upper Canada," 65.

[107]

Canada
secures

English
language

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

by Upper Canada could not be obtained, and

I was not obtained until the principle of repre-

' sentation according to population was embodied

in the act of Confederation.^

Preemi- Bills introduced into the legislature, and all

nence official documents for record, it was enacted in

assigned , ' , ,

to the the organic law of 1840, must be in the English
language; but this provision was not to prevent
copies being printed in French. As in the legis-
lature at Quebec from 1792 to the rebellion, both
English and French were used in debate in the
legislature of the United Provinces; and from
1 841 to the present day there has never been a
time when French-Canadian members, either of
the legislature of the United Provinces, or of
the house of commons or senate at Ottawa, have
not freely exercised this privilege of speaking in
French in debate.

Municipal Provision was also made in the new constitu-
tion for meeting a need to which Durham had
called attention when he noted the efficiency of
municipal government in the United States, and
the fact that in the United States even where
municipal institutions were "lacking or imper-
fect, the energy and self-governing habits of
the Anglo-Saxon population enable it to com-
bine whenever a necessity arises." ^

There was a clause in the act making it manda-
tory on the government of the United Provinces
to constitute townships, and organize municipal
1 Cf. Boyd, 143-147. 2 Lucas, II, 112-113.

[108]

govern-
ment

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

government. A temporary measure for this Munid-
purpose was passed by the legislature in 1841. J^«>^®^
A municipal code was framed for Lower Canada Lower
in 1845; and in 1849 a municipal code was en- ^^^
acted for Upper Canada, "which at last gave to Canada
the people the system of self-government which
they now enjoy, and established the principle
that local control of financial matters of local
interest should be vested in the taxpayers." ^

Until 1846, when Great Britain adopted free Regu-
trade and abandoned her old commercial policy, ^"°'* ^
duties levied on imports into all British colonies merce
were determined by parliament at Westminster, [o^^^g*
and these duties were fixed with a view to British
affording British manufacturers a monopoly of ^^"
all colonial markets. Accordingly under the con-
stitution of 1840 the imperial government again
reserved the power of imposing duties for the
regulation of commerce. The revenues from
these customs duties were to flow into the treas-
ury of the United Provinces; and, subject to
two conditions, the legislature was conceded
control of the raising of all other revenues and
the spending of all revenues.

These conditions were: (i) the provision of other
a civil list for the salaries of the governor-general

reser-
vatlons

* Clarke, 95-96. Clarke, who was clerk of the legislature
of Ontario from 1891 to 1907, in writing of the municipal
code of 1849 and its amendments — page 96 — says, "It
has given us a system far excelling that adopted in many
states of the American Union."

[109]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Popular
demands
Ignored
in framing
the new
constl-

Two of
these
demands
subse-
quently
conceded

and the judges; and (2) the provision of a con-
solidated fund for the salaries of provincial offi-
cials. Over the civil list that determines the
salaries of the governor-general and the judges,
and over the consolidated fund, parliament at
Westminster retained control until 1847.

The only bills reserved — bills to which the
governor-general could not give the royal assent
— were bills affecting religion and crown lands.

Three demands of the long agitation in Lower
and Upper Canada which had preceded the
rebellion of 1837 were not conceded in the act
of 1840: the legislative council was not made
elective; judges and civil servants were not
excluded from the legislature; and there was not
a word in the act concerning the epoch-making
claim, urged in Upper Canada as far back as
1828, for responsible government, a claim that
had been emphasized in Papineau's platform of

1835-

It was 1853 before the constitution of 1840

was amended to exclude judges and civil serv-
ants from the assembly and the legislative coun-
cil; and it was 1856 before an amending act was
passed at Westminster admitting elected mem-
bers to the legislative council. Elected members
were of the council from 1856 until Confedera-
tion.

At the time the constitution of 1840 was before
the house of commons. Lord John Russell, who
was in charge of the bill, held tenaciously to

[no]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

nomination for legislative councils. He was sure womi-
that the connection between the colonies and J^^^
Great Britain would be in danger if there were lative
elected legislative councils. But like other ^°^^
fears entertained at Westminster between 1783 of
and 1887 in regard to the colonies, there was no «™p^®
ground for this apprehension. Seven of the nine
provincial legislatures of Canada today have no
second chamber; and even the most ardent
friends of the senate at Ottawa, if it has any such
friends,^ never advance the claim that the nomi-
nated senate is of any peculiar value in main-
taining the imperial connection.

IV. The Struggle for Responsible Government

The claim for responsible government was con- Fortunes
ceded in 1841. The concession was withdrawn °'*^®

■ move-

in 1843, but was completely and finally conceded ment

in 1849. Its first and its final concessions were ^8°4ito
due, not to anything actually stated in the act 1849
of 1840, although that memorable act was the
key to all the constitutional freedom now en-
joyed by all the dominions. They were due to
the statesmanship and democratic spirit of Syden-
ham, Bagot, and Elgin, three of the four govern-
ors-general who were in office from 1839 to 1850,
and also, it is important to note, to the new
policy literally forced on Downing Street by the
Liberals of Upper and Lower Canada, who were

1 Cf. The Round Table, London, III, December, 19 12, to
September, 19 13, 719-722.

[Ill]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Syden-
ham's
con-
cessions
to the
demand

Cabinet
govern-
ment as
at West-
minster

Principles
on which
Sydenham
acted

in control of the legislative assembly of the United
Provinces, during the first decade of the consti-
tution of 1840.

Durham was succeeded by Sydenham in
November, 1839. The new governor-general
recognized the justice of the long-sustained
demand for responsible government, and the
wisdom of prompt concession. Under the old
regime at Toronto and Quebec, the executive
councils were generally composed of men in
political opposition to the majority of the legis-
lative assembly; and the governor, at each of
these capitals, usually took extreme care to have
every act of his own go forth on the responsibility
of the executive council.^

In the first session of the legislature of the
United Provinces — a session held at Toronto in
1 841 — Sydenham chose the executive council
from members of the legislature who were of the
political party in the majority in the assembly.
By so doing he established cabinet government
in Canada on the same basis as at Westminster.
Sydenham*s conception of the functions and duties
of a governor of a colony having representative
institutions was so novel that his action forms a
landmark in British colonial history, scarcely
second in importance to Durham's famous report.

The principles of Sydenham's policy were
(i) that as governor-general — as the represen-
tative of the crown in Canada — he was himself

[112]

* Cf. Scrope, "Lord Sydenham," 143.

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

responsible to the imperial authorities alone; and
(2) that it was his duty so to form and conduct
the government as to insure harmony with the
majority of the elected legislative assembly.^

Sydenham died at Kingston, Ontario's most a mer-
beautiful lakeside city, in September, 1841. He ^^^'^
was only forty-two. He was not of the aristo- in empire
cratic governing class of England — not of the ^^^^
territorial aristocracy from which at this time
the governing class was almost exclusively drawn.
He was not a peer until 1840.

In his earlier life Sydenham had been a mer- Men of
chant in a large way of business in the city of *^® ^°™"
London. He has the distinction of being the class in
first man of the commercial class, after the re- ^p«^^
form of the house of commons m 1832, to attam
front rank in imperial politics; and he had no
successor from the commercial or manufacturing
class in the wide field of imperial politics until
Chamberlain became colonial secretary in 1895.
No other man of the capitalistic or commercial
classes was appointed to a colonial governorship
until Lord Brassey, a great railway contractor,
who was created a peer, was appointed governor
of Victoria in 1895.

Queen Victoria objected to men of the com-
mercial class as colonial governors. In 1856 the
Queen vetoed a suggestion by Labouchere, secre-
tary for the colonies, in Palmerston's adminis-
tration, that James Wilson, a manufacturer,^ and

1 Cf. Scrope, 273.

C113]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Qaeen a financier of national fame, who was also founder

^b-*°a*'* of the Economist, should be appointed governor

to men of Victoria, Australia. It was then a colony

of com- ^j^j^ representative institutions, but not in the

merce as . '^

colonial enjoyment of responsible government. Its popu-
goveraors \^^[q^ ^^s much less than that of many of the
parishes of London in 1856.

"Mr. Wilson," the Queen wrote, "would not be
at all a proper person to be governor of so large
and important a colony as Victoria. It ought to
be a man of higher position and standing, and
who could represent his sovereign adequately." ^
Men of The ideas expressed in the Queen's letter of

lov^tag^ 1856 as to men who were unfit for colonial gov-
ciassas emorships have, as a rule, held good at the
gov^rs colonial office from that day to the present time.
Governorships in the dominions — offices ordi-
narily only of dignity, form, and pageantry,
under the system of responsible government —
have gone almost exclusively to men of the terri-
torial governing class; and as a rule these offices,
which offer no career, go to men of second or
third rank in political life at Westminster.^

^ Benson and Esher, "Letters of Queen Victoria," III,
24-27.

* Munro-Ferguson, who in 1886 was elected to the house
of commons from Leith Burghs (Scotland), was in 1914
appointed governor-general of the Commonwealth of Aus-
tralia. "They were now," he said, at a farewell meeting of
his constituents at Leith, on February 10, 1914, "giving
their late member a first-class political funeral." — Herald,
Glasgow, February 11, 1914.

[114]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Sydenham had no experience of colonial ad- Syden-

ministration before he arrived at Montreal in ***™

1839. He was of a different type and mental type of

caliber from the governors-general and lieuten- *^^°*^*^

L ^ r\ I. -r governor

ant-governors who were at Quebec or loronto
from 1 79 1 to the rebellion. There were of these
governors several with political ability; but most
of them were military men who needed a salaried
job. Sydenham was one of three men — Durham,
Sydenham, and Elgin — whose genius for gov-
ernment, and whose courage, vision, and popular
sympathies carried Canada successfully through
the great crisis of 183 7-1 850, and made possi-
ble the self-governing dominions and their loyalty
to Great Britain.

"Lord Durham," writes Sir Charles Lucas, AcWeve-
England's foremost authority on British colonial ™®^**
history, "preached his gospel and died. Lord Durham
Sydenham, before he too died, set the political ^^^_
machine running in the right direction. Then ham
the machine went on, the way widened, the views
widened. Men grew up to contemplate a nation,
and after contemplating to create it. Lord Dur-
ham's report gave the inspiration. Sydenham,
with his combination of strong popular sympa-
thies and great business capacity, showed how to
begin putting principles into practice."

"The history of Canada," continues Lucas, Lucas's
who was under-secret ary at the colonial office ^^*^
from 1897 to 191 1, and next in importance to the work
secretary for the colonies, "has been on the whole

["5]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

a history of singular good fortune; and not the
least part of this good fortune has been that Lord
Durham should have been forthcoming at the
particular time when he went to Canada; and
that Lord Sydenham should have been available
as his successor. It would be difficult to find in
the chronicles of any country two men who,
within little more than three years in all, did so
much to help the coming time." ^
Bagot Sir Charles Bagot, a member of Lincoln's

s*d^-*^ Inn, who had been of the house of commons, and
ham's who had served as parliamentary under-secretary
^"*^ for foreign affairs with Canning as his chief, and
who had been minister at Washington, and am-
bassador at Petrograd and The Hague, succeeded
Sydenham as governor-general in 184 1. He was
appointed by the Peel government — a Conserv-
ative administration that had come into power
in September, 1841.

Bagot, who in British politics was a Tory,
continued Sydenham's policy. At a crisis in
Quebec, he formed his government "in unison
with the known will of the majority of the popu-
lar assembly." ^ Bagot, in fact, was so situated
that he had to adopt Sydenham's principles of
government.^ Acting on the broad principle
that the constitutional majority had the right to

1 Lucas, "Durham Report," I, 301-302.

2 Parker, "Sir Robert Peel," III, 382.

' Cf. speech by Roebuck, house of commons, May 30,
1842.

Cii6]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1B67

Men of

the

rebellion

office

Welling-
ton's
indig-
nation

rule under the constitution, he appointed Louis
HyppoHte Lafontalne to the executive council,
in association with Robert Baldwin, the leader of
the Liberals of Ontario.

Lafontalne had succeeded Paplneau as leader
of the French-Canadian Liberals; and with La-
fontalne's appointment to the executive council of i837
there was also the appointment to office of ^PPoi»t«<i
several French-Canadians who had been con-
cerned In the rebellion — men who belonged to
what Wellington stigmatized as "a party tainted
with treason." ^

"What a fool," declared Wellington, "the
man (Bagot) must have been to act as he has
done! And what stuff and nonsense he has
written! And what a pother he makes about his
policy and his measures, when there are no meas-
ures but rolling himself and his country In the
mire!" "The duke," Peel was told, "can talk
of nothing else; and is in a perfect fury of anger
and indignation." ^

Bagot' s efforts to manage what Peel described
as "the fierce democracy of Canada," developed

1 Parker, III, 384.

2 Parker, III, 382-383. Wellington died in 1852. With
the exception of the Earl of Derby, who was thrice premier
between 1852 and 1868, Wellington was the last British
statesman who dreaded an extension of self-government to
the colonies. He was the last to learn the lesson of the Ameri-
can revolution. He was certainly the last statesman to hold
the idea that a British colony, which had the United States
as neighbor, could long continue under military rule.

[117:

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

"The a situation that Wellington feared would be fatal
fierce ^^ ^.}^g Connection of the United Provinces with
racy of Great Britain. What equally troubled Welling-
Canada" ^qj^ — perhaps troubled him even more — was a
dread that Bagot's concession to the democ-
racy of French-Canada might be fatal to Peel's
cabinet, of which he was a member without
portfolio.^
Bagot Bagot had no friend at court. Long before his

recaUed dispatches had arrived in London — dispatches
that came as a thunderbolt to Wellington — as
early, in fact, as September 9, 1841, Queen Vic-
toria had regretted her formal approval of Bagot's
appointment as governor-general. "The Queen,"
she wrote to Peel, "cannot refrain from saying
that she cannot quite approve of Sir Charles
Bagot's appointment, as from what she hears of
his qualities she does not think that they are of
a character quite to suit in the arduous and diffi-
cult position in which he will be placed." ^

After much commotion within PeeFs cabinet,
Bagot was censured. It was hopeless for him
to attempt to continue as governor-general. He
asked for his recall. His request was complied
with; and he died in Canada soon after the
arrival of his successor. Sir Charles T. Met-
calfe.

Bagot made his stand for Sydenham's enlight-
ened policy. He was highly regarded as a colonial

1 Cf. Parker, III, 382.

* Benson and Esher, I, 405-406.

C118]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

reformer by radicals at Westminster such as Roe- Bagot as
buck and Hume,^ and by one at least of his *fo^°*»^

. . . . . reformer

biographers he is credited with having inaugu-
rated responsible government in Canada.^

V. Metcalfe* s Repudiation of Responsible
Government

Unlike Durham, Sydenham, and Bagot, Met- Met-

calfe's

oriental

colonial
govem-

calfe, who was created a peer in 1845, had had
a varied experience of governorships before he ideas of
reached Canada in 1843. He was then fifty-eight
years of age. He had been, from the time he ment
left Eton in 1800, to 1838, in the service of the
East India Company — an indifferent school for
a governor of a colony, with representative insti-
tutions, like the united provinces of Upper and
Lower Canada, and a colony, moreover, that was
vigorously pushing for responsible government.^
Metcalfe's last Indian appointment was as lieu-
tenant-governor of the northwest provinces.
From 1839 to 1842 he had been governor of
Jamaica, where he had been eminently success-
ful in adjusting relations between the English
sugar planters and the 403,000 negroes who had
been liberated from slavery in 1838.

Metcalfe did not follow the policy of Syden-

* Cf. Parliamentary Debates, Series III, vol. 75, pp. 33
and 61.

* Cf. "Dictionary of National Biography," Supplement I,
98; Boyd, "Cartier," 72.

' Walrond, " Letters and Journals of the Earl of Elgin," 33.

C119]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Sydenham ham and Bagot. He refused recognition of the
^^ principle of responsible government — any recog-

poiicy nition that would satisfy Canadian political
tato^e le^d^rs. At the time Bagot resigned, the Lafon-
discard taine-Baldwin ministry was in power. This was
the ministry whose formation had been the cause
of Bagot' s loss of prestige in Downing Street.
Met- Kingston was then the seat of government of

caife's ^j^g United Provinces; and Metcalfe, soon after

ambition , . .

he had established himself in that city as governor-
general, undertook to make himself practically
minister of the colony.^ He refused to accept the
recommendations of the executive council in
regard to public appointments. He "refused to
follow the advice of his ministers in matters
which were within their absolute province." ^
Furthermore, when he was interviewed by a dep-
utation of electors from Upper Canada, who
asked that he follow the constitutional practice
initiated by Sydenham, Metcalfe made a speech,
much more suited to the political atmosphere of
India than to that of any British North Ameri-
can province after the rebellion of 1837.
His "If you mean," said Metcalfe, "that the gover-

attitude j^qj. jg ^q have no exercise of his own judgment in

towards i • • • r i j •

the the admmistration of the government, and is to

executive j^g ^ mere tool in the hands of the council, I totally

council , . . . . . ^

disagree with you. That is a condition to which

1 Cf. Speech by Earl of Ellenborough, H. of L., June 15,
1854.

* Speech by Cartier, at St. Denis, 1844, Boyd, 88.

[ 120 ]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

I never can submit, and which her majesty's
government, in my opinion, can never sanction.^
If you mean that every word and deed of the
governor is to be previously submitted for the
advice of the council, then you propose what,
besides being unnecessary, is utterly impossible,
consistent with the due despatch of business." ^

Metcalfe's difficulties with the Lafontaine-Bald- Met-
win administration had arisen over an appoint- *^*"*'^
ment in the civil service — over patronage. In ception
his speech Metcalfe took up this question, and ^^®^
expressed himself in strong terms in regard to the pouticai
claims of the ministers. "If you mean," he con- P^t^on-
tinued, "that the patronage of the crown is to
be surrendered for exclusive party purposes to
the council, instead of being distributed to reward
merit, to meet just claims, and to promote the
efficiency of the public service, then we are at
issue again. Such a surrender of the prerogative

1 "The claim for responsible government," said Stanley,
secretary of state for the colonies, in defending Metcalfe's
policy and administration in Canada, in the house of com-
mons on May 30, 1844, "is inconsistent with the existence
of monarchical institutions; and in the next place with the
relations that should exist between a colony and the mother
country. It is inconsistent with monarchical government
that the governor who is responsible should be stripped of
all authority and all power, and be reduced to that degree
of political power which is vested in the constitutional sov-
ereign of the country."

2 Egerton and Grant, "Canadian Constitutional Docu-
ments," 295.

C 121 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

His

distinc-
tion as a
governor-
general
of
Canada

of the crown ^ is, in my opinion, incompatible
with the existence of a British colony." ^

There had been no utterance from a governor-
general in this key since Head's rebuff to Mac-
kenzie's constituents when they petitioned against
his exclusion from the assembly at Toronto. Met-
calfe has the distinction of being the last governor-
general of Canada to use such language to his
ministers or to their constituents.

Responsible government meant nearly all that
Metcalfe inferred; and his attempt in 1 843-1 845
to stay the progress^ towards responsible govern-
ment was as useless as it would have been for
him to command the waters of Lake Erie to cease
flowing over Niagara Falls.

* As late as October i, 1843, there was no realization at
Whitehall of the changing conditions in the United Provinces,
or of the claim for responsible government which was being
insistently pressed on the governor-general. In that month
the "Rules and Regulations for Her Majesty's Colonial Serv-
ice" were revised and reissued; and on page 19 in the new
edition there is a rule applicable to the distribution of patron-
age. " Great weight," it reads, " must always be attached to
local services and experience. Every governor will, therefore,
make once in each year a confidential report of the claims of
candidates, whether already employed in the public service
or not, whom he may consider to possess that qualification,
in order that when a vacancy, or an opportunity for promo-
tion, occurs, the secretary of state may have before him the
means of judging how far the particular candidate recom-
mended by the governor is, on the whole, best qualified, and
whether a candidate of proper qualifications is to be found in
the colony or in any adjacent colony."

' Egerton and Grant, 295.

[122]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Racial divisions existed in the legislature of Doubie-
the United Provinces from 1841 to 1866. But ^j°^*y
party lines were not identical with race lines. double-
All the members from Quebec were not Liberal, ^l^^^
nor all the members from Ontario Conservative.
Combinations of groups from each province were
necessary to secure a party majority in the as-
sembly. It was by a combination of this kind
that the Lafontaine-Baldwin administration was
formed when Bagot was governor-general.

Such an administration was known as a double-
majority and double-headed cabinet, because a
British and a French party leader — of equal
rank in the cabinet, and each with his regimented
following in the assembly — were necessary to
keep the administration in power.

Robert Baldwin, who with Lafontaine was at Baid-
the head of the government when Metcalfe at- ^'!^
tempted to restore the old regime and enforce his the
old crown colony ideal of colonial government, ^*™«8i«
was the leader of the Liberals in Ontario. He respon-
had been in the political life of the upper prov- ^*^^®
ince since 1829, when he was elected to the ment
assembly. He had been a radical and a reformer
at Toronto, when association with radicals and
reformers meant a boycott for a professional
man — he was a lawyer — and meant also social
ostracism.

With Baldwin from 1829 to 1849, responsible
government was the alpha and omega of political
reform. He was the author of the municipal code

[123]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of 1849, a democratic measure of much value in

the domestic history of Ontario. But his fame

today, Hke that of Lafontaine, rests chiefly on

his part in the successful struggle for responsible

government under the constitution of 1840.

Outcome The Lafontaine-Baldwin government resigned

^^®*" in September, 1844. It was succeeded by the

oppo- Draper-Viger government, which had as its fol-

sition to lowing members of the assembly from both Que-

respon- ° . .-'. ^-

sibie bee and Ontario, who were willing to accede to

govern- Metcalfe's views of responsible government. But

these members were not numerous enough to give

the Draper-Viger administration a majority in

the assembly. Without a majority there could

be no votes in supply — no money with which

to carry on the government.

Governor- Under the constitution a session of the legis-

generai's i^tm-g \^^^ ^q ^g \^q\^ g^ch year, and a legislature

power to . . . r f r>

dissolve might Continue m existence tor tour years. But,
fhir**^^^' ^^ under the British constitution, the governor-
general had power, as he has today, to dissolve
the legislature at a crisis which seemed to make
expedient a new appeal to the electorate.
Metcalfe Metcalfe, under the conditions which con-
partisan^ fronted him in the autumn of 1 844 — with La-
fontaine and Baldwin out of office, but with their
followers still compact and hostile to the new
government — was compelled to dissolve the legis-
lature. He was compelled to take this step, or to
yield to the demand for responsible government,
as the radicals conceived it.
[ 124]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

The new ministers, Draper and Viger, were
Conservatives — Tories, as Conservatives in Can-
ada were called until 1855. Metcalfe had had no
experience in the management of elections. Elec-
tions were unknown in India. But he threw him-
self into the election of 1844 with all the vigor
that had characterized Head's intervention in the
election in Upper Canada in 1836, and with such
success that a majority was secured in the assem-
bly for Draper and Viger.

As Metcalfe was the last governor-general to Last
assume what today would be regarded as a dis- ^^"
tinctly unconstitutional position towards an ad- general

ministration, so also was he the last governor who ^ '°.*®''

1 • u 1. T • '®'^®^

was openly partisan. He was the last to inter- elections

fere in a general election in the interest of either

party. Within less than a year of his success at

the election of 1844, Metcalfe died — the third

governor-general to die in Canada in the years

from 1 841 to 1845.

For only about two years was the movement Qneen
for responsible government retarded by Metcalfe's ^^^^*^
conflict with the Lafontaine-Baldwin ministry and tionof
his success in securing a majority in the assembly ^^"^
for Draper and Viger. But unlike Bagot, Met- poUcies
calfe had friends at court. His administration
and his policy were regarded by Queen Victoria,
and by the prince consort, as "prudent, consist-
ent, and impartial."

"Upon the continuance and consistent appli-
cation of the system which Lord Metcalfe has

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

laid down and acted upon," wrote Prince Albert,
in August, 1846, "will depend, in the Queen's
estimation, the future welfare of the province,
and the maintenance of proper relations with
the mother country." ^
Met- Metcalfe's policy certainly was in accordance

caife's ^j^i^ ^Pjg instructions he had received when he

instruc- , ...

tions was appomted governor-general — mstructions
which Stanley, who was then colonial secretary
in Peel's administration of 1 841-1846, on Feb-
ruary 2, 1844, declined to lay on the table of the
house of commons.
His policy There was a debate on that day on Metcalfe's
by'&e**^ administration. Stanley expressed satisfaction
colonial that the question had been raised; for he be-
secretary ijgyg^j [^ q( importance that there should be no
mistake as to the views of the government.
" Metcalfe," reads the report of Stanley's speech,
"was sent to Canada to carry out the fairly new
colonial system, but equally determined to resist
those extravagant demands which were incon-
sistent with the authority of the crown, and of
the true rights of a colony. He believed that
the course taken by the governor-general was
the right one, and he had no hesitation in stating
that it met with the entire concurrence of the
government at home."^

Metcalfe's death was regarded by the Queen
as a great loss. Her correspondence with minis-

* Benson and Esher, II, 111-112.

* Pari. Debates, Series III, vol. 72, p. 145.

- [126]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

ters at this time shows that she fully endorsed
their policy of conceding to the United Provinces
something far short of what Baldwin and Lafon-
taine understood by the term — a term of Cana-
dian origin — "responsible government." "The
selection of a successor," the Queen wrote, "will
be most difficult;" and she urged on Stanley,
that it was of "the greatest importance that the
judicious system pursued by Lord Metcalfe, which,
after a long continuation of toil and adversity,
only now ^ just begins to show its effect, should
be followed up by his successor." '^

Queen Victoria, in this letter of November 2,
1845, added that she knew "nobody who would
be as fit for the appointment as Lord Elgin, who
seems to have given great satisfaction in Jamaica,"
where he had succeeded Metcalfe as governor in
1842.

VI. Responsible Government under
the Elgin Regime

During the whole of her sixty-four years* reign
the Queen can scarcely have done what are now
the dominions a more valuable service than when
she suggested the appointment of Elgin to Stan-
ley. The appointment was ultimately made,
not by the Peel government to which the Queen
had addressed her letter, but by the government
of Lord John Russell, which had succeeded the
Peel administration in July, 1846.

* November 2, 1845.

• Benson and Eshcr, II, 54-55; 111-112.

C»7]

Some-
thing
short of
respon-
sible
govern-
ment
to be
conceded

Queen

suggests
Elgin as
Met-
calfe's
successor

A

fortunate
sugges-
tion

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Elgin's Elgin, who was thirty-five when he was

'^"^ appointed governor-general, did not continue

makers Metcalfe's poHcy, although when the Russell gov-

Briti\ ernment was about to make the appointment —

Empire August 3, 1 846 — the Queen urged on Earl Grey,

the new colonial secretary, that "regard should

be had to securing an uninterrupted development

of Lord Metcalfe's views." ^

Today Elgin ranks with Durham and Syden-
ham among the great colonial administrators of
the nineteenth century. Had he followed in Met-
calfe's footsteps — made speeches like that of
Metcalfe to the advocates of responsible govern-
ment, and interfered in elections — his name would
have been of interest only to colonial antiquaries.
Elgin's Durham and Sydenham were Whigs — ap-

^th^ta pointees of a Whig government. Bagot and
1841 Metcalfe were Conservatives, appointees of a Con-
servative government. Elgin was a Conserva-
tive. Had he not been a Conservative he would
not have been suggested by the Queen to a Con-
servative government in 1846; for governorships
in the dominions, as distinct from governorships
of crown colonies, are regarded as patronage at
Westminster, except when occasionally a prince
or other connection of the royal family is ap-
pointed.2 Otherwise governorships go, as a

1 Benson and Esher, II, 112.

^ The Marquis of Lome, who was governor-general of
Canada from 1878 to 1883, was husband of Princess Louise,
daughter of Queen Victoria.

C128]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

matter of course, to supporters of the adminis-
tration at Westminster.

At this period of his career Elgin was a Liberal-
Conservative.^ But the HberaHsm was pre-
ponderant. He was not a Tory of the type of
Wellington. He was not even a Tory of the
school of Stanley, afterwards Earl of Derby, from
whom in 1842 he had received his appointment as
governor of Jamaica. He had avowed his Hb-
eraHsm when he was a candidate for the house
of commons for Southampton, in 1841; ^ and he
carried his liberalism into practice during the
six years he was governor-general of Canada.

Before Elgin left England for Canada in 1847,
he married a daughter of Durham. This would
seem to have broadened his liberalism and
strengthened his popular sympathies.^ It un-
doubtedly gave the Durham family added
importance in the history of the struggle for
responsible government, a struggle which had
been carried to a successful issue when Elgin
left Canada in December, 1854.

At the time that Elgin was governor-general
of Canada, and for at least a quarter of a century
afterwards, the attitude of many statesmen in
England — Conservatives as well as Liberals —
was that colonies such as Canada, Australia, and
New Zealand would end the connection with
Great Britain as soon as they were strong enough

1 Cf. Walrond, ibid.y 9. 2 cf. Walrond, ibid., 9-10.

» Cf. Walrond, ibid., 44.

[129]

Elgin's

marriage

with the

daughter

of

Durham

Helping
the

colonies
to

prepare
for
inde-
pendence

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

New-
castle's
views on
holding
colonies
by force

American
influence
once more

to Stand alone. Many English statesmen were
convinced that the constitutions framed by par-
liament after 1840 for colonies with representa-
tive government were only provisional — only
preliminary to constitutions in which these
colonies would assert their complete independence.

Proof of the existence of this conviction is
abundant in the biographies and letters of British
statesmen of the first half of the nineteenth cen-
tury. Expressions of it are to be found in the de-
bates of the house of lords on June 15 and 29,
1854, on the legislative council (Canada) bill; and
as late in the nineteenth century as 1862 the
colonies were told by the Duke of Newcastle,
who was secretary of state for the colonies in the
Palmerston administration of 1 859-1 865, that
he trusted the day would never come when the
mother country would make an effort to retain
her colonies by force.

"I trust," added Newcastle, "that the day
will never return when a single redcoat will point
a bayonet, or fire a shot, in hostility to the colo-
nies if they wish to separate from the mother
country." ^ Here again America had its influence
on British colonial policy; for the conviction
that the colonies would break away was largely
based on Great Britain's experience of 1 776-1 783
with the American colonies.

These convictions were all ill-founded. This

* Speech by Duke of Newcastle, Australian anniversary
dinner, London, February 12, 1862.

C 130 ]

vlctlons
for whici:

was no
basis

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

fact was demonstrated to the world several times Con-
in the years from Queen Victoria's jubilee in
1887 to the outbreak of the war in August, 1914. there
As one concession after another was made to
the dominions, in the years from 1840 to 1907,
when they were conceded the liberty to make
their own commercial treaties with foreign powers,
and as the dominions increased in population,
material wealth, and world-wide political impor-
tance, they drew nearer to Great Britain. They
attached increasing importance to the imperial
connection; and when war came a million troops
were raised in the dominions, and the response
which the dominions made to the Empire's need
was in some respects more remarkable than
England's own.^

From 1840 to 1880, however, the conviction was
widely held that the colonies with representative
and responsible government would inevitably
break away as soon as it suited them to do so.

Elgin never held this view of the temporary Elgin
character of the connection between the domin- ^^' ^

vinced

ions and Great Britain. He did not go to Canada of the

with the idea that he was to aid in perfecting a ^"d"'*^

system of government that was to be only pro- nection

visional, or with the conviction that the British °^*^®

, colonies

North American colonies would follow the ex- with
ample of the American colonies, and end the con-
nection with Great Britain.

* Cf. Adams, "Imperial Federation after the War," TaU
RevieWt July, 19 16, 688-694.

[131]

Great
Britain

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

His con- As Elgin conceived it, his mission was to con-
ception of vince Canadians that, without severing the bonds
mission that united them with Great Britain, "they might
in Canada attain the degree of perfection and of social and
political development to which organized com-
munities of freemen had the right to aspire." ^
His frank The principles on which Elgin based his policy
ofthe^*^ as governor were identical with those that had
policy of guided Sydenham in 1841. He would identify
Sydenham j^jfj^self with no party, but would make himself
a moderator between the influential of all parties.
He would have no ministers who did not enjoy
the confidence of the Canadian people; and he
would not refuse his consent to any measure,
proposed by the ministry, unless it were of an
extreme party character, such as the assembly
or the electors would be sure to disapprove."
FamUy Elgin arrived at Montreal at the end of De-

Compact cember, 1847. On the day that he took oath as
Elgin's governor-general, he received an address of wel-
deciara- come from the municipaHty of Montreal. In

tion of his . . IT J

principles reply he intimated that he had frankly and un-
equivocally adopted Durham's view of colonial
governorship — an intimation that caused no
little astonishment to the Family Compact and
its partisans, who had scarcely more sympathy
with Durham's principles of colonial government
than they had with republicanism in the United
States.^

* Walrond, ibid., 116. * Walrond, ibid., 34.

8 Cf. Walrond, ibid., 36.

C132]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

The Draper-Viger government was at this time
still in office. The leaders and their partisans
were in good humor, as they were in enjoyment
of the offices to which as Tories of the Family
Compact group they were convinced they had a
prescriptive right. The Liberals were in a hope-
ful mood, as they were convinced — rightly, as
it developed — that with the end of the Met-
calfe regime a better era would open for the advo-
cates of responsible government.

A dissolution of the legislature came at the Defeat
end of 1847. As soon as the newly elected assem- ^^^
bly convened, early in 1848, the Draper-Viger govem-
ministry was again in the position in which it ™®"*
was when it was first organized. It was in a
minority, and unable to carry on the government.

A new ministry — again a Lafontaine-Baldwin
administration — was formed from the opposi-
tion; and at this juncture the members of the
two parties observed a truce long enough to con-
cur in an expression of admiration of the perfect
fairness and impartiality with which Elgin had
conducted himself during the election and the
formation of the new ministry.^

Within a year of his assuming the governor- Elgin's
generalship, Elgin thus succeeded in carrying ^*
into effect the second of the principles on which
his administration was to be based — that he
would have no ministers, no members of the
executive council, who could not command a
1 Cf. Walrond, ibid., 50.

C133]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

majority in the legislative assembly. He had
still to make a fight, in the end successful, for
his third principle, that he would not refuse his
consent to any measure proposed by the cabinet,
unless it were of an extreme party character,
such as the assembly or the electors would dis-
approve.

VII. The Rebellion Losses Bill

A The test came on the measure known in Cana-

^dmark jj^^^ history as the rebellion losses bill — a bill
Canadian almost as important in the constitutional history
tationai °^ Canada as the act of union of 1840, and quite
develop- as important as the tariff acts of 1 858-1 859,
™®"* out of which developed the right of British
colonies, with representative and responsible
governments, to frame their own tariffs without
interference from the colonial office or parlia-
ment at Westminster.

The object of the rebellion losses bill was to
provide for the indemnification of men in Lower
Canada whose property had been destroyed dur-
ing the rebellion. Elgin regarded the bill as a
questionable measure; "but," to use his own
words, "one which the preceding administration
had rendered almost inevitable by certain pro-
ceedings adopted by them" during Metcalfe's
term of office.

Some compensation had been paid to persons
who had suffered loss of property in the rebel-
lion. In the last session of the old legislature

[134]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

of Upper Canada a compensation bill was enacted; Com-
and by an ordinance, passed by the council that ^^^*^<>»
was in existence in Lower Canada during the sus- sufferers
pension of the constitution from 1838 to the ^^°^^^^
union in 1840, some compensation was also paid in Upper
in Lower Canada. ^^^

In both provinces the payments made were claims
deemed inadequate; and in the first session of ?°™
the legislature of the United Provinces — 1841 — Canada
a bill was enacted for further compensation for
sufferers in Upper Canada. In 1845 there was
an appeal on behalf of sufferers in Lower Canada.
It was addressed to Metcalfe, who responded by
appointing a commission of inquiry. The com-
mission reported in April, 1846, that there were
losses for which compensation should be paid.

The Draper-Viger government took no action
on the report. The question of compensation was
consequently pending when the Lafontaine-Bald-
win government again came into power in 1848.

The Metcalfe commission had reported that An
$100,000 would cover the losses still to be com- ^^«"^«<*

, . question

pensated in Lower Canada. The bill that was
introduced into the legislature in 1848 by the
Lafontaine-Baldwin government appropriated
$90,000 for this purpose. There was a provision
in the bill that no person who had been con-
victed, or who had pleaded guilty of treason,
during the rebellion, should be entitled to any
compensation.^

* Cf. Walrond, ibid., 70-74.

C135]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Oppo-
sition by
the Tories

Elgin's
assent to
the

compen-
sation bill
resolu-
tions

His

reasons
for his
assent
communi-
cated
to the
colonial
office

The Tories in both provinces raised a great
commotion against the bill. There was much
hard language from the loyalists against Elgin,
who was urged to dissolve the legislature, though
little more than a year had elapsed since the
general election. The bill, however, was per-
sisted in by the Lafontaine-Baldwin administra-
tion.

In all British legislatures money bills originate
in the lower house. They are based on resolu-
tions. If the resolutions are carried they are
embodied in a bill which is introduced, and goes
through all its stages in both houses like any other
measure.

The resolutions on which the rebellion losses
bill was based — resolutions which, by con-
stitutional usage, could not have been submitted
to the legislative assembly had the governor-
general not signified his assent to them by message
to the house — were carried by fifty to twenty-
five votes. The bill was carried by forty-seven
to eighteen votes.

The reasons which induced Elgin to give his
assent to the resolutions were explained in a
letter which he wrote from Montreal to Grey,
who was secretary for the colonies in the Russell
administration of 1846-1852. "The measure
itself," he wrote, "is not indeed altogether free
from objection; and I very much regret that an
addition should be made to our debt for such an
object at this time. Nevertheless, I must say,

C136]

school
Canadian

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

I do not see how my present government could
have taken any other course in this matter than
that which they have followed. Their prede-
cessors had already gone more than halfway in
the same direction, though they stopped short
and now tell us that they never intended to go
further. If the ministry had failed to complete
the work of alleged justice to Lower Canada
which had been commenced by the former
administration, M. Papineau ^ would most as-
suredly have availed himself of the plea to under-
mine their influence in this section of the
province." ^

A disposition to observe constitutional usages old
and practices was never characteristic of the
Tories of the Family Compact groups in Upper Tories'
and Lower Canada. They were a law to them- ^^T"
selves, as was sufficiently proved by their ejection for
of Mackenzie from the assembly at Toronto. f°2^
They again ignored constitutional usage in the usages
crisis over the rebellion losses bill. They or-
ganized many petitions against the bill; but

^ "Returning from exile in 1845, after eight years' absence
from Canada, Papineau decided to reenter public life; and
the prestige of his name, and of his past parliamentary tri-
umphs, were sufficient to secure his election for the constit-
uency of St. Maurice. Papineau at once showed himself
irreconcilable. He was against the union. He had no faith
in responsible government, such as was advocated by La-
fontaine and his colleagues, and he declared in favor of inde-
pendence." ^ Boyd, 76.

* Walrond, ibid.y 74-75.

• [137 J

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Elgin's
attitude
towards
the

compen-

biU

instead of presenting these petitions to the
assembly, or to the legislative council, in accord-
ance with the usage at Westminster, they
addressed them to Elgin personally. This un-
constitutional course was obviously adopted with
the design of bringing about a collision between
the governor-general and his ministry and the
assembly.

At Westminster, where petitions to the sover-
eign can only be presented through the home sec-
retary, petitions thus out of order would have not
tothe**°° reached the Queen. Elgin, acting consistently
on the first of the principles on which he based
his administration, that he would make himself
a mediator and a moderator between the two
political parties, received the petitions against
the rebellion losses bill. He received them
civilly, and promised to bestow on them his best
consideration, but studiously avoided the expres-
sion of any opinion.

"By maintaining a strictly constitutional posi-
tion," writes his biographer, "he failed that
section of the agitators who calculated on his
being frightened or made angry, while he left the
door open for any one who might have candor
enough to admit that, after all, he was only
carrying out fairly the principle of responsible
government." ^

From the assembly the rebellion losses bill
went to the legislative council; and here it

C138]

1 Walrond, ibid., 77.

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

should be noted that Elgin in appointing members Elgin's
to the council had acted on the advice of his ?°^"

nons

ministers. By so doing, he had accepted another to the
demand of the protagonists of responsible govern- J^^
ment, and established the usage which has councu
continued at Ottawa and at Quebec and Halifax
to the present day. It is in accordance with
this usage that appointments to the senate, and
to the legislative councils in the provinces where
these exist, are made by the governor-general,
or the lieutenant-governors, as representatives of
the crown, but invariably on the advice of the
cabinet at Ottawa or the provincial executives at
Quebec and Halifax.

The bill, having passed the assembly and the Compcn-
council, was ready for the royal assent on April JJjJ°°
25, 1849. It received the royal assent from receives
Elgin on that day. As Elgin left the parliament ^^
house in Montreal he was received with mingled assent
cheers and hooting, and his carriage was pelted
with rotten eggs, thrown by a "small knot of
individuals consisting of persons of a respectable
class in society."

An open-air demonstration in the Champs de Loyalist
Mars followed the outbreak at the parliament ^^^^
building. Inflammatory speeches were made;
and on a sudden the mob proceeded to the house
of parliament, where the members were still
sitting. After breaking the windows, the mob
set fire to the building, and burned it to the
ground. The crowd then dispersing, members

[139]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of the legislature were permitted to leave without
molestation; and no resistance was offered by
the riotous loyalists to the soldiers who came
on the scene to assist in extinguishing the fire.^
An At the next sitting of the assembly an address

fromtif ^^^ voted to the governor-general. It expressed
legislative abhorrence of the outrage of April 25, and ap-
assembiy pj-Qval of Elgin's "just and impartial administra-
tion of the government." It also commended
his attitude towards the Draper-Viger ministry
as well as towards the Lafontaine-Baldwin
cabinet.
Mora Elgin went into the city on April 30 to receive

loyalist ^i^jg address. He was escorted by a troop of

demon- r\ -

strations Volunteer dragoons. On his way through the
streets he was greeted with a shower of stones.
Returning from the parliament house to Monk-
lands, his residence on Mount Royal, Elgin
varied his route to avoid further hostile demon-
strations. But the mob, discovering his purpose,
rushed in pursuit. They again assailed his
carriage with stones, rotten eggs, and other
missiles; and it was only by furious driving that
the governor-general reached Monklands unhurt.
For several days Monklands was prepared for
a siege; and for two or three weeks Elgin did
not leave the grounds, as he was determined that
no act of his should offer occasion or excuse to
the mob — an exclusively British as distinct from
a French-Canadian mob — for further outrages.
1 Cf. Walrond, 81-82; Burpee, "Sandford Fleming," 34.
[ 140 ]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Members of the Lafontaine-Baldwin ministry Eigin'g
feared that if Elgin went again into Montreal, [gl,,!^
his life would be in danger.^ As the legislature as in
was still sitting, ministers urged the appointment ^^^^
of a deputy-governor for the purpose of pro-
roguing the legislature, thus avoiding another
journey for Elgin to the parliament house. Less
responsible advisers urged Elgin to use the
military forces at his command to protect his
person in an official visit to Montreal.

While Elgin was thus a prisoner at Monklands, Develop-
there were two developments of importance — ?^
Elgin tendered his resignation to Grey, and ad- the crisis
dresses were forwarded to the governor-general
from various parts of Upper and Lower Canada
indorsing the fight he was making for responsible
government.

One of these addresses was from a settlement Elgin
of Scotch Highlanders in the county of Glen- ^^^
garry, Upper Canada. "It is truly gratifying to cause
me," wrote Elgin to his fellow countrymen in
Glengarry, "to learn that you appreciate my he^
exertions. Depend upon it they will not be ^?'
relaxed. I claim to have something of your own
spirit, devotion to a cause which I believe to be
a just one, courage to confront, if need be, danger

^ "Great as has been Elgin's success," said the Earl of
Derby, in the house of lords, on June 29, 1854, "I cannot
help saying and feeling that the leading principle on which
Lord Elgin has acted has been concessions one after another
to popular demands — concessions which would enable him
to lead an easy life."

[ 141 ]

which

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

and even obloquy in its pursuit, and an undying
faith that God protects the right." ^
Consti- Elgin's resignation was offered to Grey on

tuaonai ^ ii 2C, the day that the loyalists burned the

govern- ,• i «t • c • • »»

menton paruament house. It is my hrm conviction,
Its trial j^g wrote to the colonial secretary, "that if this
dictation be submitted to, the government of
this province by constitutional means will be
impossible, and that the struggle between over-
bearing minorities, backed by force, and ma-
jorities resting on legality and estabhshed forms,
which has so long proved the bane of Canada,
driving capital from the province, and producing
a state of chronic discontent, will be perpetuated."
Elgin These were the views that Elgin unfolded to

offers his Grey. But while holding these views as to the
nation teal nature of the struggle then going on in
to the Montreal, he conceived it his duty to the govern-
office ment at Westminster to suggest that "if he
should be unable to recover that position of
dignified neutrality between the contending
parties which it had been his unremitting study to
maintain," it might be a question "whether it
would not be for the interests of her majesty's
service that he should be removed to make way
for some one who should have the advantage "of
being personally unobnoxious to any section of
her majesty's subjects within the province." ^

Grey would not hear of Elgin's resignation.
Were he to resign it would be a most serious loss
1 Walrond, ihid.y 87-88. * Walrond, ihid.^ 86.

[142]

oflSce

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

to her majesty's service and to the province. Queen
Moreover, with conditions as they were in Mont- ^^^
real, it would be "most injurious to the public that
welfare, from the encouragement which it would ^^^
give to those who had been concerned in the vio- ms
lent and illegal opposition" to Elgin's government
Relying on Elgin's devotion to the interests of
Canada, Grey was sure he would not be induced
to retire from the high office the Queen had been
pleased to intrust to him, "and which," he added,
"from the value she puts on your past services,
it is her majesty's anxious wish that you should
retain." ^

VIII. Responsible Government Accepted and
Indorsed by Parliament at Westminster

The loyalists then appealed to England. Appeals
Petitions were sent from Montreal to Westminster I*^ ^®

loyalists

for the disallowance of the rebellion losses bill, to
Gladstone, who, it will be recalled, was not of J^"
the Liberal party until 1859, denounced the bill at
in the house of commons ^ as a measure for the ^*!*'

minstef

rewarding of rebels; and Herries, who had been
a member of the Wellington and Peel adminis-
tration, moved for an address to the Queen for
its disallowance. There was a debate on this
motion extending over two nights. In the
course of it Elgin's policy was defended by Peel,
almost as strongly as by Russell.

Russell stoutly contended that under the
» Walrond, ibid., 86-87. ' June 14, 1849.

[143]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Russell's constitution of 1840 the majority in the United
eulogy of Provinces must rule. The premier's speech was

respon- . . . . *^

sibie remarkable, in view of his dread in 1837, and
govern- agaJn in 1840, of responsible government in
Canada. "Not only," he said, "has Canada
self-government, but responsible government,
which has never been enjoyed to such an extent
as it has been since the time of the Earl of Elgin.
If the present ministry in Canada are sustained
by popular opinion and by the assembly, they
will remain in office. If, on the contrary, the
opinion of the province is adverse to them, the
governor-general will take other advisers, and
will act strictly in accordance with the rule that
has been adopted here."
End of a There was a majority of 141 against the motion
twen^ to disallow. In the house of lords a majority
struggle also supported the position that Russell had
taken in the house of commons; and by these
two epoch-making divisions at Westminster in
June, 1849, a struggle that had been going on in
Canada since 1828 was brought to a triumphant
conclusion. Thereafter there was no more discus-
sion of Canadian grievances in parliament at
Westminster. There were no more petitions
from Conservatives in Canada who objected to
responsible government.
Anew Thenceforward a new principle governed the

principle colonial office in its relations with colonies with
at the representative and responsible government. This
c^oniai principle was that the imperial government had

[144]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

no interest whatever in exercising any greater
influence in the internal affairs of the colonies
than was indispensable, either for the purpose of
preventing any one colony from adopting measures
injurious to another, or to the empire at large.^

In the following year, 1850, when bills estab- a free
lishing responsible government in New South ^^
Wales, Van Diemen's Land, New Zealand, and legis-
Cape Colony were before parliament, Russell ^**^«*
made a statement of the attitude of the imperial govem-
government towards the colonies that are now of *"®^**
the dominions. "I am convinced," he said in
the house of commons, "that any man acquainted
with the colonies will come to the conclusion that
it is only in rare cases that the authority of the
crown ought to be interposed, and that with
regard to local affairs the executive and legis-
lative authorities of the colonies are the best
judges.*'

Thus within a year of the attacks of the Tory Respon-
mob on Elgin, and the burning of the parliament ^^^®
house at Montreal, the success which had been ment
achieved by Papineau and Mackenzie, by La- ^^^^ed
fontaine and Baldwin, and by Durham, Syden- British
ham, Bagot, and Elgin, was beneficently affecting ^^^^^
British colonies on three continents. Abiding conti-
foundations were also being laid for the develop-
ment of the good relations between Great Britain
and the dominions that were manifested to the
world when Germany declared war in 1914.
^ Egerton and Grant, 297.

[145]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Elgin's Elgin, who, later in his career, was British

toCaiwda ^"^^y ^° China, and viceroy of India, was

and the govemor-gcneral of Canada from 1847 to 1854.

®™^® In these seven years — years of political turmoil,

and also of commercial dislocation and depression

due to the sweeping fiscal reforms of 1 846-1 847

in the United Kingdom — he did more than any

governor-general before or after him to create a

political civilization for Canada.

He did much also to establish better relations
between the British North American provinces
and the United States; for he was primarily
responsible for the much-valued treaty of reci-
procity with the United States that was in force
— to the moral and material advantage of both
countries — from 1854 to 1866. Elgin's fame as
a statesman of the empire, like that of Durham
and Sydenham, is enduring. It will survive as
long as the history of Great Britain's oversea
dominions is read. Every privy council chamber
in the political capitals of Canada, Australia, New
Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland is a
monument to Elgin's achievements of 1847-1854.

IX. The Development of the Political Civiliza-
tion of Upper and Lower Canada

Aback- The extreme poverty of the political civiliza-

^utt»i ^^^^ ^^ Upper and Lower Canada had been
civilization revealed to the world by Durham. It was a

backwoods or frontier political civilization. Even

as such it was inadequate.

C146]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

In Upper Canada the men who were active in Aneim
political life — unless they were of the Family ^^^^
Compact group, and satisfied with conditions as
they were — realized this poverty quite as much
as Durham had done when he was in Canada in
1838; and as soon as the question of responsible
government was satisfactorily settled in 1849,
there began an era of political development
which extended from 1851 to 1866, an era which
is without parallel in the nineteenth-century
history of any English-speaking country.

Even before the disturbing questions of Munid-
responsible government and the relation of the ^^^^_
state to religion were settled, the upbuilding ment
of a political civilization had been well begun, ^^^q^
County and municipal government had been
established on a democratic basis. Systems of
public education — one for Upper Canada, and
another for the French province — had been
organized. The criminal code had been human-
ized. Postal services had been greatly extended.

The adoption of free trade in England in 1846, RaUways
and the abandonment of the old British colonial J]J|^^g^
policy, had enabled the United Provinces to navi-
enact their own customs laws; although these ^^^^
laws were not for the protection of home in-
dustries until 1858. Liberal naturalization laws
had been enacted. Government aid had been
given to railway undertakings; and large sums of
money had been expended on road construction,
on the Welland and St. Lawrence canals, and

C 147]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Clear
Grits
and
Rouges

Program
of the
reformers

Old laws
to be
repealed

on the ship channel in the St. Lawrence that
gives access to Montreal from the sea.

All this work was going on before responsible
government was finally achieved in 1849. With
this achievement began the era of constitutional
reform that continued until Confederation. The
reformers were Liberals — Rouges as they were
called in Lower Canada, Clear Grits in Upper
Canada.^

In Upper Canada, where pohtical thought was
most active and potent, the program of the
reformers in 1851 was in two divisions. In the
first were reforms which it was in the power
of the legislature, under the constitution of 1840,
to make. In the second were constitutional
reforms, which, in some important respects,
could only be made by the legislature after
liberalizing amendments had been made to the
constitution by parliament at Westminster.

The more important demands in the first
division of the program of 1851 were:

I. Simphfication of procedure in the law
courts.

^ " In Canada parties have been known by different names.
We have had Liberals and Conservatives, Rouges and Blues,
Grits and Tories, and for a short period under Robert Baldwin,
Reformers. It was in 185 1 that Brown fastened on that sec-
tion of the Reform party which, under Malcolm Cameron,
withdrew its confidence from the Baldwin-Lafontaine ministry,
the term 'Clear Grits'; and from that day to this the name
Grits has been used colloquially to designate the Liberal
party." — GazeUCy Montreal, October 15, 1917.

C148]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

2. Repeal of all laws conferring special privi-
leges on churches.

3. Reform in the method of sale of crown
lands.

4. Free navigation of the St. Lawrence for all
nations.

5. Abolition of primogeniture, which had
become the law in Upper Canada, when, by act
of its legislature in 1792, English law had been
declared the law of the province.

6. * Abolition of customs houses and duties on
imports.

7. Establishment of a uniform decimal currency.

In the second part of the program, as it stood Amend
in 1851, the demands were:

1. * Election of the governor.

2. An elected legislative council.

3. Election by county and municipal councils
of all county and municipal officers.

4. Abolition of the property qualification for
members of the assembly, created by the imperial
act of 1840.

5. An extension of the electoral franchise —
an extension that would bring in all householders.

6. Vote by ballot.

7. * Biennial legislatures with a fixed term,
instead of legislatures of uncertain duration.

8. No expenditure of public money without
the control of the legislature.

9. Representation according to population —
a demand which developed out of the obvious

C 149 1

ments
to the

tution
of 1840

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

over-representation of Lower Canada in the
legislature of the United Provinces.

10. Abolition of pensions to government
officials.

11. Canadian commerce and commercial inter-
course with other nations to be entirely unde/?
the control of the legislature.*

12. *The legislature to have power to alter or
repeal any act or charter, imperial or otherwise,
affecting only Canada, which the imperial parlia-
ment itself might alter or repeal.*

Reyivai These were the demands of the Liberals of

If^T^ Upper Canada in 1851. In the second part of

popular the program there was a revival of the demand

ff^wa^^ of the reformers of 1828-183 7 for an elected

1837 instead of a nominated legislative council; and

in 1852 another of these earHer demands was

revived — the demand for the exclusion of

judges and office holders from the legislature.

Attitude The Conservatives naturally were not re-

^^^ formers. They opposed most of the demands in

Conserv- r t • i

ative party the program of 1 85 1. It was, however, mamly
with the Conservatives of Toronto, Montreal,
and Hamilton — with the manufacturers of

1 This was the beginning of the movement for the right of
Canada to make her own commercial treaties — the movement
that achieved complete success when plenipotentiaries named
by the Laurier government of 1896-1911 negotiated the
reciprocity treaty with France of 1907.

2 Cf. Clarke, 65. The demands marked with an asterisk
have not been realized and have not been pressed since
Confederation.

[ 150 ]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

these cities — that there originated in 1856-
1857 a movement for a protective tariff for the
United Provinces, a tariff that should protect
Canadian manufacturers against both British
and American competition. This movement was
almost immediately successful.

At least ten of the reforms were realized in the
era of great political activity from 1851 to 1866.
Others, such as vote by ballot, the abolition of
tolls on the Welland and the St. Lawrence canals,
representation according to population, and the
right of Canada to make her own commercial
treaties, were not realized until after Confedera-
tion in 1867.

Only those demands which entailed amend-
ments to the imperial act of 1840 are of paramount
interest; and this interest is chiefly in the con-
ciliatory spirit in which governments at Whitehall,
and parliament at Westminster, met the demands
from Canada for democratic amendments to the
constitution of 1840, and for amendments to other
legislation of the imperial parliament affecting
Canada, that hindered reforms which the legis-
lature was prepared to undertake.

There were four of these amendments in the
sixteen years that the constitution of 1840 was in
force. They were all made in the years from
1847 to 1854. Two of the most important —
one giving the legislature a free hand in making
a final settlement of the clergy reserves question,
and the other bestowing large powers on it for

Reforms
that were
effected
before
Confed-
eration

Conces-

madeat
West-
minster

Amend-
ments to
the

act of the
imperial
parlia-
ment
of 1840

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

reforming its own constitution — were made

while Elgin was governor-general.
Increased These two amendments were made by the
^^'^f^ imperial parliament at Elgin's request, or at any

granted . i , ri i-

to the rate they were made at the request or the cabmet
TriiS-to ^^ ^^^ United Provinces, with the cordial approval
of Elgin. By these four amendments parliament
at Westminster parted with control it had exer-
cised over Canada, and by so doing increased
appreciably the power of the legislature of the
United Provinces.
Civuust The first amendment, enacted at Westminster
and the '^^ 1 84?, removed the restrictions in the constitu-

consoli- ii'

dated tion of 1840 on the civil list and the consolidated
*^*^ fund. These restrictions had been imposed on
account of the serious difficulties that arose in
1 83 3-1 83 7, when the legislative assembly of
Lower Canada refused to pass money bills.
The new legislature of the United Provinces
chafed under these restrictions; and apparently
without a word of opposition in parliament at
Westminster, they were all removed, and thence-
forward the legislature was as free as the im-
perial parliament in the appropriation of public
money.
Use of the A Valuable concession was made to Lower
French Canada by the second amendment, made in 1848.

Ian mi a ATA "^ "

French-Canadians were aggrieved by the pro-
vision in the constitution that all legislative and
state documents, which were to be of record, must
be in English. Copies of these documents might

language

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

be printed in French, but these copies were not
to be of official record.

By the amendment of 1848, without opposition
in either the house of commons or the house of
lords, a greater use of the French language was
conceded. The amendment, in fact, gave to
the legislature — in practice to each house —
power to make such regulations as to the use of
French as might seem desirable. It was an
amendment that was in train before Elgin became
governor-general. Apparently Metcalfe had
urged it; and Gladstone, during his short tenure
of the office of colonial secretary in Peel's second
administration, had promised that parliament
should be asked to enact it.

Elgin welcomed the new freedom in the use Papi-
of French; for in 1 847-1 848 Papineau was agi- °^^"'^
tating in Lower Canada against the restrictions agitation
of 1840 on the use of the French language; and
Elgin was, moreover, convinced of the impolicy
of all attempts to denationalize the French-
Canadians.

"Generally speaking," wrote Elgin to Grey, Elgin's
"all such attempts produce the opposite effect ^^^'^
from that intended, causing the flame of national French
prejudice and animosity to burn more fiercely. ^*^*^
But suppose them to be successful, what would
be the result.? You may perhaps Americanize,
but depend upon it by methods of this description
you will never Anglicize the French inhabitants
of the province. Let them feel, on the other

[153]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

hand, that their religion, their habits, their
prepossessions, their prejudices if you will, are
more considered and respected here than in other
portions of this vast continent, who will venture
to say that the last hand that waves the British
flag on American ground may not be that of a
French-Canadian?" ^
French Here again "our only neighbor," to use Cart-

Sdto^ Wright's phrase, influenced British policy towards
United Canada. Obviously it was Elgin's purpose that
states conditions for French-Canadians should be such
that they would realize the advantage of British
supremacy. They would realize that the institu-
tions they cherished — language, church, and
schools — had a greater likelihood of permanency
within the British Empire than if Lower Canada
should become a state of the adjoining republic.
Speech Elgin spoke French with ease and fluency.

He addressed meetings in French as well as in
English during the first year of his governorship;
and when the legislature assembled at Montreal,
in January, 1849, he took advantage of the new
amendment to the constitution to deliver the
speech from the throne in the chamber of the
legislative council in French as well as in English.
This was an innovation so far as the legislature
of the United Provinces was concerned. It was
disliked by the Tories; but it established a usage
which is followed to this day at the opening and
proroguing of parliament at Ottawa.
1 Walrond, ibid., 54.
[154]

from the
throne in

and in
French

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

The British act of 1853 which empowered the a final
legislature of the United Provinces to make a ^**^f-

1 r I 1 mentof

complete settlement or the clergy reserves, was the
not an amendment to the constitution of 1840. ^^^'^

• reserves

It repealed an act, passed by parliament in 1840, question
which authorized the legislature to rearrange the
clergy reserves scheme of 1791,^ and to divide
the proceeds of the lands among all the Christian
churches, the larger shares to be assigned to the
Episcopal church of England and the Presby-
terian church of Scotland.

In 1 85 1 the government of the United Prov- "dis-
inces was desirous to sweep away the whole *^^
system. Since 18 19 the system had been, as and
Sydenham described it in 1840, "the perpetual ^*^«^"
spring of discord, strife, and hatred." But the
legislature could take no step in this direction
with the imperial act of 1840 in eflPect, and it
accordingly petitioned the government at West-
minster for the repeal of the law.

A coalition government — Conservatives and The
Whigs — with the Earl of Aberdeen as premier,
and the Duke of Newcastle as colonial secretary, in'
was in power in 1853, when parliament was ^"*"
asked to repeal the act of 1840. The petition

* After the establishment of the clergy reserves by the
imperial act of 1791 an attempt was made in Upper Canada
to establish the tithe system, as it then existed in connection
with the Episcopalian church in England and Wales and in
Ireland. The legislature, however, ended this attempt in
1821. Cf. Statutes of Upper Canada, 1821, ch. 32.

C 135 1

amend-
ing bill

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

asked the transfer to the legislature of Canada
of the power of dealing with these reserves.^

The bill, unlike the bills of 1847 and 1848,
amending the constitution of 1840, met with
opposition in both the house of commons and
the house of lords. In the commons, the strongest
opposition came from Sir John Pakington, who
had been secretary for the colonies in the Con-
servative administration of February-December,
1852. Wilberforce, Bishop of Oxford, was its
most resolute opponent in the house of lords.
But it was carried in both houses; and the only
restriction imposed in the new law on the action
of the legislature was a clause protecting the life
interest of beneficiaries under the act of 1840.
End of The legislature of the United Provinces lost no

the con- xiimt in exercising the power thus conferred upon
between it. In fact, it had been waiting since 1851 for
church authority to proceed. A settlement of the

and state •' *^ . .

clergy reserves question was made m 1854. All
connection between church and state was then
ended; and in connection with this Canadian
bill, there was an incident in the house of com-
mons which illustrates the new attitude of
parliament and government at Westminster
towards colonial legislation.

A member of the house of commons had moved
that a copy of the bill of 185 1 of the legislature of
the United Provinces be laid on the table of the

^ Cf. Speech by Sir William Molesworth, H. C, March 4,
1853.

[156]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

house. Sir George Grey was then colonial secre- Pariia-
tary in the Aberdeen administration. Usually a ™^*
motion of this kind is complied with at once, freedom
But Grey moved that the motion be discharged. °**^®
The government had no copy of the bill. No vinciai
copy had been forwarded by the governor- |®^'
general; "and," added Grey, "if the government
should write to the colony for a copy, it would
look like interference on their part with a measure
pending before the colonial legislature." ^

X. Democratic Amendments at Westminster
to the Constitution of 1840

The most important of the democratic amend- Parlia-
ments to the constitution of 1840 were made in ™®^*

' sxir-

1854. At the instance of the Aberdeen govern- renders
ment, parliament then empowered the legislature '^^®*°
of the United Provinces to make radical changes
in its constitution. At the same time parliament
surrendered a right, under the constitution of
1840, to a veto on certain bills enacted by the
legislature.

These bills were measures concerning religion ReUgion
and crown lands. In the event of the legislature "^^

1 • 1 1 r 1 crown

passmg such measures it was the duty of the lands
governor-general to reserve them. They were
sent to Westminster. Copies of them must lie
for thirty days on the tables of the house of
commons and the house of lords; and in these
thirty days it was open to any member of parlia-
^ Sir George Grey, H. C, December 19, 1854.

L1572

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

ment to move for an address to the Queen praying
her to withhold the royal assent. In any case
there could be no royal assent until the bills had
thus been before parliament for thirty days.
New At this time — 185 2-1 854 — the legislature of

powers ^j^g United Provinces was intent on several
sought . .... , .

by the retorms to its constitution. It was desirous
legislature (j) that part of the members of the legislative
council should be directly elected; (2) that there
should be an elected speaker of the council,
instead of a speaker nominated by the governor-
general — in practice by the government; (3) that
a property qualification should not be required
for election to the assembly; and (4) that the
legislature should have power to increase the
number of members of the assembly, unrestrained
by a section in the constitution of 1840, which
provided that such an increase could be made
only by a two-thirds majority in each branch of
the legislature.
Oppo- The Aberdeen government was quite ready to

sition amend the act of 1840 as the legislature desired,
leader It was willing, as was bitterly protested by
°^^® Stanley, now Earl of Derby, to agree to "an
ative absolute subversion of the present constitution";
^J^** willing to make a "change from the present form
minster of a limited monarchy into what would be practi-
cally and absolutely a democratical government." ^
As Newcastle, the colonial secretary, was of the
house of lords, the bill making these changes was

1 H. L. Debates, June 22, 1854.

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

introduced in the upper house at Westminster. Aberdeen

In acquainting the house with its provisions, ^J*™"

Newcastle described the changes desired, and grants

intimated that when the Aberdeen government *"*^®

r 1 1 • 1 1 conces-

acceded to the petition of the legislature three sions
courses were open to it: ^^^^

The government could have (i) adopted a legis-
draft measure making these changes in the ^*^®
constitution of the legislature, which had been
sent over from Canada, and by following this
course parliament at Westminster would have
settled the question for Canada; (2) it could have
asked the legislature to pass and send to West-
minster a bill making these changes, which
could be confirmed by imperial act; or (3) govern-
ment could ask parliament to repeal the sections
of the constitution of 1840 which prevented the
legislature from making the desired changes
itself.

"To have adopted the first course," Newcastle "un-
told the house of lords, "would have been at 1°^^^^
variance with those principles of colonial govern- legis-
ment which I have endeavored to carry out ^^^^f
during the time I have held the seals of the years"
colonial office." "The proper course to pursue,"
he continued, "is to legislate no more for the
colonies than we can possibly help. Indeed, I
believe that the only legislation now required by
the colonies consists in undoing the bad legisla-
tion of former years." ^

1 H. L. Debates, June 15, 1854.

[ 159]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Failure Newcastle, by inference, thus classed the

no^taated '"^^y restraining clauses of the constitution of
legislative 1840 as "bad legislation"; and in defending the
^^^^ amendment which conceded to the legislature
liberty to reform the legislative council, he
admitted that the nominated legislative council
had been a failure. "It does not," he said,
"exercise that due influence in the colony or the
legislature which it ought to possess.*'
Nomi- Furthermore, the legislative council, as then

to^r* constituted, was so little esteemed that difficulty
councu had been experienced in finding men who were
refused billing to accept appointments to it. "It has
fallen," added Newcastle, "into disfavor with
the colonists to such an extent that men have
frequently expressed their repugnance and un-
willingness, and in many instances their positive
refusal, to enter the legislative council." ^
Oppo- Opposition to these democratic changes was

^^° strongest and most persistent in the lords,
amend- Derby, who was at this time leader of the Con-
j^^^ servative party, was anxious to retain direct
lords control by parliament at Westminster over the
legislature of the United Provinces. He was
intent on retaining some of the restraining
sections of the act of 1840. But only 39 peers
voted with him — 39 to 63 — when he divided
the house at second reading of the bill.

In the house of commons the opposition lacked
the spirited lead, the vigor, and the persistence
1 H. L. Debates, June 15, 1854.

C160]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

of the opposition in the lords. The bill, com- No
prehensive and far-reaching as it was, was enacted ^°^^
in the form in which it had been introduced by sition
Newcastle, whose name five years later was to ^^_®
be associated with another great concession to mons
political agitation in Canada — the concession
to the legislature of the right to make what
tariffs it pleased.

In its exercise of its new powers under the im- a partly
perial acts of 1854, the legislature of the United ^^^^^^^
Provinces in 1856 enacted a law for the ad- lative
dition of elected members to the legislative ^^'^^
council. The franchise on which these members
were elected was the same as that on which
members of the assembly were chosen. It was a
prerequisite to election that a candidate should
be the owner of real estate to the value of £2000,
over and above all incumbrances and debts.
There was also a provision in the law which
excluded clergymen of the churches of England,
of Scotland, and of Rome. The term of the
elected members was eight years.

Forty-eight new electoral divisions — twenty- New
four in Upper Canada and twenty-four in Lower ^^^1°^^^
Canada — were created by the act of 1856.
But all these electoral areas were not to elect
councilors at once. The forty-eight new members
were to be gradually introduced; and lots were
drawn to determine which divisions should form
the groups to elect first. There were only two
elections between 1856 and Confederation, when

[16.]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the total number of the council — nominated and
elected — stood at forty-eight. Of these twenty-
three had been appointed, and twenty-five were
of the council by popular election.^
Extent With the enactment by the imperial parliament

of the Qf ^j^g amending law of 1854, about all that now

COuCcS*

sionsof remained to the government at Westminster in
lft?~ connection with the administration of the United
Provinces was the appointment of the governor-
general. It will be recalled that the provinces
had enjoyed the right to frame their own customs
tariffs since 1847; and in that year also, it may
be added, as a result of the thoroughgoing re-
vision of the old navigation code by parliament
at Westminster the United Provinces obtained
the right to make their own coastwise navigation
laws as regards the Great Lakes and other inland
waters.
Great In the fourteen years from 1840 to 1854, Great

Britain Britain had frankly and completely surrendered

respon- . •; . .

sibie to the United Provinces all the rights which were
forthe Qj^^g considered a necessary condition to the

defense . , ...

of holding of colonies. Great Britain, in those

Canada years, was, as she is today, responsible for the
defense of Canada. "She guards our coasts,
she maintains our troops, she builds our forts,
and she spends hundreds of thousands among us
yearly." So Canadians were reminded in 1851
by George Brown, leader of the Liberal party in

* Of. Statutes of U. P., 19 and 20 Vict., ch. 100; Mackenzie,
"Life and Speeches of George Brown," 308.

C162]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Upper Canada, when there was an agitation
against the payment of the salary of the governor-
general from the treasury of the United Prov-
inces.^

Except as regards the navy these direct burdens Growth
of Great Britain were gradually reduced. Most ^^^^^
of them, in fact, were entirely removed in the pro-
forty-seven years from Confederation to the great ^^
war. But while still carrying all this responsi- lature
bility, while still defraying the cost of patrolling
the coasts, the expense of troops in Canada, and
the maintenance of forts at Kingston, Quebec,
and Halifax, Great Britain conceded to the
United Provinces (i) responsible government;
(2) the patronage of the crown; (3) control over
crown lands; (4) control over the civil list; (5)
the customs; (6) the post office; (7) the clergy
reserves; (8) freedom from the old navigation
laws; and (9) liberty to the legislature, as great
as was then, or at any time, enjoyed by parlia-
ment at Westminster, to change its constitution,
and greater than has ever been enjoyed directly
by congress at Washington.

In this period Great Britain also obtained for Privi-

the United Provinces the right to the free navi- ^®^®^

gation of Lake Michigan, and in the years from ceded

1854 to 1866 secured for all the British North ^ ^.

. . . . . Washing-

American provinces, except British Columbia, the ton to

advantages of commercial reciprocity with the c*^<^

United States.

* Mackenzie, " Life of George Brown," 50.

[163]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

XL The Unwritten Constitution of the United
Provinces as Developed from 1841 to 18 ^q

Canada's Most of these conccssions, as well as two others
^^ ^^ still to be mentioned, were based on acts of the

from the .

adoption imperial parliament. Three of them — control

frd"b °^ customs, freedom from the old navigation

Great laws, and liberty to enjoy commercial reciprocity

Britain ^j^-j^ ^j^g United States — resulted from Great

Britain's adoption of free trade in 1846, and

from the liberalizing amendment, made by

parliament in 1846, to what was known in the

old colonial code as the British possessions act of

1845.^ Freedom of navigation of Lake Michigan,

an exclusively American lake, was secured by a

treaty negotiated by Great Britain with the

United States.

Powers Three rights, however, were assumed by the

assumed legislature of the United Provinces between

by the

legis- 1 84 1 and 1859 for which usage was the only
lature basis. For these rights, so long as the constitu-
tion of 1840, as amended by parliament at
Westminster in 1854, was in operation, no act
of the imperial parliament could be cited as the
authority on which the legislature and govern-
ment proceeded.

In the order in which they were assumed, these
rights were (i) the right of the legislature to
insist on an executive or cabinet which was sup-

^ Cf. Porritt, "Sixty Years of Protection in Canada,'*
188-189; 8-9 Vict. ch. 93; and 9-10 Vict, ch, 94.

: 164 ]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

ported by a majority in the legislative assembly

— 1 841-1849; ^ (2) the right of the legislature
to exercise the same power that parliament at
Westminster then exercised in matrimonial causes

— in other words divorce cases, 1853; and (3) the
right of the legislature to enact protective tariffs
without interference from Whitehall, 1859.

XII. The Legislature of the United Provinces
Assumes Control over Divorce

The right of the legislature of the United Matri-

Provinces to grant relief in matrimonial causes ™°

'-' ^ causes

would seem to have been assumed in 1853.^
Parliament at Westminster exercised this right
from 1 55 1 to 1857, when the divorce court in
London was created.^

Not more than four or five divorce bills Five
were enacted by the legislature of the United g^[^*®*
Provinces from 1853 to Confederation. But at without
Confederation it was not practicable, owing to J°^*^
the opposition of Catholic Lower Canada, to matri-
follow the example of England of 1857, and ""^^^

* The history of the struggle by which responsible govern-
ment was won has already been recounted.

2 The legislature of Upper Canada, in the last year of its
existence, 1840, had enacted a divorce bill in the interest of
John Stuart, of London, in that province. Cf. Statutes of
Upper Canada, 3 Vict., ch. Ixxii. This was, as far as can be
ascertained, the only divorce bill enacted by the legislature
of Upper Canada during the forty-nine years of its existence.

' Cf. Clifford, "A History of Private Bill Legislation,"
I, 389-391.

C165]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

delegate all matrimonial causes to the courts in
all the provinces. By a usage, the origin of which
has thus been described, it comes about that
today petitioners for divorce in Ontario, Quebec,
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta — the five
provinces in which courts with jurisdiction in
divorce cases have never been established —
must go for relief to parliament at Ottawa.^

XIII. The Fiscal Freedom of the United
Provinces

Protec- The right to enact protective tariffs without

^g interference from Westminster — tariffs which
against might be detrimental to the commercial interests
toTOrts ^^ ^^^ United Kingdom, but which were regarded
as in the interest of the United Provinces — was
first asserted by the legislature in 1858. After
one strongly worded protest from the colonial
office the right was conceded by the British
government in 1859.
Influence Once again in the period between the rebellions
Ajnerican ^^ Lower and Upper Canada and Confederation,
tariff of but not for the last time in these twenty-nine
^®*^ years, American influence and example had
weight in determining policies in Canada; and
in this instance in affecting also policies of colo-
nial governments in Australia and New Zealand.

It was the development of manufacturing in
New England and in other states adjacent to

* Cf. Sinclair, "Rules and Practice before the Parliament
of Canada upon Bills of Divorce," 1-3.

[166]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Canada, under the United States tariff of 1842,
that gave the impetus at Hamilton, Toronto, and
Montreal to the protectionist movement.^ The
movement had its origin at Hamilton in 1847.
It resulted in the enactment in 1858 by the legis-
lature of the United Provinces of what is known
in Canadian fiscal history as the Cayley tariff.

The Cayley tariff takes its name from the c«yiey
minister who framed it and piloted it through *"^
the legislative assembly, where in accordance with
British constitutional procedure all money bills
originated. It was a frankly protectionist tariff
— the first tariff to protect domestic manufacturers
enacted in any of the British North American
provinces, or in any colony that is now of the
dominions.

The measure superseded the tariff of the
United Provinces of 1856. In this tariff — a
tariff exclusively for revenue — the general range
of duties on manufactured goods, imported
either from the United Kingdom or the United
States, was fifteen per cent. Only in a few
instances were the duties on these imports as
high as twenty per cent.

In the Cayley tariflF the general range of duties Compari-

1 TA ^* son with

was increased to twenty per cent. Duties as American
high as twenty-five per cent were levied on tariflf
boots, shoes, harness, and saddlery, on leather,
clothing, and wearing apparel. These duties

» Cf. Edward Porritt, " Canada's National Policy," Political
Science Quarterly, June, 1917, 197-208.

[167]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

were nearly as high and as protective as those in

the United States tariff of 1842.
First anti- There was no concealment by the government
dumping q£ ^YiQ United Provinces of the character of the

clause .fy. ^ . .

new tariff. Protectionist arguments were ad-
vanced from the treasury bench in the assembly
in support of the higher duties. In particular
when objection was made to the increased duty
, on soap, a duty in the interest of a factory in
Montreal, Rose, the attorney-general, assured
the house that the change was made because the
Canadian market was flooded with the refuse
soap of British manufacturers, which was entered
at the customs house at prices below those at
which soap had ever been sold in the United
Kingdom.^
Tory By this time, 1858, the name "Tory" was

^**^ disappearing from the phraseology of Canadian

assumes . .'^ ° * °-^ .

anew politics. It began to be dropped in 1855, after
the Liberals, or "Grits,'' as they were called,
had carried to success their agitation against the
clergy reserves. The new name of the Tories
was "Liberal-Conservatives." The name was
coined by a Tory newspaper — the Spectator, of
Hamilton — which was convinced that there was
no future in Canada for a political party living
on the Bourbon Toryism of the United Empire
Loyalists, or of the Family Compact, hopelessly
struggling for ascendancy in church and state.

1 Cf. Porritt, " Sixty Years of Protection in Canada,"
228-230.

[168]

name

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

Hamilton had been the center of the movement Father
fortheprotectionist tariff of 1858. The Spectator, °'^®^
to which Isaac Buchanan, the father of what has National
been known in Canada since 1879 as the National ^°"^^
Policy, was a frequent contributor, had given
the new movement its energetic support. It
accordingly welcomed the Cayley tariff with
enthusiasm; and in expressing this welcome it
acknowledged that the United Provinces were
following the example of the United States.

"The free traders, so called," wrote the Specta- Following
tor, " have been worsted, and they have probably ^^^
learned by this time that their nostrums are by
no means palatable to the people of this country.
Though this country is not, and we trust never
will be, republican, its material interests are the
same as those of our repubHcan neighbors. Can-
ada, therefore, wants no untried theory of trade
and industry, seeing that we have the actual and
dearly bought experience of the United States." ^

No halt in the protectionist movement followed Aiex-
the success of 1858. In August of that year ^^
Cayley was succeeded by Alexander Gait. The
new minister of finance was a man of much force,
independence, and individuality, who afterwards
achieved wide fame as one of the fathers of Con-
federation. He was also one of the earliest and
most resourceful protagonists of the movement
for complete liberty for Canada to make her own
commercial treaties. "Canada first," was Gait's
^ Spectator, Hamilton, July 30, 1858.

C169]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

conception of the duty of a Canadian statesman,

both before and after Confederation.

Gait's Gait was ready and willing to concede more

J^°* protection to Canadian manufacturers. He

framed the tariff of 1859 with this intent; and

it was this tariff that brought Gait into conflict

with Newcastle, who in 1859 was again colonial

secretary — this time in the Palmerston-Russell

Whig administration of 1 859-1 866.

Governor- Elgin had retired in 1854. He had been suc-

generai's ^^^^^^ ^ gj^ Edmund Walker Head. In forward-

helpless- . .

ness ing the new tariff to the colonial office, Head ex-

pressed regret at its protectionist features. " But,"
he added, "I must necessarily leave the represen-
tatives of the people in parhament to adopt the
mode of raising supplies which they believe to be
the most beneficial to the constituencies."
Gait's Gait had anticipated that he would come into

^®°se conflict with the free trade government at White-
traders in hall over the new tariff. This may be inferred
England from the speech in which he introduced his bill
to the assembly in March, 1859.

The policy pursued with regard to taxation in this country
— he then said — has been objected to in England. But I am
perfectly certain that this house will never permit any other
body to interfere with its proper right to determine what
shall be the amount and mode in which taxes shall be put
upon the people. Canada has adopted the protective policy;
and it is scarcely fair for parties in England to criticize our
policy, when in point of fact the greater part of our debt was
incurred when they had a protective policy in England.^

* Globe, Toronto, March 14, 1859.
C170]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

British manufacturers promptly and energeti- Protests
cally protested to the colonial office against the ^
increased duties in the Gait tariff, especially manu-
against increases in the iron and steel schedule, '^cturers
which, as they asserted, would divert much of
the trade of Sheffield with the United Provinces
to the United States.

Newcastle was a free trader. He had sup- New-
ported Peel in 1846 when, as Earl of Lincoln, he ^^*'®^
was a member of the house of commons. His the
sympathies were consequently with the protesting ^^^
manufacturers. In principle he was opposed to facturers
the upbuilding of a protectionist system in
Canada. This he made clear to the governor-
general in a dispatch dated August 13, 1859.
But, as will be recalled, Newcastle had taken a
prominent part in creating the democratic con-
stitution then in operation in the United Prov-
inces, and political conditions in Canada were
well in mind when he wrote his dispatch to Head.

Whenever the authenticated act of the Canadian parlia- New-
ment on this subject arrives — he wrote, concerning the Gait castle
tariff bill — I may probably feel that I can take no other
course than signify to you the Queen's assent to it, notwith-
standing the objections raised against the law in this country.
But I consider it my duty, no less to the colony than to the
mother country, to express my regret that the experience of
England, which has fully proved the injurious effect of the
protective system, and the advantage of low duties upon
manufactures, should be lost sight of, and that such an act
as the present should have been passed.^

^ Egerton and Grant, 348-349.

C171]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Oalt'8

defense
of the
new
fiscal
policy

Fiscal

freedom

aright

of the

Canadian

people

Provincial
govern-
ment
respon-
sible only
to the
people of
Canada

Gait, through the governor-general, then as
now the medium of communication between the
cabinet and the colonial office, replied to New-
castle on October 25, 1859. He replied in a
memorandum, approved by the cabinet at
Quebec, which among state papers of the nine-
teenth century concerning colonies that are now
of the dominions, ranks second only to Durham's
Report of 1838.

The paragraphs of importance in this study of
the evolution of the Dominion of Canada are
three in number. "Respect to the imperial
government," wrote Gait, in the first of these
paragraphs — a paragraph in which he stated
what he conceived were the rights of the govern-
ment of the United Provinces under the written
and unwritten constitution of 1840 —

must always dictate the desire to satisfy them that the policy
of this country is neither hastily nor unwisely formed, and
that due regard is had to the interests of the mother country
as well as of the province. But the government of Canada,
acting for its legislature and people, cannot through those
feelings of deference which they owe to the imperial author-
ities, in any measure waive or diminish the right of the people
of Canada to decide for themselves both as to the mode and
extent to which taxation shall be imposed.

The provincial ministry — Gait assured Newcastle — are
at all times ready to afford explanations in regard to acts of
the legislature to which they are party, but subject to their
duty and allegiance to her majesty, their responsibility in all
general questions of policy must be to the provincial parlia-
ment, by whose confidence they administer the affairs of the
country. And in the imposition of taxation it is so plainly

C172]

EVOLUtlON FROM 1837 TO 1867

necessary that the administration and the people be in accord,
that the former cannot admit responsibility or require approval
beyond that of the local legislature.

Self-government — reads the second of these paragraphs

— would be utterly annihilated if the views of the imperial
government were to be preferred to those of the people of
Canada. It is, therefore, the duty of the present government
distinctly to affirm the right of the Canadian legislature to
adjust the taxation of the people in the way they deem best

— even if it should unfortunately happen to meet with the
disapproval of the imperial ministry. Her majesty cannot
be advised to disallow such acts unless her advisers are pre-
pared to assume the administration of the affairs of the
colony, irrespective of the views of its inhabitants.

The imperial government — wrote Gait, in the third para-
graph of his historic memorandum — are not responsible
for the debts and engagements of Canada. They do not
maintain its judicial, educational, or civil services. They
contribute nothing to the internal government of the country;
and the provincial legislature, acting through a ministry
directly responsible to it, has to make provision for all these
wants. They must necessarily claim and exercise the widest
latitude as to the nature and extent of the burdens to be
placed upon the industry of the people. The provincial
government believes that his grace must share their con-
viction on this important subject; but as serious evils would
have resulted had his grace taken a different course, it is
wiser to prevent future complications by distinctly stating
the position that must be maintained by every Canadian
administration.^

Gait's

conceiH

tion

of

colonial

auton-

Re-

lations
of the
imperial
govern-
ment
with the
province

After Great Britain had conceded responsible
government to all the British North American
provinces, and had also adopted free trade, there
were at least two instances in which the colonial

1 Egerton and Grant, 349-351.

C173]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Colonial office had interfered with the fiscal policies of

office colonies with responsible government. The legis-

ference lature of New Brunswick in 1848 had passed a

"^^^ . bill under which bounties were to be paid to

colonial , .

fiscal encourage the cultivation of hemp. At Charlotte-

poUcies town in 1852 the legislature of Prince Edward

Island passed a bill under which bounties were

to be paid to fishermen to offset the competition

the island fishermen were then meeting from the

bounty-aided fishermen of New England. Both

these laws were disallowed by the government at

Westminster.^

Endan- It would have been possible, moreover, for

^ring Newcastle to have objected to the tariff of the

reciproc- United Provinces of 1859 on the ground that

j^ it endangered the treaty of reciprocity with the

with the United States, which was then in force, a treaty

for which the British government was responsible;

and also on the ground that it was injurious to

the empire at large.

Injury The second of these objections could easily

empire have been lodged against the new tariff, because,

at large as will be recalled, after the conflict over the

rebellion losses bill of 1849 the principle adopted

at the colonial office in regard to colonies with

responsible government was that Great Britain

"has no interest whatever in exercising any

greater influence in the internal aflPairs of the

colonies than is indispensable, either for the

purpose of preventing any one colony from

1 Cf. Speech by Sir John Pakington, H. C, March 4, 1853.

[ 174]

United
States

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

adopting measures injurious to another, or to
the empire at large.*' ^

The New Brunswick and Prince Edward Prece-
Island precedents were, however, not pressed ^^°* '^^
into service by the colonial office at this crisis ignored
of 1859. The changes in the tariff adverse to
American manufacturing interests, changes which
had much to do with the denunciation of the
treaty in 1865 by the United States,^ were ignored
in the correspondence between Westminster and
Quebec. Nor was there any attempt to enforce
the principle that a government at Whitehall had
the right to interfere when legislation was pending
in a colony that was injurious to other colonies
or to the empire at large.

The Cayley and Gait tariffs directly endangered interests
no interest of the maritime provinces, because, ^^^
except for a little coal from Sydney, Nova Scotia, provinces
none of the provinces "down by the sea" marketed
any of its products in Lower or Upper Canada.
But these tariffs of 1 858-1 859 did endanger the
reciprocity treaty, in which New Brunswick,
Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island had as
large an interest as the United Provinces.

The tariffs were also distinctly adverse to the
iron and steel, textile and leather industries of
the United Kingdom. They came, moreover,
as a shock to both British statesmen and British

1 Cf. Earl Grey, "The Colonial Policy of Lord John
Russell's Administration," I, 17.

* Cf. Porritt, "Sixty Years of Protection in Canada,'*
142-144.

C175]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

A shock commercial and manufacturing interests; for it
stJS^^^ had never been conceived in England in 1846,
men and when protection and the old commercial policy of
British ^j^g empire — the protectionist tariff and the old
merciai navigation code — were abandoned, that British
Interests ^olonies would dream of imposing protective

duties on imports from the United Kingdom.
No Newcastle and the Whig government at

native Westminster were confronted with the fact that
open to responsible government had been established in
ewcas e ^j^^ United Provinces for ten years, and that
Gait's memorandum left them no alternative,
unless they were prepared to establish military
rule in the United Provinces, and in the colonies
that followed the example of Canada.
Charter The royal assent, as Newcastle's dispatch to

of the ^Y\e governor-general of August 13 had fore-
freedom shadowed, was not withheld. The tariff bill
of the became a law; and Gait's memorandum of

dominions

October 25, 1859, became the charter of fiscal
freedom of the colonies with responsible govern-
ment. It became, in fact, part of the unwritten
constitution of the oversea dominions,
other Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Ed-

coionies ward Island in the years from 1859 to Confeder-
exampie ation did not follow the example of the United
of the Provinces. These provinces had then no manu-
Provinces facturing industries to protect. Newfoundland
has never had a protective tariff. But Victoria
adopted protection in 1864; New South Wales in
1865; British Columbia in 1867; New Zealand

[176]

series of

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

in 1881; South Australia in 1882; and until the
British preference was embodied in the Canadian
tariflFof 1897 not a single colony had enacted any
preference for imports from the United Kingdom
or for the sister colonies. Into all British colonies,
from 1846 to 1897, manufactures from the United
States were admitted on exactly the same terms
as manufactures from the United Kingdom.

The concession by Great Britain to the United Last
Provinces of the right to make their own tariffs
was the last of a long series of concessions that con-
began in 1 841, after responsible government had ^^^^^^^
been established as the result of the liberal
policy of Sydenham and of the democratic spirit
in which he interpreted his instructions from the
colonial office.

XIV. A Nation CreaUd out of Two Backwoods
Provinces

Political conditions in the United Provinces were Pouticai
at no time ideal. There was intense bitterness in ^^'

ditlons

the political life of Upper Canada until the clergy in the
reserves question was settled in 1854, and the 5*^*^
influence of the Family Compact was eradicated
in 1859-60. Corruption in connection with railway
legislation and railway subsidies and bonds was
abounding.^ There was much friction and jealousy

^ A detailed description of some of thesie conditions is
embodied in a report of 115 pages from a select committee of
the legislative council — a committee that in 1855 investi-
gated charges made against Francis Hincks, premier of the
United Provinces from 1851 to 1854.

C177]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

between Upper and Lower Canada over the de-
mand of Upper Canada for representation based
on population. There was, in fact, such friction,
and such instabiHty of government arising from
the system of ministries with double heads and
double majorities, that a federal union instead of
the legislative union of 1840 had become inevitable
as early as 1856.
Corrup- Elections to the legislative assembly were
**°uticai characterized by bribery, corruption, and most
heelers, of the artifices of the political boss. Speakers of
*rfdato ^^^ assembly were sometimes partisan. Sharp
Interests and discreditable manoeuvers in constitutional
practice were resorted to by at least one hard-
pressed ministry. The civil service was recruited
from political heelers, with little regard for
economy or efficiency; and special interests, intent
on using the constitutional machinery of taxation
for their own advantage, promptly entrenched
themselves in the tariffs enacted after 1858.
Develop- After the numerous amendments to the con-
^^^ stitution of 1840 made by the imperial parliament
local between 1847 and 1854, not one of these evils
conditions ^^g inherent in the system of government — in
the constitutional machinery created either by
parliament at Westminster or by the legislature
of the United Provinces. Nor were they due,
directly or indirectly, to any influence or control
exercised by the colonial office. They were all
developed by local as distinct from constitutional
conditions; and after the sweeping amendments

C178]

EVOLUTION FROM 1837 TO 1867

made at Westminster in 1854, it was easily
within the power of the legislature to remedy or
eradicate them all.

Despite the friction between Lower and Upper a demo-
Canada, and despite these blemishes, a political ^^^^ .

. .,. . ^ , . . . , political

civilization extremely democratic in character dvuiza-
was created between 1840 and 1867. With the **°"
political and constitutional opportunities that
were afforded by Great Britain to all the British
North American provinces in those years, the
legislature and the statesmen of the United
Provinces, aided by governors-general such as
Sydenham, Bagot, Elgin, Head, and Monck,
created a nation out of two backwoods provinces.

"You can mark during that period," said Agov-
Monck,^ in his farewell address to the last legisla- *"*°^!i,
ture of the United Provinces, "the firm consolida- survey
tion of your institutions, both political and °*^®
municipal. You can mark the extended settle- ments of
ment of your country, the development of your
internal resources and foreign trade, the improve-
ment and simplification of your laws, and above
all the education which the adoption of the
system of responsible government has afforded to
your statesmen in the well-tried ways of the
British constitution." 2

There was, it can be added, no exaggeration
or overstatement in these farewell words of the
last governor-general of the United Provinces.

^ Governor-general from 1861 to 1867.

^ Journals of the Legislative Council, August 15, 1866.

C 179]

1840-
1867

CHAPTER VI

THE INFLUENCES AND FORCES

THAT BROUGHT ABOUT

CONFEDERATION

Canadian, JT^ OUR distinct and easily traceable in-

and • r fluences worked to bring about Con-

American federation and the enactment of the British

North America act — the constitution of the

Dominion — by the imperial padiament in 1867.

Two of these influences were at work in

Canada. The first of them was operative in the

United Provinces; the second in the Maritime

Provinces. The third influence was potent at

Westminster; and the fourth, which aff'ected

political conditions both in Canada and at

Westminster, but especially at Westminster, was

American.

Example The American influence was developed partly

Jfl'!"°'out of the example of the United States, and

United . ^

States partly, it must be conceded, out of fear of the
United States. The example of the United
States — the success of the federal system —
stimulated the movement for confederation in
the United Provinces.^ Apprehension in England
concerning the attitude of the United States
towards British North America, especially during
and at the close of the civil war of 1 861-1865,
1 Cf. Mackenzie, 342.

[180]

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

greatly strengthened the influences at West-
minster that were favorable to any workable
plan for a union of all the provinces under British
rule from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast.^

In the Maritime Provinces the influence that union of
worked for a confederation of the British North °^t^«

. . . 1 r 1 • provinces

American provinces was the fact that m 1863- contem-
1864 the Maritime Provinces, which then had ^^^^
many interests in common, and scarcely any ism
that were antagonistic, were contemplating a
legislative union.

All these influences were at work from 1861 to Failure
1867. Two had been in existence and operating °^J«8is-
from 1858; for in that year it was shown un- union of
mistakably that the legislative union of Upper ^^^^
and Lower Canada was a failure as far as Upper Lower
Canada was concerned; and there was also an ^^^^
intimation in the speech from the throne, in the
house of lords, at Westminster, that the imperial
government would welcome a union of all the
British North American provinces.

I. The Origin of the Confederation Idea

If Great Britain was to retain the half of the con-
North American continent that remained to her *®?®^"

ation

after the American revolution. Confederation sug-
was inevitable as soon as the peace of Versailles f®^*®?.

'^ in 1783

was signed. It was urged, in fact, as early as

^ Cf. Debates on British North America Act, H. L., Febru-
ary 27, March 4, also Queen's speech at end of session, August
21, 1867.

C 181 ]

as a
rival to
United

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

1783 by Colonel Moore, a government engineer,
who under instructions from Guy Carleton,
governor of Quebec, reported on the resources
and defenses of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
A con- Moore recommended the union of the Mari-

federated ^jj^g Provinces with the territory out of which

Canada .

in 1 791 Lower and Upper Canada were carved.
He urged that by the estabhshment of uniform
states government and laws, intercourse and mutual
interests would be created; that "a great country
may yet be raised up in America"; and that
"only by union was there any likelihood of
saving what remained to Great Britain upon
the continent of America, and of building up a
formidable rival to the American states." ^
Credit All that is known of Moore is that he was a

military engineer, and that he wrote this report
in 1783; but Canadian historians credit him
with having been the first Englishman to con-
ceive of a great Canadian confederation, such as
came into being between Dominion Day, 1867,
and the great war.
A sag- A Httle more than half a century after Moore

from°'* dreamed his dream, the house of commons at
pariia- Westminster in 1837 adopted a resolution in
which was emphasized the need of some arrange-
ment between the Maritime Provinces and Lower
and Upper Canada for the joint regulation and
adjustment of interests that were common to all
the British North American provinces.^

1 Cf. Boyd, 173. * Cf. Mackenzie, 339.

[182]

accorded
to Moore

ment
in 1887

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

Durham in his report of 1838 recommended Durham's
that the bill for the union of Lower and Upper ^^^
Canada "should contain provisions by which
any or all of the other North American colonies
may, on application of the legislature, with the
consent of the two Canadas, or their united
legislature, be admitted into the union on such
terms as may be agreed on between them."

The idea of a union of all the British North An
American provinces was thus much older than ?^^^
the yoking of Lower and Upper Canada in 1840; piea for
and this union of two provinces, with nearly as ^T _
many interests which were sharply antagonistic ation
as interests which they had in common, had ^^^^^
been in existence for only a single decade when
an Upper Canadian member of the legislative
assembly — Merritt, of Lincoln — asked the
house to agree to an address to the crown for a
constitutional convention to consider a federal
union. This was in 1851, before the under-repre-
sentation of Upper Canada in the legislative
assembly had become a grievance with Canadians
west of the Ottawa River, and only seven
members voted with Merritt.

n. Popular Dissatisfaction in Upper
Canada with the Union of 1840

It was the census of 1851 that revealed that Census
Upper Canada was inadequately represented in
the legislative assembly. Experience of the
working of legislative union showed that through

[183]

of 1861

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Upper
Canada
demands
a larger
repre-
sentation

French

Canada
prevents
a redistri-
bution
of seats

Safeguards
for Upper
Canada
that

became a
boomerang

indirect taxation by which the revenues were
raised, and also through the difference in social
habits and requirements of the people of Upper
Canada and of the habitants of the French
province, Upper Canada was paying three-fourths
of the expenditures of the United Provinces.

With the revelation of these facts there began
the movement of Upper Canada for a representa-
tive system based on population. After the
sweeping and radical amendments made in 1854
at Westminster to the constitution of 1840, it
was within the power of the legislature to
remedy this grievance, and to increase the repre-
sentation of Upper Canada in the legislative
assembly.

French Canada was, however, well aware of
two facts in the history of the act of union of
1840. It knew that the assigning to Upper
Canada of as many representatives in the legisla-
tive assembly and the legislative council as were
assigned to Lower Canada was done to give the
population of British origin in the United Prov-
inces a preponderating influence in the legislature
and the government. Canadians of British origin
were to have this ascendancy, although from
1830 to 1840 the population of Upper Canada
was much less than that of Lower Canada.

French Canada also knew that the clause in
the act of union making it impossible to vary the
apportionment of members in the assembly,
except by a two-thirds vote of both the assembly

C184:

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

and the council, was intended to safeguard the
representation as determined at the union.

The leaders of French-Canadians in the legis- Lower
lature could not gainsay the census statistics of ^^^
1 85 1. Nor could it be denied that the larger part claims
of the revenue was paid by Upper Canada. But ^
French-Canadians refused to concede the claim Canada
of Upper Canada for a larger representation in
the legislature; and nothing short of another
rebellion, and another intervention by the im-
perial government similar to that of 183 7-1 840,
could have remedied the grievance of Upper
Canada, had not French Canada, as time went
on, become willing to consider a federal union,
with a legislature for each province, charged
with the administration of exclusively provincial
business.

No appeal for representation by population French
moved French Canada as long as the union ^j^^
of 1840 continued. French-Canadian leaders, taking
moreover, were so determined that nothing g*!^^
should endanger the position of their people in Bay
the legislature, that for some years they blocked ?°^F^^
all proposals for taking over the territory of the
Hudson Bay Company by the government of
the United Provinces, lest its settlement and
development should add to the political power
of Upper Canada.^

1 Cf. Mackenzie, 102.

[185]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

III. Imperial Aspects of Confederation

An At this point the difficulties between Upper

taperiai ^^^ Lower Canada on the question of representa-

endan- tion in the legislature touched an important

^®^®*^ imperial interest; for the imperial government at

this time was much concerned about the future

of the vast stretch of country lying between the

western boundary of Upper Canada and the

Rocky Mountains.

Population was pouring into the northwestern
states. Settlement was coming near the boundary
line that divides these states today from Mani-
toba and Saskatchewan; and Great Britain was
nervous lest American settlement might push
into the uninhabited prairie country of Canada,
and lest international complications might ensue.^
If the United Provinces would not, or could
not, take over responsibility for the government
and settlement of the Hudson Bay Company's
territory, its settlement presented a new and
difficult problem for the colonial office; and it
was for this reason, among others, that in 1864-
1866 the government at Westminster extended
such a welcome hand to statesmen from Canada
with proposals for a confederation of the British
North American provinces.

Old as were the suggestions for confederation,
there were great difficulties to be overcome before

1 Cf. Speech by Earl of Carnarvon, H. L., February 19,
1867.

[186]

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

the dreams of Moore, Durham and Merritt civu
could be realized. Several decades might have Z"^.

United

passed before the Dominion of Canada came states
into being, had it not been for the failure in some
important aspects of the union of 1840, and for
the civil war in the United States.

The civil war, and the international difficulties End of
it developed, raised apprehensions at Toronto, ^^^^°^
Quebec, and Ottawa, and above all at West- treaty
minster, concerning the defense of the British
North American provinces.^ Resulting from the
civil war there came threats from Washington —
threats made good in 1865 — of the denuncia-
tion of the reciprocity treaty of 1854. There
were also threats, which were not made good, of
abrogating the article in the convention of 1818
— an article which Great Britain had rigidly
insisted on at the time the convention was
made — which interdicted the maintenance of
vessels of war on the Great Lakes, and of ending
the bonding privileges which so greatly facili-
tated transport by the railways and on the
Great Lakes.

There was, moreover, the isolation of British isolation
Columbia, and its partial dependence for transport g^tish
facilities on San Francisco; and there was the Columbia
danger, which has already been alluded to, that
American settlers in the northwestern states
might look with covetous eyes on the splendid

1 Cf. Buckle, "The Life of Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of
Beaconsfield," IV, 475.

[187]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

grain-growing and ranching country in the
territory between the Lake of the Woods and the
eastern foothills of the Rocky Mountains.
Hudson The only governing power until 1869 in the
Bay Com- territory out of which since 1871 there have
tenure of been Organized the provinces of Manitoba,
^^®' Saskatchewan, and Alberta was the Hudson
Bay Company. Its tenure of authority had
long been wearing thin. The British govern-
ment dreaded any large inroad of Americans
into the country before it should be taken over
by a Canadian government, and adequately
organized for defense and civil administration.
Conditions Upper Canada had no practical concern over
*^* ^ the isolation of British Columbia. That was an

anected

au unfortunate condition that troubled only the

provinces English settlers in the Pacific coast province

and the colonial office at Westminster. But

Upper Canada was greatly interested in the

almost uninhabited regions beyond its western

boundary line. It was also practically interested

in the bonding question; and Upper Canada,

Lower Canada, and the Maritime Provinces

were directly interested in the defense of the

British North American provinces, and in the

disturbing economic changes that would result

from the denunciation by the United States of

the Elgin-Marcy treaty.

Deadlock All these Conditions, as well as the movement

to United jj^ ^Yie Maritime Provinces in the early sixties

Provinces ... .

for a legislative union, made for Confederation.

C 188 ]

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

But it was the deadlock in the United Provinces,
resulting from the inadequate representation of
Upper Canada and the instability of govern-
ments based on double majorities and double-
headed cabinets,^ that forced the question to the
front, and from 1858 made a federal union of
Upper and Lower Canada, or a union including
all the British North American provinces, the
dominant issue in Canadian poHtics.

There were many fathers of Confederation.^ Gait
Thirty-three statesmen of the United Provinces, i'^^.
the Maritime Provinces, and Newfoundland eration
were of the constitutional conventions at Char- ^*^'
lottetown and Quebec in 1864 at which the Do-
minion was created. But it was Alexander Tulloch
Gait — Gait of the epoch-making correspondence
with Newcastle over the tariffs of 1858 and
1859 — who first pushed the idea of Confederation
into the realm of practical politics at Toronto
and Quebec and also at Westminster.

In the session of 1858, before he succeeded His fear
Cayley as minister of finance. Gait outHned a °'
plan for federal union in a speech in the legislative tionof

provinces

* Cf. Francis J. Audet, "Canadian Dates and Events — by
1492-1915," 105. United

* "Confederation will stand for all time as the monument
of the work accomplished by the devotion, the unselfishness,
and the far-sighted vision of those men whom we are all proud
to call the fathers of federation. To these men and their
work we owe a yebt which we can never repay." — The Duke
of Devonshire, governor-general of Canada, at the dedication
of the new parliament house, at Ottawa, July 2, 19 17.

C189]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

assembly — a speech in which he declared, with
characteristic outspokenness, that unless such a
union were effected, the British North American
provinces would ultimately drift into the United
States.^
Attitude Edmund Walker Head, Elgin's successor as
f ri governor-general, did all in his power to forward
govern- the scheme Gait had outlined on July 6, 1858;
™®^* and the first intimation to the world at large
that the imperial government was coming into
the discussion of Confederation was an announce-
ment in the speech from the throne in the legisla-
tive council of the United Provinces, at the end
of the session of 1858, that the Maritime
Provinces and the imperial government, were
about to be invited to discuss, with representatives
of the United Provinces, the principles on which
a "bond of a federal character, uniting the
provinces of British North America, may perhaps
hereafter be practicable." 2

IV. Jn Appeal to Whitehall
Confed- In the interval between the end of the session
qlTe^tion ^^ ^858 and the beginning of that of 1859, Gait
for and Cartier were at Whitehall in the interest

theS^*^** of the new movement. Representatives of the
selves Maritime Provinces had been at the colonial
office in the previous year, in the interest of a
union of these provinces. They had been told
by Labouchere, secretary for the colonies in the
1 Cf. Boyd, 174. 2 Ibid., 175.

[190]

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

Palmerston administration of 1 855-1 858, that
union was a question for the provinces them-
selves, and that no obstacles would be thrown in
their way by the imperial government.

In October, 1858, when Gait and Cartier were Buiwer
in London, the Derby administration of 1858- ^^°^
1859 was in power, with Buiwer Lytton as colonial
colonial secretary. It was Buiwer Lytton who ^*^^®**^
piloted the act creating representative govern-
ment for British Columbia through the house of
commons. It was Buiwer Lytton also who was
responsible for the paragraph in the Queen's
speech at the end of the session of 1858 expressing
the hope that the new colony on the Pacific
coast would be but one step in the process by
which the British dominions in North America
might be peopled in an unbroken chain from the
Atlantic to the Pacific by a loyal population of
subjects of the British crown.

Gait and Cartier laid the case for Confederation Case for
before Buiwer Lytton in a memorandum dated ^°^^^
October 23, 1858 — one of the really important
documents in the constitutional history of the
Dominion. The act of union of 1840 and its
provisions regarding representation in the legisla-
tive assembly were recalled. The colonial secre-
tary was reminded that in 1840 Lower Canada
possessed a much larger population than Upper
Canada, and that in the first decade of the union
representation as determined by the act had led
to no difficulties.

C191]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Conflict But since that period — continued the memorandum —

between the growth of population has been more rapid in the west-
pper an ^^^ section — in Upper Canada — and claims are now made on
Canada behalf of its inhabitants for giving them representation in
the legislature in proportion to their numbers. These claims,
involving, it is believed, a most serious interference with the
^ principles on which union was based, have been and are

being strenuously resisted by Lower Canada. The result is
shown by an agitation fraught with great danger to the
peaceful and harmonious working of our constitutional
system, and consequently detrimental to the progress of the
provinces.
Only one The necessity of providing a remedy for a state of things

remedy that is yearly becoming worse, and of allaying feelings that
are being daily aggravated by the contentions of political
parties — continued the memorandum — has impressed the
advisers of her majesty's representative in Canada with
the importance of seeking for such a mode of dealing with these
difficulties as may forever remove them. In this view it has
appeared to them advisable to consider how far the union of
Lower with Upper Canada could be rendered essentially
federative in combination with the provinces of New Bruns-
wick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island, together with
such other territories as it may be desirable to incorporate
with confederation from the possessions of the crown in
British North America.^

Relations The interests that the Maritime Provinces
Sl ^^ then shared with the United Provinces were only

Maritime -'

Provinces thosc that atosc out of the fact that all five prov-
Jfl _, inces were on the same continent, and were

United

Provinces under the same crown. Otherwise the United
Provinces and the "provinces down by the
sea" stood to each other almost in the relation
of foreign states.

1 Boyd, 176.
[192]

and
currency

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

Hostile customs houses guarded their frontiers, xariflfs
Tariffs for protection in the United Provinces,
and tariffs for revenue in New Brunswick, Nova
Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfound-
land, choked the channels of intercolonial trade.
There was no uniformity in banking. There
was no common system of weights and measures;
and there was no identity of postal service.
The currency differed. The sovereign and the
American dollar were legal tender in the United
Provinces. British and American coins were
also current in New Brunswick. In Nova
Scotia, Peruvian, Mexican, and Columbian dollars
were legal tender; while in Prince Edward Island
the complexity of current moneys and of their
relative values was even greater.^

In the Gait and Cartier memorial, Bulwer Progress
Lytton, the colonial secretary, was reminded of ^^^^^^
these conditions. He was reminded that each North
colony was distinct in government, customs, ^™^2*^
industries, and legislation.

To each other — continued the memorandum — no greater
facilities are extended than to any foreign state, and the
only common tie is that which binds all to the British crown.
This state of things is considered neither promotive of the
physical prosperity of all, nor of that moral union which
ought to be possessed in the presence of the powerful con-
federation of the United States.

* Cf. Speech by Earl of Carnarvon, H. L., February 19,
1867.

C 193 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

V. Dread of Annexation by the United
States

Attitude Gait, in his speech in the legislative assembly

^^^* in 1858, had urged confederation to ward off

Cartier annexation. Cartier had no admiration of Ameri-

towards ^^^ political institutions. He never concealed

United ...

States his dislike of them; ^ and the attitude of Gait
and Cartier towards the United States is ex-
pressed in the memorandum of October 13. "It
is in the power of the imperial government by
sanctioning a confederation of these provinces,"
they wrote, "to constitute a dependency of the
empire, valuable in time of peace and powerful
in the event of war, forever removing the fear
that these colonies may ultimately serve to
swell the power of another nation." ^

A con- The request to the colonial secretary was that

vention ^j^^ British government would authorize a con-
proposed , "

vention of delegates from the Maritime Provinces

and the United Provinces to consider a federative
union — the convention to report on the prin-
ciples on which such a union might properly be
based.
New Only Nova Scotia and Newfoundland had

^Tf ^ ^ shown any active interest in the movement in

wick and •' /« i tv /r • • r» •

Prince 1 857 for a union of the Maritime Provinces.

SlLd*^ Bulwer Lytton communicated this fact to the

hold aloof representatives of the United Provinces. "We

think," he added, "that we should be wanting in

1 Cf. Boyd, 356-357. » lh%d,y 177.

C 194]

FORCES THAT BROUGHT CONFEDERATION

proper consideration for those governments if
we were to authorize, without previous knowledge
of their views, a meeting of delegates from the
executive councils, and thus commit them to
preliminary steps towards the settlement of a
momentous question of which they have not yet
signified their assent to the principle."

The colonial secretary communicated the views Govem-
of the United Provinces to the governments at u^^*/*
Fredericton, Halifax, Charlottetown, and St. Provinces
John's; and when Gait and Carrier returned to ^f^^
Quebec in the winter of 1858, the cabinet of the move
United Provinces also put itself in communication
with these governments, and invited them to
take such action as they deemed expedient.
Nothing immediate resulted from these com-
munications; but they gave an impetus to the
movement, and they were the first practical steps
in the direction of Confederation.

The next year, 1859, the Liberals of Upper a less
Canada held a convention at Toronto which was ^

DiuOUS

attended by 570 delegates. Confederation was scheme
discussed; but the outlook for a comprehensive ^^^^j.
scheme was then so unpromising that the con- eration
vention decided that the most practical and
immediate remedy for the constitutional griev-
ances of Upper Canada was the organization of
two local governments, and the creation of a
joint authority to control interests common to
Upper and Lower Canada.

Brown, the leader of the Liberals of Upper

C 195]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Canada,^ formulated this plan in the session of
the legislature of i860. He submitted two reso-
lutions. One declared that the union of 1840
was a failure, that it had resulted in great politi-
cal abuses and universal dissatisfaction. The
other called for an end to the legislative union,
and the organization of the two provinces on the
lines urged at the Toronto convention of Sep-
tember, 1859. Both resolutions were defeated
by large majorities, and in i860 no progress
towards confederation or towards redress of the
grievances of Upper Canada was apparent.

^ "George Brown was loved by many people who never
saw his face, nor heard his voice. Back in the townships,
where the Globe carried its weekly message, he had the
authority of a prophet. He created the Liberal party of
Upper Canada, as Sir Wilfred Laurier has fashioned the
Liberal party of to-day." — Sir John Willison, ** Some Politi-
cal Leaders in the Canadian Federation," in "The Federa-
tion of Canada — 1867-1917," p. 54.

C196]

eratlon

CHAPTER VII

THE QUEBEC CONVENTION AND THE
BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

THERE was a general election in the United a
Provinces in 1861. It resulted in the *^*""°"
govem-

overthrow of the Cartier-Macdonald government, ment
But in the years from 1861 to 1864 there was ^®^8®<*
instability of political conditions in the United Confed-
Provinces that was without precedent in the
English-speaking world. There were three gov-
ernments in this short period; and in June,
1864, a deadlock would have ensued had not
Brown ^ and the Liberals supported the Tache-
Macdonald administration in return for a guar-
antee for the settlement of the constitutional
diflSculty.

* " Brown was leader of the Clear Grit party, and second
to Macdonald (if to him) in personal influence." — Riddell,
"Constitution of Canada," Note xxii, 49. "Dunkin, a
member of the legislature from Broome, said that the attempt
to overcome the deadlock by the scheme of Confederation
reminded him of the two boys who upset the canoe. Tom
said, 'Bill, can you pray.?' Bill admitted that he could not
think of any prayer that was suitable to the occasion.
Tom's rejoinder, according to Dunkin, was earnest, but not
parliamentary. He said, 'Well, something has to be done,
and that — soon.'" — Willison, "Some Political Leaders in
the Canadian Federation," 51.

C 197]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Or end A coalition government was formed, with

legislative gj-Qwn and two of his colleagues of the Liberal

union

of 1840 party as members of the cabinet. It was a
coalition based on a written agreement that
(i) the government would address themselves to
the negotiations for a confederation of the British
North American provinces; and (2) in the event
of failure in this undertaking, they would intro-
duce, in the next legislative session, the federal
principle for the United Provinces alone, "coupled
with such provisions as would permit the Mari-
time Provinces to be hereafter incorporated into
the Canadian system." ^
Question It was in June, 1864, that this great forward
^ step was taken. Earlier in the year the pro-

Maritime posals of 1857 for a legislative union of the
Provinces Maritime Provinces had been revived. The

revived

legislatures of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and
Prince Edward Island passed resolutions authoriz-
ing their governments to send representatives to
a convention to be held at Charlottetown in
September, 1864. Charles Tupper, at this time
a doctor at Amherst, Nova Scotia, but from
1864 to 1901 one of the foremost Canadian
statesmen, was the leading spirit in the union
movement in the Maritime Provinces.^

^ Mackenzie, 90.

2 "Tupper was bold, confident, dominant. He never
knew the call to retreat. He had courage for any combat
and resource for any emergency. History will find and
point out blemishes in the public career of Sir Charles

[198]

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

con-
vention

The Charlottetown convention met on Sep- Char-
tember i. The government of the United '°*^®*°^
Provinces, without waiting for an invitation,
sent a delegation to Charlottetown to urge a
confederation of all the British provinces. The
delegation was cordially received, and the result
was a second convention held at Quebec in
October.

All the provinces, including Newfoundland,
were represented at Quebec. The convention
was in session behind closed doors from October
lo to October 28.^ It agreed on a federal as
distinct from a legislative union; and from the
historic Quebec convention, the first constitu-
tional convention in the history of the British
Empire, with the exception of the conventions
that preceded the union of England and Scotland
in 1707, were issued the famous seventy-four
confederation resolutions.

Quebec

Con-
vention

Tupper, but he gave the state physical vigour, intellectual
power, and constructive energy. As for the rest, 'his great-
ness, not his littleness, concerns mankind.'" — Willison,
"Some Political Leaders in the Canadian Federation," 59.

^ Correspondents representing Canadian, British and
American newspapers assembled at Quebec to report the
proceedings of the convention. In answer to a memorial
for facilities for reporting the correspondents were told,
in a letter from the secretary, H. Bernard, that no com-
munications of the proceedings of the convention could be
made until the delegates were enabled definitely to report
the issue of their deliberations to the governments of the
respective provinces. — Joseph Pope, "Confederation Docu-

II.

C199]

or
Dominion

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

British These resolutions having been adopted by the

America legislatures of the United Provinces, Nova
act Scotia, and New Brunswick,^ they were embodied

in the British North America act which was
passed by the imperial parliament. The act
received the royal assent on March 29, and the
Dominion came into existence on July i, 1867.
Kingdom There are 145 sections and five schedules in
the British North America act. The act was
the creation of the statesmen of the British
North American provinces, with few suggestions
and little help from the colonial office or the
imperial parliament. There were statesmen in
British North America — John Alexander Mac-
donald, in particular — who would have liked
to give to the new confederation the title of the
Kingdom of Canada. But Lord Derby, who was
premier of the Conservative administration of
1 866-1 868 that carried the act through parlia-
ment, was careful of the susceptibilities of the
United States, and suggested Dominion instead
of Kingdom.

I. American Opposition to Confederation

Opposi- In 1866-67 ^^ acutely disturbing contention

UnitS*^^ over the compensation demanded by the United
states States from Great Britain for the losses sustained

to Con-

federa- 1 Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island withdrew from

the negotiations after the Quebec conference, although
Prince Edward Island came into confederation in 1873.

[ 200 ]

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

by American shipping and trade from the
depredations of the Alabama, a cruiser built at
Birkenhead, for the government of the confed-
erate states, had not been settled. There was,
moreover, some opposition to Confederation in
the United States, particularly at Augusta, the
capital of Maine, and also in the senate and
house of representatives at Washington.

The legislature of Maine adopted, and trans- Alarm
mitted to Washington, resolutions originating Jj^ j.
with the federal relations committee of the Maine
assembly, in which Confederation was condemned
on the ground that it would establish monarchi-
cal government on the North American con-
tinent. In its alarm the legislature at Augusta
overlooked the fact that a legislature, organized
under the monarchical system, had existed in
Nova Scotia for more than a century before the
Charlottetown and Quebec conventions of 1864;
and that in 1867 there were no fewer than five
legislatures on the North American continent
that were opened and closed with speeches
from the throne.

The preamble to the Augusta resolutions RepubU-
disclaimed any desire to accelerate the progress ^ ,
of republican principles in the British North and
American provinces. The conviction was ex- ^^^'
pressed that "republican institutions should
never be assumed by any people until the whole
population has been inured to habits of self-
government, and thoroughly imbued with the

[ 201 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

principle of implicit obedience to law, whenever
that law is the declared will of a majority."
Objection The first resolution declared that "any at-

MrThTcai ^^"^P^ ^^ ^^^ P^^^ of ^^^ imperial government
govern- of Great Britain to establish monarchical govern-
"^®'^* ment in North America, or to place a vice-
royalty, by act of parliament, over her several
North American provinces, would be an implied
infraction of those principles of government
which this nation has assumed to maintain upon
this continent."
Remon- By the second of these resolutions the people

from*^^ of Maine, "deeply interested in the preservation
Washing- of peace, and of friendly relations with the people
*ested^' of British North America," respectfully ap-
pealed to the United States government "to
interpose its legitimate influence, in friendly
and earnest remonstrance with the British
government, against establishing any system
of government in North America the influence
of which would endanger the friendly relations of
the people of the British provinces with the
people of the United States."
Banks, of Copies of the resolutions were transmitted
^uletts ^y ^^^ governor of Maine to President Johnson,
urges and to each house of congress. In the house
acuon ^£ representatives,^ Banks, of Massachusetts, a
former chairman of the committee on foreign
aff"airs, and a soldier of much distinction in the
civil war, called attention to the resolutions, and
1 March 8, 1867.
[ 202 ]

mittee
desired

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

made a motion demanding the immediate ap-
pointment, by the speaker, of the standing com-
mittee on foreign affairs. Urgency was pleaded
"in view of events transpiring on the northern
frontier," and the need for "considering the for-
eign relations of the United States."

"It is not intended," said Banks, in asking a com-
the house to adopt his motion, "to present at
this time any protest against Confederation of
the British provinces. The resolutions which I
have read, from the state of Maine, were read
merely for information. All I ask is that a
committee shall be appointed, to which any
instructions, in reference to this matter, may be
given by the house."

Blaine, of Maine — James Gillespie Blaine, "a
afterwards secretary of state and candidate of ^®fp®<^*-

, *ul pro-

the Republican party for the presidency in test"
1884 — deprecated any action by congress,
and reminded Banks that the matter "certainly
could not go beyond a mere protest." "The
resolutions of the state of Maine," Blaine added,
"do not contemplate any positive action. They
contemplate merely a respectful protest."

Banks, however, was persistent. His object The per-
was the immediate appointment of the com- 01^*3^3
mittee on foreign affairs, with an instruction
to consider the resolutions from Augusta, and
report to the house. "This question of Con-
federation," he said, in answer to Blaine, "affects
not alone the interests of the British provinces.

[203]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

It affects our interests also; and it is certainly
proper that its effects upon the interest of this
country should be considered. At least we
should have an organized committee that shall
have power to consider its bearing upon our
interests, whether it be for the purpose of making
a protest or for more decided action. It is
necessary that we should ascertain the full effect
of this measure when consummated, and that
it should be understood."

Had the committee been named, Banks would
probably have resumed the position of chairman,
and as such would have been charged with the
duty of drawing up the report, if the Augusta
resolutions had been sent to the committee
with an instruction.
A futile The house, however, took no action in the
move- direction desired by Banks; and in the senate^

meat in .

the sen- an attempt made by Simon Cameron, of Penn-
*** sylvania, was equally futile. Cameron was

desirous that the committee on foreign relations
should be instructed (i) to inquire "upon the
facts in respect to the design of foreign powers
to impose their systems of monarchical govern-
ment upon the people of this continent; " and (2)
to report "what action, if any, our government
should take to avert the inevitable consequences
of the further prosecution of such designs, and
to maintain for ourselves and for our posterity
the fundamental principles and objects of the
1 March 9.
[204]

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

original settlers of our country and the founders
of the republic."

Cameron also desired that the committee
should be "authorized and empowered to take
such measures as they may judge expedient and
necessary to collect and submit the facts for the
information of the government and the people."

Obviously the senator from Pennsylvania No men-
was anxious for a manifesto against Confed- ^^°i
eration. Few members of the senate shared eration
Cameron's apprehensions regarding the British *?
North America act; and no new duties were son's
thrown upon the committee on foreign relations ^^'^
as a result of the resolution of which he gave
notice. President Johnson, Lincoln's successor,
did not even mention the Confederation of
Canada in the customary survey of the foreign
relations of the United States in his annual
message to congress on December 3, 1867.^

These discussions in congress came after the What
British North America bill had been introduced *^""

enced

in the house of lords, but before it had been Derby
read a third time in the house of commons.
They could not have influenced Derby in offer-
ing the suggestion that the word "dominion"
be substituted for "kingdom" in deference to
American susceptibilities. But Derby and his
son, Lord Stanley, who was secretary of state
for foreign affairs, were only too well aware of

* Cf. Congressional Globe y March 8 and 9, 1867. James
D. Richardson, Messages of the Presidents, VI, 558-581.

[205]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the extreme tension over the Alabama claims,
and of the outbursts it was provoking in the
Dominion United States. So were the Fathers of Con-
of Canada fg^jg^^tion who had carried the bill to London.
They accepted the premier's suggestion made
before the bill was introduced in the house of
lords; ^ and when the Earl of Carnarvon, the
colonial secretary, announced the title of the
new Confederation to the house of lords, at
second reading of the bill, he added, "It is a
designation which is a graceful tribute on the
part of the colonies to the monarchical principle
under which they have lived and prospered,
a principle which they trust to transmit unim-
paired to their children's children." ^

II. The Attitude of Parliament, the Colonial Office^
and the People of Great Britain towards the
New Dominion

Parliament There was no contention over the bill, either
BWtish ^" ^^^ house of lords where it was introduced, or
North in the house of commons. It was before the
America ^Quge of lords Only four days.^ The house of
commons spent no longer time on it.^ Additional
schedules were added by Adderley, under-
secretary for the colonies, when the bill was in
committee. But only one amendment — little

1 Cf. George M. Wrong, "The Creation of the Federal
System in Canada," "The Federation of Canada," 22, 23.

2 H. L, Debates, February 19, 1867.

3 February 19, 22, 25, 26. * February 27, March 4, 7, 8.

[ 206 ]

act

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

more than a parliamentary draftsman's amend-
ment — was made to the bill. This was the only-
amendment made in either the lords or the
commons to an act which in the Pickering edition
of the British statutes extends to thirty-three
closely printed pages.

One member of the house of commons, Roebuck, No
of Sheffield, regretted that the act did not create s"p^«™«
a supreme court, with functions similar to those
of the supreme court at Washington. Cardwell,
who had been secretary for the colonies in the
Whig administration of 1 859-1 866, and who
from the front opposition bench helped Adderley
to pilot the bill through committee, answered
this objection. **As matters now stand," he
said, "if the legislature acted ultra vires the
question would first be raised in the colonial law
courts, and would ultimately be settled by the
privy council. No doubt it was a defect. But
the point had undergone consideration by the
delegates, who thought it would be better to
leave things in this state." ^

1 H. C. Debates, March 4, 1867. In the early years of
Confederation, when there were many questions at issue
between the dominion government and the governments
of the provinces, there was a movement dt Ottawa in favor
of the creation of a supreme court. "It is worthy of con-
sideration," wrote Sir John Young, governor-general from
1868 to 1869, to the Earl of Granville, then secretary of state
for the colonies, "whether it would not be expedient to
establish a tribunal with powers analogous to those of the
supreme court of the United States, for the decision of all

[207]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Fathers of
Confed-
eration

Framers
of consti-
tution
given a
free hand

Viscount Monck had succeeded Head in 1866
as governor-general. Monck, like Head, did
all that was constitutionally possible to forward
Confederation, and he has a distinguished place
in Canadian history for his services in the crisis
of 1 864-1 867. But the task of framing the
resolutions on which the British North America
act was based — the task so successfully per-
formed at Quebec in October, 1 864 — was
achieved by the thirty-three men who in Canada
today are always spoken of with veneration as
the Fathers of Confederation.^

There was no steering of the Quebec conven-
tion by any representative of the colonial ojffice.
About this time an act was passed by the imperial
parliament empowering all legislatures in colonies
with representative and responsible government
to amend their constitutions as they deemed
expedient. At Westminster, Confederation was
regarded as a matter which concerned the British
North American provinces. Consequently the
questions of constitutional law and conflict of jurisdiction."
"I see no reason," wrote Granville, on May 8, 1869, "for the
establishment of such a tribunal. Any question of this kind
could be entertained and decided by the local courts, subject
to an appeal to the judicial committee of the privy council;
and it does not appear in what respect this mode of determi-
nation is likely to be inadequate or unsatisfactory." — Ses-
sional papers of Canada, 1870, No. 35, 4-5.

1 A complete list of the Fathers of Confederation, with the
names of the provinces they represented at the Quebec con-
vention, is given on pages 121-22 of Audet's "Canadian His-
torical Dates and Events."

[ 208 ]

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT

Fathers of Confederation were given a free hand.
Their mission at Quebec was to agree on a plan
which would bring the provinces into union, and
they went about their great task with the confi-
dent feeling that their plan would be promptly
accepted by the colonial office and by parliament
at Westminster.

At the Quebec convention the United Provinces Fathers
were represented by twelve delegates; Nova ?nfd
Scotia by five; New Brunswick by seven; Prince eration
Edward Island by seven; and Newfoundland by
two. Of these thirty-three delegates, the men
who achieved greatest distinction from their
part in bringing about Confederation, and from
their subsequent careers in the political life of
the Dominion, were Alexander Tulloch Gait,
George Brown, John Alexander Macdonald, and
Oliver Mowat, of Ontario; George Etienne
Cartier and Thomas Darcy McGee, of Quebec;
Charles Tupper, of Nova Scotia; and Samuel
Leonard Tilley, of New Brunswick.

England watched with appreciative interest No party
the conventions in Charlottetown and Quebec *^°*'°'
which led up to Confederation. At Westminster over
the British North America bill aroused no party ^' ^' ^'
controversies. At this time the people of the west-
United Kingdom were engrossed by the fortunes ™^^*®^
of the bill of the Derby government extending
the parliamentary franchise in the boroughs,
— the first extension of the electoral franchise
since 1832, — and, moreover, in 1867 the era of

[ 209 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

popular indifference to oversea possessions had
not yet come to an end.
Popular The popular attitude towards Confederation
atmud© ^^g ^gjl expressed by the Times, in its survey
Britain of the year. "India and the colonies," reads a
c^? paragraph in this survey, "have enjoyed an
eration Unbroken tranquillity. The British provinces of
North America have formally assumed the title
of the Dominion of Canada, and the experiment
of confederation or union promises favorably.
The colonial office, once the most onerous depart-
ment in the imperial government, is now, in
great measure, relieved of its legislative and
administrative functions." ^
Confed- How the Creation of the Dominion was regarded

from°'^ by the Derby-Disraeli government may be
point of judged from the queen's speech at the end of
Derb°- ^^^ session of the imperial parliament of 1867.
Disraeu "The act for the union of the British North
American provinces," it read, "is the final
accomplishment of a scheme long contemplated,
whereby these colonies, now combined in the
Dominion, may be expected not only to gain
additional strength for the purposes of defense
against external aggression, but may be united
among themselves by fresh ties of mutual interest,
and attached to the mother-country by the only
bonds which can effectually secure important
dependencies, those of loyalty to the crown and
attachment to the British connection." ^

^ Annual Summaries Reprinted from the Times, I, 266.
2 H. L. Debates, August 21, 1867.

[210]

ment

CHAPTER VIII

THE DOMINION A FEDERAL
UNION

CONFEDERATION involved quite impor- changes
tant changes in political organization for ^y„^
the provinces which came under the terms of the organ-
British North America act — Ontario, Quebec, ^^^^^'^ «'

^- provinces

Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward
Island, and British Columbia. These changes
were necessary because each province had thence-
forward to elect two groups of parliamentary-
representatives; one for the Dominion house of
commons, and the other for the provincial legisla-
ture; and also because each of the provinces at
Confederation ceded some of its powers to the
Dominion government.

After Confederation the relations of the colonial colonial
office in London were only with the government °®^®
at Ottawa, and not with the five provincial changes
capitals, as in the period from 1846 to 1867. Jf
Except for this fact, and for the fact that after eration
1878 an end was made in practice to the reserva-
tion of bills by the governor-general,^ it cannot be
said that there was any change in the relations
between the government in Canada and the im-
perial government at Westminster.

1 Cf. Z, A. Lash, "The Working of Federal Institutions
in Canada." — "The Federation of Canada," 80-85.

[211]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Few new Power was given in the British North America
??!!!,?♦« act to the Dominion parHament to create new

accrue to ^ ...

Dominion provinces out of the territories lying between the
Great Lakes and the Rocky Mountains — a
power which was exercised in 1870, when Mani-
toba was organized as a province/ and again in
1905 when Saskatchewan and Alberta were
created. Otherwise it cannot be said that any
additional freedom or any important new powers
accrued to Canada at Confederation.
Why In the period between 1841 and 1867, as has

TOWCTs^ been shown in the preceding pages, the govern-
ment at Whitehall had, sometimes promptly
and cordially, sometimes tardily and grudgingly,
conceded everything that had been asked by the
United Provinces and the Maritime Provinces.
It had conceded so much, and had obtained so
little in return, that in September, 1866, when
the Derby government was faced with the
problem of the defense of the British North
American provinces, Disraeli, who was then
chancellor of the exchequer, deemed that the
time had come for reconsidering the position
of the British government in relation to these
outlying portions of the empire. "We must,'*
he wrote to Derby, "consider our Canadian
position, which is most illegitimate. An army

^ Note also an act respecting the establishment of prov-
inces in the Dominion of Canada, which received the royal
assent on June 29, 1871. — British Statutes, 34 and 35 Vict.,
C.78.

[212]

THE DOMINION A FEDERAL UNION

maintained in a country which does not permit
us even to govern it! What an anomaly!" ^

Long before Confederation the British North
American provinces had secured nearly all the es-
sentials of autonomy. They had obtained nearly
all the powers they could ask or expect, if they
were to remain of the British Empire and under
the British crown. They all enjoyed representa-
tive and responsible government. Each since 1859
had been almost completely master of its own
fiscal system, although only Ontario and Quebec
had used this power to levy protective duties on
imports from the United Kingdom. All, except
British Columbia, had enjoyed the right of
reciprocal trade with the United States, and had
received from the United States, in return for
adequate concessions made by the United Prov-
inces and the Maritime Provinces, tariff con-
cessions which were denied by the United States
to Great Britain.

The imperial government in 1 850-1 854 had
greatly exerted itself through its minister at
Washington, and through Elgin, the governor-
general, to secure reciprocal trade between the
United States and the United Provinces, the
Maritime Provinces, and Newfoundland. But
the terms and conditions of the treaty were left
to the statesmen of the provinces to determine
as seemed best for the interests of the provinces;
and so far as the British government was con-

provinces

before
Confed-
eration

Partial

treaty-
making
power
exercised
by

provinces
inl8M

1 Buckle, IV, 476.

C213]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

cerned the treaty might have been continued
indefinitely so long as the British provinces found
reciprocity to their advantage, as they un-
doubtedly did from 1854 to 1866.^
Fewer All the ptovinces before Confederation pos-

*^*™*^" sessed the power to amend their constitutions as

tions to . .

governors- their legislatures might deem advisable. Before
general Confederation there had also been far-reachins;

after IMl j-^ • r i • • •

modincations 01 the instructions given to
governors-general and governors on their appoint-
ment to the capitals of the provinces. These
modifications were necessary owing to the large
measure of home rule enjoyed by all the provinces
between 1841 and 1867.
Fewer The classes of bills that might be reserved for

transmission to the colonial office before approval
by the governor-general, or the governors of
British Columbia, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
and Prince Edward Island, had, in consequence
of the larger measure of home rule, also been
much restricted, thereby increasing the powers
of the legislatures and the authority of the
cabinets. There were, therefore, few new powers
to be asked from the imperial government by
the Fathers of Confederation.
Powers The fullness of the concessions to the old

accruing gj-j^isj^ Notth American provinces was made
Dominion obvious by half a century's experience of the
1867 to working of the British North America act.
1914 1 Qf Porritt, "Sixty Years of Protection in Canada,"

79-118.
[214]

bUls
reserved

THE DOMINION A FEDERAL UNION

From 1867 to the outbreak of the war in 1914,
the imperial government was even more ready-
to make concessions than it had been from 1840
to Confederation. The growth and development
of Canada created new needs, needs which had
not existed when there were not more than
two or three million people in all the British
North American provinces. But in these forty-
seven years — 1867 to 1914 — the Dominion
had sought, had had bestowed on her, or had
asserted, only six rights or powers which had not
been enjoyed by the United Provinces and the
Maritime Provinces between 1859 and 1867.

The rights thus obtained by the Dominion Treaty-
between 1867 and 1914 were (i) the right to "'^^'^
make her own tidewater coastwise navigation fuUy
laws — a right first exercised in 1870;^ (2) the ^^'^
right of the Dominion cabinet to veto a nomina- in i907
tion to the office of governor-general — a right
that has existed at least since 1882^; (3) the right
of the Dominion to direct representation on the
judicial committee of the privy council at White-
hall— a right first exercised in 1897, when Sir
Henry Strong, then chief justice of Canada, took
his seat on the judicial committee; (4) the right
of the Dominion to decide whether it will be a
party to treaties made by Great Britain, a right

^ The United Provinces were conceded the right to make
their own inland coastwise navigation laws in 1847.
* Cf. Bruce, II, 205.

[215]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

enjoyed since 1872; ^ (5) the right of the Dominion
to make her own immigration laws, and to exclude
paupers and other undesirables from the United
Kingdom or elsewhere in the British Empire —
a right first asserted and exercised in 1904; and
(6) the right of the Dominion to appoint her own
plenipotentiaries for the negotiation of commercial
treaties and conventions — a right partially
conceded as early as 1870, and fully conceded by
the imperial government in 1907 .^

I. The Cost and Advantages of Federal Union

Mac- The British North America act of 1867 estab-

doimid's ijgj^gj ^ federal as distinct from a legislative

prefer- ^ =»

ence for union. Macdonald, one of the Fathers of Con-
I^on**^^* federation, who was the first premier of the

* At the present time the British government never nego-
tiates a treaty without putting in a stipulation that this
treaty does not apply to Canada, or any of the self-governing
dominions, unless they are willing to be bound by it. — Speech
by Sir Wilfred Laurier at Simcoe, Ontario, August 15, 191 1.

2 It may be briefly noted that growing out of the war, and
out of the prompt and self-sacrificing part that Canada and
the other oversea dominions took in the defense of the empire
and of civilization, the Dominion of Canada, the Common-
wealth of Australia, the Dominion of New Zealand, and the
Union of South Africa were in 1916 claiming a part in formu-
lating the foreign policy of the empire. (Cf. Quarterly Re-
view, July, 19 16, 266-282.) It was urged that foreign policy
and imperial defense must no longer be determined by the
cabinet which is chosen only from the British parliament,
and maintained in power by a majority in the house of
commons at Westminster.

[216]

THE DOMINION A FEDERAL UNION

Dominion, would have preferred a legislative
union;' and Macdonald did not lack support for
this preference in the legislature of the United
Provinces. Most of the advocates of legislative
union urged it on the ground of economy.

Had such a union been possible, economy case
might have resulted; for with nine provincial '^^
legislatures, and as many provincial capitals and lative
governments, in addition to the Dominion par- "°*°"
liament, the Dominion government, and the
Dominion capital, Canada, on the basis of its
population and its normal expenditures on de-
fence, is the most expensively governed country
in the English-speaking world.

A legislative union might have greatly hin- Eastern
dered the development of political civilization in ^^
the newer provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Canada
and Alberta. East and west are even more
accentuated in Canada — the difference is more
obvious — than in the United States. As regards
political thought and tendencies, a Canadian
from any one of the four provinces east of the
Ottawa River enters into another world when he
crosses the "Bridge," and settles in rural Mani-
toba, Saskatchewan, or Alberta.

* "Federalism in 1861 had received a staggering blow
by the apparent breakdown of the American union and the
beginning of the civil war. This breakdown so impressed
the mind of Macdonald that he despaired of Federalism,
and had fixed his attention on a unitary system like that
of the United Kingdom." — George M. Wrong, "The Crea-
tion of the Federal System in Canada," 14-15.

[217]

ment

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Peculiar A legislative union with a house of commons
^^Ime^^ and senate, controlled by majorities from the
provinces five provinces east of the Great Lakes, would have
been a perpetual brake on the three prairie
provinces. It would have been a hindrance for
these provinces, on which in the second decade
of the twentieth century the material prosperity
of all Canada largely depended.^
Taxation During their rapid development from 1905 to
not only* 19^4' ^^e prairie provinces acted on the convic-
functions tion that taxation and police are not the only
o govern- fuj^^tions of government. They developed poli-
cies in regard to public utilities — grain elevators,
street-car lines, telephone systems, and water,
light, and power undertakings — more in accord
with English and Scottish precedents than with
the precedents of eastern Canada or of the United
States.
Federal Federal union has been costly and is still

^^ costly to Canada, in view of its enormous area
its cost to and its comparatively small and scattered popu-
Canada lotion. Federal union has its inconveniences
arising from some of the direct methods of taxa-
tion in use in the various provinces, and the
lack of uniformity as regards bankruptcy, usury,
and other laws directly affecting commerce. But

^ "The creation of western Canada is the most splendid
achievement of our life since 1867. The hope of that great
lone land has been realized beyond expectation." — R. A. Fal-
coner (president of the University of Toronto), "The Quality
of Canadian Life," in "The Federation of Canada," 120.

[218]

THE DOMINION A FEDERAL UNION

no student of the political and economic and
social development of Canada since 1867 — no
student who can survey the various needs and
economic and social characteristics of the nine
provinces of the Dominion — will deny that
federal union has been, and is, worth all that
it has cost, that it is costing, and that it will
cost. Nor will he desire that Macdonald had
carried a union on the lines of his first plan and
wishes.

A legislative union might today be possible Legisia-
for the prairie provinces, with little interference ^0^31^
with the federal system. A legislative union, Canada
it has long been contended, is possible for the ^^^^^
Maritime Provinces, and such a union might be
much to their advantage. But experience from
1 841 to 1867, and from 1867 to the jubilee year
of Confederation, has shown that a legislative
union was never desirable for the Dominion.^

^ In the Mail of Toronto, of January 6, 1880, there was
a review of twelve years' working of the system of govern-
ment that was established in 1867. "The local system,"
it read, "has been in existence only twelve years. During
that time it has, on the whole, worked well. Certainly it
will not be contended that the business of the province of
Ontario would have been transacted as well or more cheaply
by a legislative union. The bitter experiences of the politi-
cal vendetta that rent Upper and Lower Canada, and made
the union of 1841 a grim satire on unity, ought to satisfy
every thinking man that such a form of government is not
suited for a country of mixed races. It is tolerably certain,
indeed, that if one parliament had to deal with the local as
well as the general interests of the seven provinces, the work

[219]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

II. The Forces against a Legislative Union

Quebec Howevcr desirable legislative union might have

ouHor seemed to the advocates of economy, it was a
federal plan which in 1 864-1 867 could never have been
^^^^ carried. Quebec would hear of nothing but a
federal union. The attitude of the Maritime
Provinces was the same as that of Quebec. More-
over, much as British Columbia desired railway
and telegraph lines from the Atlantic to the
Pacific — public utilities of supreme importance
politically, economically, and socially, which it
could obtain only by union with eastern Canada
— its political history from 1850 to 1867 warrants
the assumption that the Pacific coast province,
with its almost exclusively English population,
and its dread of some of the political, racial,
and religious conditions that had developed and
become rooted in Ontario and Quebec, might
have long held aloof if a legislative union had been
established in 1867.
No choice George Brown, leader of the Liberal party of
open to Upper Canada, told the advocates of legislative
of union why such a plan was not possible, when he

^^^^- addressed the legislative assembly of the United

eratlon . . .

Provinces and asked it to indorse the resolutions
of the Quebec convention of October, 1864.
"We had," he said, in recalling the deliberations

would be badly done, if done at all, and the sectionalism
that now curses us would become an intolerable drag on
progress and a perpetual danger to the state."

[ 220 ]

THE DOMINION A FEDERAL UNION

of the convention, "to take federal union or drop
the negotiations. Not only were our friends
from Lower Canada against legislative union,
but so were most of the delegates from the Mari-
time Provinces. There was but one choice open
to us — federal union or nothing." ^

At Westminster there were tried and sincere
friends of self-government in the colonies that
are now of the Dominions who in 1867 would have
preferred a legislative union for the Dominion
of Canada. Foremost among them was Russell
— Lord John Russell of the act of union of 1840.
Carnarvon had these advocates of legislative
union in mind when, in introducing the British
North America bill to the house of lords, he came
to the clause establishing federal union.

It is true — said the colonial secretary of the Derby-
Disraeli administration of 1866-1868 — that no federation
can be as compact as a single homogeneous state, though the
compactness will vary with the strength or weakness of the
central government. It is true that federation may be com-
paratively a loose bond, but the alternative is no bond at
all. Federation is only possible under certain conditions,
when the states to be federated are so far akin that they
can be united, and yet so far dissimilar that they cannot
be fused into one single body politic; and this I believe to
be the present conditions of the provinces of British North
America.

Carnarvon realized that there might be diffi-
culties even with federal union. But he believed
that the Dominion of Canada enjoyed one con-
1 Mackenzie, 335, 336.

[221 ]

Russell's
prefer-
ence for
federal

Carnar-
von
on

federal
bond

Crown
and
federal
onion

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

spicuous advantage lacking in confederations in
non-British countries. "It is to be remembered,"
he said, "that unhke every other federation that
has existed, the federation of British North Ameri-
can provinces derives its poHtical existence from
an external authority. It derives it from that
which is the recognized source of power and rights
— the British crown." "And I cannot but recog-
nize in this," Carnarvon added, "some security
against those conflicts of state rights and central
authority which in other federations have some-
times proved so disastrous." ^

^ H. L. Debates, February 19, 1867.

[2223

CHAPTER IX

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

BETWEEN THEDOMINION AND

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS

THE success of the United States under the Lessons
federal system stimulated the first stages ^^
of the movement in the United Provinces for a war of
union of all the British North American prov- J??J"
inces. But as the movement was gradually
pushed forward — as confederation of all the
provinces, or a federal union of Upper and Lower
Canada, was coming into sight — disturbing
conditions developed in the United States which
brought about the civil war of 1 861-1865.

The Fathers of Confederation noted these
ominous conditions, and realized that they must
establish a federal union with a constitution that
would reduce to a minimum the likelihood of
serious friction between the central government
and the various provincial governments.

In the session of the legislature of the United Avoiding
Provinces of i860 — soon after the mission of *^°"*»^®

over

Gait and Cartier to London in the interest of provincial
confederation — John A. Macdonald made a ^^^
speech in the assembly in which he insisted that
in the constitution for the British provinces some
dangers which he regarded as inherent in the
constitution of the United States must be avoided.

[223]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Mac-
donald's
conception
of

American
consti-
tution

A strong
central
govern-
ment
essential

Where
framers
of consti-
tution of
United
States
erred

"The fatal error which they have committed/'
he said, in alluding to the struggle over states'
rights, "and it was perhaps unavoidable from the
state of the American colonies at the time of the
revolution, was in making each state a distinct
sovereignty. The fatal error was made in giving
to each state distinct sovereign power, except
in those instances where powers were specially
reserved by the constitution, and conferred
upon the general government."

"The true principle of confederation," continued
the statesman of the United Provinces, who in
1867 was created Knight Commander of the
Bath for his services at Confederation, "lies in
giving to the general government all the principles
and powers of sovereignty, and in the provision
that the subordinate or individual states should
have no powers but those expressly bestowed on
them. We should thus have a powerful central
government, a powerful central legislature, and
a powerful decentralized system of minor legis-
latures for local purposes." ^

The principles of distribution of powers between
the Dominion and the provincial governments
which Macdonald thus enunciated in i860 were
reiterated by him at the Quebec convention of
1864. He recalled poHtical conditions in the
recently revolted American colonies at the time
when the constitution of the United States was
framed.

1 Boyd, 1 81-182.

[224]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

"There were," he said, "thirteen individual
sovereignties, quite distinct the one from the
other. The error at the formation of these con-
stitutions was that each state reserved to itself
all sovereign rights, save small portions dele-
gated. We must reverse the decision by strength-
ening the general government, and conferring on
the provincial bodies only such powers as may be
required for local purposes." ^

The principles which Macdonald had thus
twice enunciated were adopted at Quebec.^ It

1 "The framers of the constitution of Canada," wrote ex-
President Taft, in the National Geographic Magaziney Wash-
ington, March, 19 16, "thought it an improvement on the
constitution of the United States in that the defects which the
constitution of the United States was supposed to have shown
in the civil war were corrected." Mr. Taft quoted Mac-
donald's speech at Quebec. "I think," he continued, "it
is the general opinion now that this view of the constitution
of the United States was a mistaken one. The adoption of
the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments strengthened somewhat
the restraint upon state legislatures enforceable in the supreme
court of the United States, but generally the division of power
between the states and the general government remained the
same. And yet as our congress has exercised powers which
she always had, but which she had not before exercised,
the strength of the central government is seen to be quite
all that it ought to be. There is danger that a great widening
of the field of federal activity, and a substantial diminution of
state rights, would in the end threaten the integrity of our
union instead of promoting it."

2 "Canada is a single state, in which the various units
have prescribed powers: the United States is a union of many
states, which have agreed to delegate certain powers to a

[225]

donald's
views

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Quebec was agreed that in the division of powers between

convention ^.j^^ Dominion and the provincial governments the

Mac- residuum should be in the Dominion government,

and not be reserved either to the provinces or to

the people, as in the constitution of the United

States.^

No The plan was apparently adopted without

contention contention; for Tupper, in his recollections of

division the Convention, writes that there was "a wonder-

of powers £^^ accord among the various representatives in

regard to general principles involved in drafting

a basis of union." ^ Xhis unanimity was eulogized

by Adderley, under-secret ary for the colonies,

when the British North America bill was before

the house of commons at Westminster.^

I. The Powers of the Dominion Parliament

Camar- Carnarvon, in introducing the bill to the house

von's of lords, characterized the clauses which effected

case for . . .

strong the distribution of powers as "the most delicate
central and important part of the measute." "In this,"
he said, "I think is comprised the main theory
and constitution of federal government. On
this depends the practical working of the new
scheme."

govern-
ment

central authority." — George M. Wrong, "The Creation
of the Federal System in Canada," 24.

1 Cf. Taft, "Great Britain's Bread upon the Waters,"
National Geographic Magazine, March, 1916, 232.

2 Tupper, " Recollections of Sixty Years," 40.
» Cf. H. C. Debates, February 27, 1867.

[ 226 ]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

And here — Carnarvon continued — we navigate a sea of
difficulties. There are rocks on the right hand, and on the left.
If, on the one hand, the central government be too strong,
then there is risk that it may absorb the local action and that
wholesome self-government by the provincial bodies which it
is a matter of both good faith and political expediency to
maintain. If, on the other hand, the central government is
not strong enough, there arises a conflict of states' rights and
pretensions. Cohesion is destroyed, and the effective vigor
of central authority is encroached upon.

Familiarity with Macdonald's enunciation of
i860 and 1864 of the principles on which he desired
that the federal union should be based is obvious
in Carnarvon's next remarks on the distribution
of powers effected by the bill.

The real object we have in view — he said — is to give to
the central government those high functions and almost
sovereign powers by which general principles and uniformity
of legislation may be secured in those questions that are of
common import to all the provinces, and at the same time
retain for each province so ample a measure of municipal
liberty and self-government as will allow them, and indeed
compel them, to exercise those local powers which they can
exercise with great advantage to the community.

Carnarvon made no claim as to the general
superiority of the constitution of the Dominion
over the constitution of the United States. Such
a claim was left to the advocates of the new con-
stitution in the legislatures of the several British
North American provinces. ^ But in one particu-
lar he was confident that the constitution was
superior to that of the United States.
1 Cf. Mackenzie, 309; Boyd, 225.

C 227 ]

Munici-
pal

Uberty
for
provinces

Claims
of

superi-
ority over
American
consti-
tution

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

criminal
code

Central To the central parliament — he said, when explaining

parlia- the clause of the bill dealing with the criminal code and the
ment and administration of criminal law — will be assigned the enact-
ment of criminal law. The administration of it, indeed, is
vested in the local authorities; but the power of general
legislation is very properly reserved for the central parliament.
And in this, I cannot but note a wise departure from the
system pursued in the United States, where each state is
competent to deal, as it may please, with its criminal code,
and where an offense may be visited with one penalty in the
state of New York, and with another in the state of Virginia.
The system proposed is, I believe, a better and a safer one.^

Four
groups
of powers

Division
I —
powers
assigned
to

Dominion
parlia-
ment

The division of powers made by the British
North America act is effected by a distinct
classification into four divisions. In the first
division are those subjects which are assigned
exclusively to the Dominion parliament. In the
second are those which are assigned exclusively
to the provincial legislatures. In the third are
the subjects of concurrent legislation, such as
immigration and agriculture; and the fourth com-
prises the subject of education.

The section of the act assigning subjects to
the Dominion parliament declares that it shall
be lawful for the sovereign, "by and with the
advice and consent of the senate and the house of
commons, to make laws for the peace, order, and
good government of Canada, in relation to all
matters not coming within the classes of subjects
by this act assigned exclusively to the legislatures
of the provinces." "And for greater certainty,"

H. L. Debates, February 19, 1867.

[228]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

it continues, "but not so as to restrict the gener-
ality of the foregoing terms of this section, it is
hereby declared, notwithstanding anything in
this act, that the exclusive legislative authority
of the parliament of Canada extends to all matters
coming within the classes of subjects next here-
inafter enumerated."

Twenty-nine subjects are enumerated. They
are as follows:

1. The public debt and property.

2. The regulation of trade and commerce.

3 . The raising of money by any mode or system
of taxation.

4. The borrowing of money on the public
credit.

5. Postal service.

6. The census and statistics.

7. Militia, military and naval service, and
defense.

8. The fixing of and providing for the salaries
and allowances of civil and other officers of the
government of Canada.

9. Beacons, buoys, lighthouses, and Sable
Island.

10. Navigation and shipping.

11. Quarantine, and the establishment and
maintenance of marine hospitals.

12. Seacoast and inland fisheries.

13. Ferries between a province and any British
or foreign country, or between two provinces.

14. Currency and coinage.

[229]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

15. Banking, incorporation of banks, and the
issue of paper money.

16. Savings banks.

17. Weights and measures.

18. Bills of exchange and promissory notes.

19. Interest.

20. Legal tender.

21. Bankruptcy and insolvency.

22. Patents of invention and discovery.

23. Copyrights.

24. Indians and lands reserved for the Indians.

25. Naturalization and aliens.

26. Marriage and divorce.

27. The criminal law, except the constitution
of courts of criminal jurisdiction, but including
the procedure in criminal matters.

28. The establishment, maintenance, and man-
agement of penitentiaries.

29. Such classes of subjects as are expressly
excepted in the enumeration of the classes of
subjects by this act assigned exclusively to the
legislatures of the provinces.

"And any matters coming within any of the
classes of subjects enumerated in this section,"
reads the paragraph following the foregoing
enumeration, "shall not be deemed to come
within the class of matters of a local or private
nature comprised in the enumeration of the classes
of subjects by this act assigned exclusively to the
legislatures of the provinces."

C 230 ]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

II. Powers of the Provincial Legislatures

The second of the four divisions — the divisions Division
in which are set out the subjects assigned to the °
provincial legislatures — is prefaced by a declara-
tion that "in each province the legislature may
exclusively make laws in relation to matters
coming within the classes of subjects hereinafter
enumerated." They are as follows:

1. The amendment from time to time, notwith-
standing anything in this act, of the constitution
of the province, except as regards the office
of the lieutenant-governor.

2. Direct taxation within the province, in
order to the raising of a revenue for provincial
purposes.

3. The borrowing of money on the sole credit
of the province.

4. The establishment and tenure of provincial
offices, and the appointment and payment of
provincial officers.

5. The management and sale of the public
lands belonging to the province, and of the
timber and wood thereon.

6. The establishment, maintenance, and man-
agement of public and reformatory prisons in
and for the province.

7. The establishment, maintenance, and man-
agement of hospitals, asylums, charities, and
eleemosynary institutions in and for the prov-
inces, other than marine hospitals.

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

8. Municipal institutions in the province.

9. Shop, saloon, tavern, and other licenses,
in order to the raising of a revenue for provincial,
local, or municipal purposes.

10. Local works and undertakings, other than
such as are of the following classes:

(a) Lines of steam or other ships, railways,
canals, telegraphs, and other works and under-
takings connecting the province with any other
or others of the provinces, or extending beyond
the limits of the province;

(b) Lines of steamships between the province
and any British or foreign country;

(c) Such works as, although wholly situate
within the province, are before, or after their
execution, declared by the parliament of Canada
to be for the general advantage of Canada, or
for the advantage of two or more of the prov-
inces.

11. The incorporation of companies with pro-
vincial objects.

12. Solemnization of marriage in the province.

13. Property and civil rights in the province.

14. The administration of justice in the prov-
ince, including the constitution, maintenance,
and organization of provincial courts, both of
civil and criminal jurisdiction, and including
procedure in civil matters in these courts.

15. The imposition of punishment by fine,
penalty, or imprisonment, for enforcing any law
of the province made with relation to any matter

[232]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

coming within any of the classes of subjects
enumerated in this section.

i6. Generally all matters of a merely local or
private nature in the province.

III. Concurrent Legislation

The third division — concurrent legislation — Division
needs a few words of explanation. Long before ™
Confederation, Upper and Lower Canada, Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick, and British Columbia
had possessed, as they still do in 191 8, large
areas of crown lands. In each of these provinces,
moreover, laws had been enacted to encourage
immigration from the United Kingdom with a
view to the settlement of these crown lands.
None of the provinces parted with the control
of their crown lands when they entered the
federal union.

At Confederation the Dominion was possessed crown
of no crown lands that were available for colo- ^^^
nization on a large scale. Its only public lands
in 1867 were military and naval reservations,
which, at Confederation, were ceded by the im-
perial government. The Dominion government
remained without so much as a quarter section of
160 acres to offer to immigrants until it acquired
the Hudson Bay Company's territory in 1869,
and parts of these vast areas were surveyed and
parceled out for settlement.

It was these conditions as regards crown lands,
and also the fact that each of the provinces

C233]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Agri- desired, after Confederation, to continue its own
*^"iiTm agricultural policy, that resulted in the third
provinces division in the distribution of powers effected

by the British North America act.
immi- There is only one section in this third division.

gration

and In each province — it reads — the legislature may make

agriculture laws in relation to agriculture in the province, and to immi-
gration into the province. And it is hereby declared that the
parliament of Canada may, from time to time, make laws
in relation to agriculture in all or any of the provinces, and
to immigration into all or any of the provinces; and any
law of the legislature of a province, relative to agriculture,
or to immigration, shall have effect in and for the province
as long and as far only as it is not repugnant to any act of the
parliament of Canada.

Chinese Except that the legislature of British Columbia
has frequently passed bills restricting Chinese
immigration into the province — bills that did
not become law because they were disallowed by
the government at Ottawa^ — the provincial
legislatures after Confederation, ceased to pass
laws regulating immigration.

The Dominion code, administered by the
department of immigration and colonization at
Ottawa, has long been the only law. Dominion

1 "By virtue of sections 56 and 90 of the British North
America act, an authentic copy of every provincial act has
to be sent to the governor-general; and if the governor-
general in council, within one year after receipt thereof,
think fit to disallow the act, such disallowance, being signi-
fied by the governor-general in the manner prescribed, shall
annul the act from and after the day of such signification." —
Lefroy, "Canada's Federal System," 81.

[234]

gration

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

or provincial, regulating immigration. But in immi-

recent years all the provinces except Prince ^^^°^

Edward Island, and the prairie provinces, which gandaby

have no lands at their disposition for settlement,^ provincial

L J 1 1 • 1 • • • govem-

nave, under the concurrent legislative provision ments
of the British North America act, enacted laws
under which immigration propaganda is con-
ducted in the United Kingdom, and in the case
of Ontario and Quebec, also in the United States.
The propaganda of these provinces, which is
distinct from the propaganda of the Dominion
government, on which fourteen million dollars
were expended in the years from 1897 to 1914,^
is ill the interest of the province which embarks
on it. It advertises the special attractions which
the province offers to immigrants. The aim
of the wider propaganda, long maintained by the
government at Ottawa, is to attract immigration
to the Dominion as a whole, and in particular to
divert a stream of agrarian immigration to the
unoccupied Dominion crown lands in the grain-
growing provinces west of the Great Lakes.

IV. The Legislatures; Parliament and the Cabinet;
Education

The fourth division in the distribution of powers Division
— the division concerned with education and the ^
powers of the Dominion and provincial govern-

^ Crown lands in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta
are under the control of the Dominion government.

* Cf. "Immigration Facts and Figures, Ottawa," 1915, 30.

[235]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

ments in regard to it — gave the Fathers of
Confederation more trouble than almost any other
provision embodied in the resolutions on which
the British North America act was based. The
difficulty arose out of the system of sectarian
schools established in Upper Canada under an
act of the legislature of the United Provinces
passed in 1863.
Separate The school system then established created
schools ^Qj. Uppej. Canada what have since been known
as separate schools — schools for Roman Catho-
lics and schools for Protestants, all supported
by local taxation, and under the management of
local representatives, with some supervision
from the department of education of the province.
In the Catholic schools distinctly Catholic
teaching is given; in the Protestant schools there
is no teaching of the beliefs or tenets of any
denomination.
Opposition The great majority of the people of Upper
c ^^^to ^^"^^^ ^^^ ^^^ desire separate schools. A com-
mon school system, with schools attended by
children of all religions, was the aim of the Protes-
tant population of Upper Canada in the years of
the legislative union. But in the era of the
United Provinces, as today, there were areas
in Upper Canada, now Ontario, in which there
were large settlements of French-Canadians,
and areas settled by immigrants from Ireland.
French-Canadians in the legislature, before
1863, had insisted on separate schools for Lower

[236]

separate-
school
Oystem

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

Canada; and in the interests of the Roman
Catholics — French-Canadian and Irish — they
also insisted, from 1849 to 1863, that there should
be a separate school system in Upper Canada.

Fourteen years of bitter sectarian contro- Upper
versy, years in which the Roman Catholics in ^^^
Upper Canada made the separate school question cauon
the paramount issue in politics,^ culminated ^^353
in the education act of 1863. It was accepted
by the Roman Catholic hierarchy as a settle-
ment — a settlement which relieved the Protes-
tants of Upper Canada from "standing constantly
to arms," as George Brown, leader of the Liberals,
described the position, "awaiting fresh attacks
upon our school system," as they had been com-
pelled to do in the years from 1849 ^^ 1863.

On the eve of Confederation there were 4,000
common schools in Upper Canada. Of this
number 100 were separate schools, Roman
Catholic in local management and in organization,
atmosphere, and teaching.

It would have been impossible to carry the Lower
preliminaries to Confederation beyond the Char- ^^"^
lottetown convention of September, 1864 — Confed-
beyond the second of the five stages ^ — had not ^e^^ds

^ Cf. Mackenzie, 122-127. ^®"

2 These stages were (i) the agreement effected when the 8^<^^
Tache-Macdonald government was reorganized in June,
1864; (2) the Charlottetown convention; (3) the Quebec
convention; (4) the approval of the Quebec resolutions by system
the legislatures of the several provinces; and (5) the enact-
ment of the British North America act at Westminster.

[237]

separate

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the Fathers of Confederation been willing that
adequate protection should be afforded in the
British North America act to the separate school
system, and the principles on which it was based
when it was established in 1863. ,

Safeguards French Canada would never have given its
^^otestant support to Confederation without this pro-
schools in tection. There were also in 1 864-1 867 com-
Canada paratively large numbers of Roman Catholics — •
French-Canadian, Irish, and Highland-Scotch — ■
in Ontario, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick.
Moreover, in Montreal and Quebec, and also in
the eastern townships of the French province,
there were many people of English and Scotch
descent who were of the Protestant minorities
in that province — people who could not send
their children to the Catholic schools, and who
were consequently in need of schools similar to
those of the Protestant majority in Upper Canada.
Section The protection demanded by those Fathers of

^ee^' Confederation who were vigilant guardians of
Roman Catholic interests — nearly all of them
from the French province — was embodied in
section 93 of the British North America act.
This section, which forms the fourth division
in the classification and assignment of powers,
determines the powers of the provincial legis-
latures and of the Dominion parliament respec-
tively with regard to education.

Carnarvon approached this section with cir-
cumspection when on February 19, 1867, he

[238]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

unfolded the provisions of the bill to the house Carnar-
of lords.

Your lordships — he said — will observe some rather

von

explains
section
to
complicated arrangements in reference to education. The house of

object of this clause is to secure to the religious minority of lords
one province the same rights, privileges, and protection which
the religious minority of another province may enjoy. The
Roman Catholic minority of Upper Canada, the Protestant
minority of Lower Canada, and the Roman Catholic minority
of the Maritime Provinces will thus stand on a footing of
entire equality. But in the event of any wrong at the hands
of the local majority, the minority have a right of appeal
to the governor-general in council, and may claim the appli-
cation of any remedial laws that may be necessary from the
central parliament of the Confederation.^

The section as it stands in the act declares that a

"in and for each province, the legislature may J^®^**^*^"

exclusively make laws in relation to education." powers

But the enactment of laws relating to education ?^ ^®^^

.... latures

IS governed by an important condition, important
from the point of view of the Roman Catholic
Church in at least two of the provinces that were
organized before Confederation, and also in the
three provinces — Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and
Alberta — which were created by parliament at
Ottawa in the years from 1870 to 1905.

This condition — the kernel of section 93 —
is that nothing in "any such law shall prejudicially
affect any right or privilege with respect to de-
nominational schools which any class of persons
have by law in the province at the union."
1 H. L. Debates, February 19, 1867.

[239]

Kernel

of

section

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Protection
for

Protestant
schools in
Quebec

Grievances

of

minorities

Appeal to
governor-
general
in council

In the province of Quebec the legislature can-
not enact a law prejudicial to separate schools,
Protestant or Roman Catholic, without contra-
vening section 93. It cannot legislate to the dis-
advantage of these schools, because by section
93 "all the powers, privileges, and duties at the
union, by law conferred and imposed in Upper
Canada on the separate schools and school
trustees of the queen's Roman Catholic sub-
jects,'* were "extended to the dissentient schools
of the queen's Protestant and Roman Catholic
subjects in Quebec."

Quite as important as these restrictions on the
legislatures in enacting laws relating to schools
maintained out of public funds are two other
provisions of section 93 for remedying any griev-
ance of minorities that might result from legis-
latures or governments of the provinces acting
in contravention of these terms of the British
North America act.

The first of these provisions declares that where
in any province a system of separate schools
existed by law at the union, or after the union
was established, an appeal shall lie to the governor-
general in council — that is, to the cabinet at
Ottawa — "from any act or decision of any
provincial authority affecting any right or privi-
lege of the Protestant or Roman Catholic minority
of the queen's subjects in relation to education."

"In case any such provincial law, as from time
to time seerns to the governor-general-in-council

[240]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

requisite for the due execution of the provisions
of this section, is not made," reads the second
of these provisions, "or in case any decision of
the governor-general-in-council or any appeal
under this section is not duly executed by the
proper provincial authority in that behalf, then,
and in every such case, and as far only as the
circumstances of each case require, the parliament
of Canada may make remedial laws for the due
execution of the provisions of this section and of
any decision of the governor-general under this
statute."

Remedial
legis-
lation by
parlia-
ment

V. A Contention-breeding Provision of the British
North America Act

Only two of the existing nine provinces of the
Dominion had separate school systems at Con-
federation. These were Ontario and Quebec.
Nova Scotia,^ New Brunswick, and Prince
Edward Island ^ were free from the system; and

^ An attempt was made in Nova Scotia on the eve of
Confederation to assimilate the school law of that province
to the school laws of Upper and Lower Canada. The move-
ment was opposed by Tupper, who intimated to Dr. T. L.
Connolly, Roman Catholic archbishop of Halifax, that he
should oppose any bill introduced in the legislature to the
end desired by the archbishop, and should not shrink from
the performance of that duty were he confident that it would
terminate his public life. — Saunders, "Life and Letters of
Sir Charles Tupper," I, 150-152.

2 In New Brunswick before Confederation there was a
parish school system. In 1871, after an education bill had
been enacted by the legislature at Fredericton, the question

[241 ]

School

situation
at

Confed-
eration

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

No

sectarian
schools in
British
Coltunbia

British Columbia, six years before it came into
Confederation, had established a school system,
which the education act ^ declared "shall be
conducted upon strictly non-sectarian principles."
"Books inculcating the highest morality shall
be selected for the use of such schools," reads
another section of the law, "and all books of
religious character, teaching denominational
dogma, shall be strictly excluded therefrom."

In 1872, a year after it came into the union,
British Columbia amended the education act
of 1865; and when Robertson, provincial secre-
tary in the McCreight administration, who was
in charge of the bill, introduced it to the legis-
lative assembly, he intimated that its basal
principles were (i) that every child had a moral
right to an education, and (2) that the system
should be free and unsectarian.^ By this act
of 1872 clergymen were incapacitated from serving
as school trustees.

As the school system of British Columbia had
been established before the province came into
section 93 Confederation, it was not possible for the Domin-
ion government to make section 93 of the British

was raised as to whether the parish school system constituted
a separate school system under the terms of the British
North America act. A case was taken to the judicial com-
mittee of the privy council at Whitehall. The decision was
that the New Brunswick parish system could not properly
be held to constitute a separate school system.

1 The Common School act, 1865, 28 and 29 Vict., c. 6.

* Cf. Colonist, Victoria, March 14, 1872.

[242]

New

provinces

and

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

North America act operative in that province.
But when Manitoba was created a province in
1870, the section was made to apply to laws re-
lating to education passed by its legislature. A
Conservative government was responsible for the
Manitoba act. In 1905, when Saskatchewan
and Alberta were created provinces, a Liberal
government, supported by fifty-five of the sixty-
five members of the house of commons from
Quebec, was in power at Ottawa, and again
section 93 was extended to the new provinces.

There was much heated contention over sepa- Conten-
rate schools in Upper Canada from 1849 to 1863. g°°°'^^
But this contention of the era of the United schools
Provinces was comparatively small, and cer- ^^
tainly limited in area, as compared with the eration
intense and extended contention and bitterness
which in the first half-century of Confederation
were engendered by section 93 of the British
North America act.

French-Canadians, in these fifty years, were as
vigilant in asserting the rights of their church
under this section, and in securing that the sec-
tion was extended to the provinces carved out
of the Hudson Bay Company's territory, as they
were in insisting on the use of the French language
in parliament, or in asserting their claims to
offices in the civil service and to government
patronage generally, or in opposing the enact-
ment of the conscription law of 1917.

Section 93, in the years from 1867 to 191 7,

[243]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Pouticai was at the root of more political crises in Winni-
arisiL P^S' Toronto, and Quebec, and also at Ottawa,
out of than any other issue in provincial or Dominion
section 93 politics. It was the occasion of more public
noise in Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec than any
other controversial question. More political rep-
utations had their gilt edges worn off in these
heated and long-drawn-out politico-sectarian,
constitutional controversies than in any other
controversy or agitation in Canada from Con-
federation to the great war.
Both Both political parties were vexed and torn by

pouticai these section 93 agitations. Tupper, a Conserv-
invoived ative premier, partly owed his political downfall
in 1896 to trouble in Manitoba over section 93,
and to developments in Ottawa growing out of
this trouble. Laurier, premier of Liberal govern-
ments from 1896 to 191 1, lost prestige with the
Liberals in the constituencies through his part
in embodying the section in the constitutions of
Saskatchewan and Alberta. He again lost pres-
tige in 1916, when as leader of the opposition in
the house of commons he identified himself with
claims of the Roman Catholic church under this
section — claims originating in connection with
separate schools in Ottawa, which at that time
were agitating Ontario and Quebec, and making
business for the judicial committee of the privy
council in London.^

^ Cf. " Priests Block Recruiting in Quebec Province," New
York Times Magazine, June 25, 19 16; Senator Landry's

C 244 ]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS

The church whose interests were so carefully Roman
safeguarded at the Quebec convention of 1864 ^**^°"*^
has obtained some advantages in other provinces in
than Quebec by section 93. The area in which ^^^^
schools controlled by its clergy and its lay adher-
ents are established was extended between 1867
and 191 7 in Ontario, and separate schools were
established in the prairie provinces.

The recrudescence of the separate-schools
question also afforded the church opportunities
of giving a political lead to its adherents, and of
keeping in touch with political leaders. The
schools question also has, since Confederation,
as in the years from 1849 to 1863 in Upper and
Lower Canada, strengthened the political soli-
darity of French-Canadians and kept them in
association and political sympathy with Roman
Catholics in other provinces besides Quebec.

Lawyers have undoubtedly profited from all Profit-
these agitations. Cases under the separate- *^^®
schools laws found their way into the courts, gentie-
Some of them were carried to the judicial com-
mittee of the privy council — the court of last
resort for litigants from India and the British
dominions that holds its sessions at Whitehall.
In the first half century of Confederation, section
93 enriched more barristers in Montreal, Quebec,
Ottawa, Toronto, and Winnipeg, and more

letter of May 22, 1916, the Gazette, Montreal, June 3, 1916;
full text of judgments in school cases, the Gazette, Montreal,
November 3, 1916.

[245]

men of
long robe

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

attorneys and gentlemen of the long robe and
of the Inns of Court in the neighborhood of
Temple Bar, than any other section of the British
North America act.
A key Carnarvon, who as colonial secretary managed

wn^tkTns ^^^ preliminary negotiations with the Fathers
in of Confederation who were in London in 1867,

^mT'' ^"^ w^° piloted the British North America act
through the house of lords with a good will
towards Canada and its aspirations and a states-
manlike parliamentary skill that are kindly
remembered in the Dominion, described section
93 as complicated.

It is complicated. It is one of the most com-
plicated and contention-breeding sections ever
embodied in the constitution of any English-
speaking country. But it must be understood,
and so must the education systems of the older
provinces as they existed on the eve of Confeder-
ation. Otherwise it is impossible to understand
many political episodes and developments in
Canada since 1867, or to realize the cause of the
divisions between Quebec and Ontario in Domin-
ion politics, or to understand some of the con-
ditions that have long characterized politics
at Ottawa.

1:246]

Confed-
eration

CHAPTER X

THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND
CABINET

BEFORE Confederation there was a governor- Colonial
general established at the capital of the ^°J^^_"
United Provinces, and a governor in each of fore
the other provinces of British Columbia, Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward
hland. They were all appointed by the crown,
pn the advice and recommendation of the colonial
office in London. They were sent out from Great
Britain, and were appointed under the patronage
system as it then existed at Westminster.

I. The Governor-general under Confederation

By the British North America act the office of Lieu-
governor-general was continued; and governors *®^^^*"

o o ^ ' o govem-

of the other provinces ceased to be appointed by ors under
the colonial office. For governors sent out from g^j^ .
Great Britain there were substituted lieutenant- act
governors — invariably Canadians — appointed
by the governor-general in council — in practice
by the cabinet at Ottawa.

No change was made by the British North gov-
America act in the general relations of the gov- ®™°^"

» . f* general

ernor-general to the cabinet. These remained and the
the same as from 1849 — the year in which <»^^«*

[247]

of the

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Elgin, continuing an undertaking successfully
begun by Sydenham in 1841, aided in com-
pletely establishing responsible government in
the United Provinces.

By responsible government, it will be recalled,
is meant the system under which the governor-
general must form his executive council or cab-
inet only from members of parliament who can
command the support of a majority of the mem-
bers of the house of commons — the house which
in practice has sole control of the powers of
taxation and appropriation.
Custom There was no law, either of the imperial parlia-

ment or of the legislature of the United Provinces,
establishing the system of responsible govern-
ment. There is no law of the imperial parHament
which established the cabinet at Ottawa exactly
as it is constituted today — as it has been con-
stituted since 1867.^ Nor is there any law which
declares that the cabinet at Whitehall must be

^ All that the section of the British North America act
establishing the executive council or cabinet says is, "There
shall be a council to aid and advise the government of Canada,
to be styled the queen's privy council for Canada; and the
persons who are to be members of that council shall be from
time to time chosen and summoned by the governor-general
and sworn in as privy councilors, and the members thereof
may be from time to time removed by the governor-general."
— Section XI. "The provisions of the British North-
America act imply, though they do not express, the unwritten
conventions of British parliamentary practice." — H. E.
Egerton, " Federations and unions within the British Empire,"
123-24.

[248]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

chosen by the king from members of parliament
who command a majority in the house of commons
at Westminster. The cabinet system at White-
hall is based on usage — on a custom of the con-
stitution which has been continuously followed
for at least two centuries.

At the capital of the United Provinces the un-
system of responsible government was also based '^**®°
only on usage, or on the custom of the constitution, tution
From 1840 to 1867 the United Provinces had a °'^^

. . r ' r United

written constitution — the act of union of 1840, Provinces
with the liberalizing amendments made by the
imperial parliament in 1847 and 1854. But they
had also, as has already been told, an unwritten
constitution.

The greatly restricted power of the legislative
council in respect to money bills — the power to
reject but not to amend a money bill — was deter-
mined by the unwritten constitution. So also
was the right of the legislature to enact a tariff
without regard to the industrial and commercial
interests of the United Kingdom, a right first
asserted and exercised in 1858. It was also under
the unwritten constitution that responsible govern-
ment was established in 1841-1845, and main-
tained inviolate from 1849 to 1867.

Quite important parts of the constitution of un-
the Dominion are still unwritten. The British ^^"«**

constl-

North America act ordains that "bills for appro- tution
priating any part of the public revenue or for ^^f.
imposing any tax or impost shall originate in

[249]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the house of commons." The conditions under
which money bills shall originate — conditions
which prevent any money bill from originating
except at the instance of the privy council or
cabinet — are also determined by the written
constitution.
Restricted There IS, however, no section in the act which
^JseMte '^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ senate shall have far less power
over over money bills — a power that in practice is

^°®y scarcely more than nominal — than is exercised
by the house of commons. Nor was there any
section in the Quebec act of 1791, or in the act of
union of 1840, which gave to the three legis-
lative assemblies of 1791-1867^ the larger powers
which they exercised over money bills. In regard
to money bills the legislative councils were in
the same position as is today the senate at Ottawa.
In all matters affecting the raising and appro-
priation of the provincial revenues they were in
an inferior or secondary position in relation to
the legislative assemblies.

The larger powers of the commons of the Domin-
ion over money bills are based on a custom of
the constitution of the United Kingdom, which
originated at Westminster in 1661 ^ — a custom
that had been established for almost a century

1 The legislative assembly of Upper Canada, the legislative
assembly of Lower Canada, and the legislative assembly of
the United Provinces.

2 Cf. Porritt, "Unreformed House of Commons," I, 548-
557.

[250]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

before the first elected legislative assembly in Respon-
anv of the present oversea dominions of Great ^^^®

. . . . TT IT • govem-

Britain came mto existence at Halifax in 1758. ment

Responsible government in the Dominion, ^^j"
the system of government that restricts drasti- by usage
cally the actual power and authority of the
governor-general at Ottawa, is also still based
only on usage and custom. Neither by the
British North America act, nor by any subsequent
legislation at Westminster, was direct statutory
sanction given to the system of government in
Canada that between 1841 and 1849 was created
by the statesmen of the United Provinces, and
accepted by Sydenham, Bagot, and Elgin as
representatives of the crown.

II. Relations of the Governor-general to the
Cabinet

There is, however, a section in the British Govem-
North America act that to some degree and °*'' ,

• general

indirectly establishes responsible government, must act
and much of what in Canada between 1841 and on advice
1867 had come to be associated with the term — cabinet
Canadian in origin — "responsible government."
"The provisions of this act relating to the gov-
ernor-general," it reads, "shall be construed as
referring to the governor-general, acting by and
with the advice of the queen's privy council for
Canada."

Lafontaine and Baldwin and their colleagues
of the movement for responsible government,

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Basal it will be recalled, made two demands on Met-

S^ef^n- ^^^^^ ^" 1 843-1 845. They insisted on his acting

sibie on two principles. The first was that he should

govern- select his executive council — or cabinet — only

ment -^

from the political party which commanded a

majority in the legislative assembly. The second
was that he should act in all political matters
only on the advice of the council so chosen.

Elgin's policies and actions as governor-general
of the United Provinces from 1847 to 1854 were
based on these two principles. His fame in
Canadian history, and in the history of the Empire,
rests on his part in the establishment of respon-
sible government. Head and Monck, his suc-
cessors, acted on the precedents that Elgin had
estabhshed.
These These principles were soon adopted in other

^d°Td*^ British colonies. They were, in fact, so quickly,
toother and completely adopted in the British North
colonies American provinces, in Australasia, and in South
Africa, that as early as i860, seven years before
Confederation, responsible government had be-
come so general in British colonies with parlia-
mentary institutions, and the powers of governors
had thereby been so greatly curtailed, that Sir
William Denison, governor of New South Wales
from 1854 to 1 861, expressed regret that under
the new order there remained little real work
for governors to do.

While serving as governor at Sydney, Denison,
who was of the old school of colonial adminis-

C 252 ]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

trators, was appointed governor of Madras, a
province of India, in which there was no represen-
tative government, and consequently no system
of responsible government. "I look forward
with great pleasure," he wrote from Sydney,
on November 17, i860, "to the idea of having
something to do. In these responsible govern-
ments one sees much going on which is most
objectionable. Yet one is powerless either to do
good or to prevent evil." ^

New duties and added responsibilities were
imposed by the British North America act on
the governor-in-council. These new duties nec-
essarily accrued to the cabinet in a federation
which in 1867 included four provinces and by 1905
had come to include nine. Only two or three
examples need be cited to illustrate the new duties
that had to be assumed by the cabinet of the
Dominion, duties of a class and importance such
as had never been discharged by the executive
council of the United Provinces nor by the
cabinet of any British North American province
in the era of 1 791-1867.

The appointment of lieutenant-governors of
the provinces, by the British North America act,
is vested in the governor-general-in-council. On
the governor-general-in-council is also imposed the
responsibility of disallowing acts passed by the
provincial legislatures; and it is to the governor-
general-in-council that aggrieved minorities under
^ Denison, "Varieties of Viceregal Life," I, 497.

C253]

Position
of

colonial
governor
under
respon-
sible
govern-
ment

Govem-

or-in-

council

Increased

powers

and

new

functions

of the

Dominion

cabinet

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Orders-
in-council

Meaning

of the

tejrm

"govem-

or-

general-

in-

council"

A consti-
tutional
fiction

section 93 — the separate-schools section — make
their appeals for remedial measures.

Orders-in-council made under statutory author-
ity — orders promulgated in the Canada Gazette,
the official journal of the Dominion — which have
the force of law, also issue from the governor-
general-in-council. These orders, under the fed-
eral system, are necessarily more numerous, much
more important, and in every way a larger part
of the governmental machinery than orders-in-
council were in the period in which every province
was separately organized, and conducted, through
its governor, all its own business and its nego-
tiations with the sister provinces and with the
imperial government.

At most, however, these new duties and respon-
sibilities thrown upon the governor-general-in-
council add only to the dignity and the nominal
importance of the governor-general. The gov-
ernor-general-in-council in reality is not much
more than the title of the cabinet, the king's
privy council in Canada.

III. The Governor-general and Party
Politics

The presence of the governor-general-in-council
is today not much more than a constitutional
fiction. In the chamber of the king's privy
council, in the eastern block at Ottawa, there is
a high-backed, decorated chair. It is at the head
of the council board. It is reserved for the

[254]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

king's representative. There is a tradition at
Ottawa that in the days of the United Provinces
this chair was sometimes occupied by the governor-
general. But rare indeed are the occasions since
Confederation when the regal chair has been
occupied by the governor-general during a session
of the cabinet.

Why the governor-general of the Dominion Non-
has seldom or never sat at the head of the cabinet ^^^^^'

ance of

table has been explained by a former governor- governor-
general, the late Duke of Argyll, who was much ^^^^'^^
appreciated and popular in Canada during his meetings
term of office from 1878 to 1883. ^

Argyll, who until 1900 was Marquis of Lome,
assumed office at Ottawa in November, 1878.
In a private letter written in November or Decem-
ber of that year, the new governor-general re-
marked on some of the old world usages he had
discovered in the new world capital.

It is curious — he wrote — how old monarchical ways, Stirvival
no longer known in Great Britain, still survive in some forms of old
in the free and self-governing colonies. For instance, now ^°^^^^'
that I have taken up my work, and attend at the government
buildings to all the papers that are brought before me, I am
sometimes told that my predecessors used to attend also the
meetings of the cabinet, quite as we may suppose the Stuart
monarchs may have presided at their council of state, when
their ministers deliberated. Now you know well, or ought
to know, that the queen, and the sovereigns before her since
the revolution, have done this but seldom. When the queen
nominally presides at a council it is only a form, for all de-
cisions have been previously taken. She has seen the papers
that led to the decision, and she may herself, or through her

usages

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Regal

chair in
the cabinet
chamber
at
Ottawa

secretary, have taken part in written or oral discussion, but
with each minister, or the prime minister singly, and not in
cabinet conclave.

But the governor-general of Canada has often himself
sat and spoken in the cabinet conclave. To prove this to
me I was shown the council room, in which a high-backed,
decorated chair was placed at the head of the long table,
and ranged along the table at each side, were the chairs for
the ministers. I said, as soon as I saw this cabinet throne,
that I would not be representing the queen in occupying it
when ministers were engaged in consulting with each other
about any bill they proposed to bring forward in the house,
and that I would never use it.

Govern-
ors-
general

"Nor did I," added Argyll, when in 1907
these notes of 1878 were published in his reminis-
cences, "do so — sit in the regal chair — even for
the formality of assenting to bills passed, which
was done by signing council orders." ^

The attitude and policy of Argyll towards the
cabinets of 1 878-1 882 was also the attitude of
from 1878 the Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Stanley of
to the Preston, the Earl of Aberdeen, the Earl of Minto,
of the war Earl Grey, and the Duke of Connaught, who were
successively governors-general from 1883 to the
outbreak of war in 1914. No other attitude,
in fact, was possible; for no other attitude would
have been tolerated by the statesmen or by the
people of the Dominion.

The governor-general's attitude on all political
questions must be absolutely non-partisan. What-
ever his party affiliations at Westminster may

Governor-
general
non-
partisan

1 Argyll, "Passages from the Past," II, 412.

[256]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

have been, immediately he assumes office at
Ottawa, as the representative of the king, his
attitude towards poHtical parties and poHtical
agitations of all kinds, in the constituencies as
well as in parliament, must be as nearly as he
can approach it the attitude of the king toward
political parties at Westminster.

As the king's representative he must stand His
aloof in all party contentions. He must accept ^^^^
the services of the group of party leaders who the ins
can command a majority in the house of com- *^^*^®
mons. But he must be ready at any time to
accept the services of the leaders of the opposition,
if a ministerial crisis, or the issue of a general
election, brings about the downfall of the party
in power, and control of the house of commons is
transferred to the party previously in opposition.

IV. Influence of the Governor-general on Political
Life

A political history of Canada from 1867 to Cor-
1917 that was loyal to the truth would have to ™^*^°°
tell of much corruption and of many scandals pouticai
at Ottawa. Some of the scandals grew out of s<^<^»
methods resorted to by politicians in power to
raise money for election campaigns from Canada's
governing class — from the men who were dicker-
ing for railway charters and the accompanying
land grants and subsidies from the Dominion
treasury; ^ from beneficiaries of the tariff and of
» Cf. Boyd, 328-332.

C 2S7 1

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the iron and steel bounties of 1883-1911;^
from men who desired large grants of public
lands with valuable timber rights; and from men
who were seeking by orders of the governor-
general-in-council valuable mineral or water
rights.^
Contracts Other political scandals of the first fifty years
^^ of Confederation developed out of corrupt rela-

eering tions of politicians in power with contractors for
public buildings, for dredging, and other public
works; ^ out of the corruption'* and frauds at elec-
tions to the house of commons; out of the lavish
expenditures on the immigration propaganda;

1 Of. Cartwright on the Red Parior at Ottawa, H. C. De-
bates, April II, 1890.

2 "Generally I would charge against your party, as repre-
sented by the governments in which you sat," wrote Sir
John Willison, editor of the Newsy Toronto, to Sir Charles
Tupper, in 1903, "that it carried on a strong constructive
Canadian policy by bad political methods, and gross corrup-
tion in the constituencies; and that the net result was to
build up Canada, and greatly lower the public morals." —
Saunders, "Life and Letters of Sir Charles Tupper," II, 255.

' Cf. Speech by Sir George E. Foster, Minister of Trade
and Commerce, House of Commons, Ottawa, February 17,
1916; and "Campaign Funds, Dominion and Provincial,"
Tribune, Winnipeg, November 30, 1915.

* "In Canada the necessity of two contending parties
to obtain an electoral majority in every district is a cor-
rupting influence which poisons the life of the people from
the Atlantic to the Pacific." — ^Viscount Grey of Fallodon,
letter on proportional representation. The Times, London,
April 2, 1917.

[258]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

and out of the purchase of small railway lines,
to be used as feeders or branches of the Inter-
colonial Railway, the line owned and operated
by the Dominion government, that connects St.
John and Halifax with Montreal.^

Political conditions at Ottawa and in the con- An ex-
stituencies, that since 1867 have continued or ^^^^^'^^o'"-

, . general s

developed these flaws in the working of the repre- descdp-
sentative and administrative institutions of Can- *^°"°^

political

ada, are soon obvious to a new governor-general. con-
He cannot read Canadian history, the debates ^*^°^
in parliament, the reports of royal commissions
and investigating committees, or even the daily
newspapers, without becoming aware of them.
But the position of the king's representative
at Ottawa in regard to political parties and
political controversy is, and since 1849 has
always been, such as to make corrective action on
his part impossible.

The Dominion is under responsible govern- The
ment. This is a condition that obviously ad- ^^^^^
mits of no change. However great the scandal, whitehau
there can be no interference by the governor- *°^"*^
general, so long as the political party in the scandals
majority stands ready to support the government ^^.
in the house of commons at Ottawa.

"The Canadian ministers," said Gladstone,

when, during his administration of 1 868-1 874,

his attention was called in the house of commons

to the scandal over the first charter for the

^ Cf. Grain Growers' Guide, Winnipeg, May 31, 191 5.

[259]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Canadian Pacific Railway, granted by the Mac-
donald government in 1872, "are responsible
to their parliament, and are not in any way
responsible to us for their conduct. I do not
think this is a matter in which it is competent or
desirable for us to interfere." ^
An attitude Investigations into the granting of the first
in which charter for the first trans-continental line across

no change

is possible the Dominion revealed the worst scandal in the
history of Great Britain's oversea dominions.
Macdonald, by the action of the house of com-
mons at Ottawa, was forced to resign, and was
out of power from 1873 to 1878. The scandal
was not forgotten in Great Britain, when, after
his death in 1891, tributes to Macdonald as an
empire builder were paid in parliament at West-
minster. But neither in Great Britain nor in
Canada has the attitude which Gladstone as-
sumed in 1873 ever been questioned.
No The Dominion of Canada, like all the domin-

uninvited [qyis, is Under responsible government in the fullest
ference meaning of the term. Canadians pride themselves
^^ on this fact. They point with pride also to the
Britain leading and conspicuous part which the old British
North American provinces had from 1791 to
1849 in securing responsible government and the
status of nation for the other oversea dominions
of the empire. In the internal affairs of Canada
there can never be any uninvited interference
by Great Britain, either through parliament at
1 H. C. Debates, August i, 1873.
[260]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

Westminster, or through the colonial office or
the governor-general.^

Recognition of this fact is one of the funda- PoUticai
mental principles of the relations between Great ^*^*^'
Britain and the oversea dominions. Failure to a matter
recognize it, and to adapt all policies in accord- '°*' ^®
ance with it, would endanger the tie that holds Canada
the Empire together. The government of Canada
can be made responsible in the widest and best
sense of the term — a government under which
it will be impossible for any governing class to
achieve its unsocial ends — only by the action
of the men and women of Canada.

Only by public opinion, expressed at the polls, a
can the government be made actually responsible *^^™p*-
to all the people of the Dominion. Only by govem-
public opinion, so expressed, will an end be made Jjf
to a party system that permits a small governing
class, systematically using both political parties,
to name the men who shall hold this or that port-
folio in the Dominion cabinet,^ or to dictate

^ "The king is a constitutional monarch, reigning by
virtue of an act of parliament, who leaves ruling to those whose
constitutional duty it is — the ministry responsible to the
people of the British Isles. That ministry has long ceased
to interfere with Canadian affairs. It would not think of
directing or even advising the people of Canada or its ministry
what to do, or to leave undone." — Riddell, "Constitution
of Canada," 90-91.

* In the twenty years from 1896 to 1917 there were only
two changes of government at Ottawa. At each of these
changes — the first in 1896, and the second in 191 1 — the

C261]

class

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

policies and legislation in its own interest, and
antagonistic to the interests of the people as a
whole.^
Public Public opinion in Canada is slow in expressing

*^°" itself at the polls against a government under
expressing which Corruption has manifested itself, or against
itself ^ government which has repudiated pledges by-
virtue of which it was elected.^ Only once in
the first half century of Confederation, in 1874,
did the electors of the Dominion dethrone a
government because it had proved corrupt and
untrustworthy.^
Party An administration at Ottawa is little perturbed

fealty j^y ^Y\e exposure of a scandal unless it is so grave
as to bring about its downfall. The party
supporters of the government in the house of
commons — the only house that need be consid-
ered in these matters — under any and all con-
ditions will vote with the government.'* The
party press from Halifax to Victoria will white-
wash the government, and insist, no matter how

governing class, represented on both occasions by the bankers
of Montreal and Toronto, dictated to the incoming premier
the man on whom he must bestow the portfolio of minister
of finance.

1 Cf, Goldwin Smith, "On the Position and Functions
of the Governor-General," Sun, Toronto, March 18, 1908,
and A. MacPhail, "Essays in Politics," 92.

2 Cf. Porritt, "Sixty Years of Protection in Canada,"

363-387-

» Cf. Cartwright, "Reminiscences," 110-119.
* Cf. Cartwright, ibid., 112.

[262]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

gross the scandal that has been exposed, that
conditions are no worse than they were when the
opposition was in power.

Much the same attitude will be taken by the Rigidity
active supporters of the government in the con- ^^^
stituencies, and in particular by the local political
mechanics; for nowhere in the English-speaking
world in normal times are party lines more rigidly
drawn or more rigidly adhered to than in Canada.

In the constituencies there is no large body of
electors who are unattached to either political
party. There is no large independent vote, as
there is in the United Kingdom and the United
States; ^ and unfortunately for the beneficent
working of the party system and of representa-
tive institutions, conditions in Dominion politics
from 1896 to the beginning of the war in 19 14
were such as not to admit of the existence of a
strong, aggressive, and effective opposition in
the house of commons at Ottawa.

V. Extra-Official Utterances of the Governor-
general

On the everyday political life of the Dominion Gov-

— on the policies, standards, and ideals of states- ^"^^'^

men and parties at Ottawa — the governor- and

general has not as much influence, direct or *^*^*®™"

. . . . poraiy

indirect, as the editor of any widely circulated poutics
newspaper that is not tied to any political party.

^ Cf. Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," notes IV and
V, los-^.

C263]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Only with his constitutional advisers is it allow-
able for him to talk politics. In public, con-
temporary politics is a forbidden subject for a
governor-general; and discretion must be ex-
ercised when he ventures to discourse from a
public platform on religion, economics, or so-
ciology.
Academic There is not much even of academic freedom
^^^^^ for a governor-general. Grey, who was at Ottawa
governor- from 1904 to 1911, was much criticized because
general j^^ spoke in public on the widespread success in
England and Scotland of cooperation on the
Rochdale principle. Even in discussing on the
platform general or abstract principles and
virtues, a governor-general must use much
circumspection, and take due care that any
speech he makes is accurately reported in the
press. On contemporary politics in all their
various aspects he must not, in public, venture
even a hint. It might be construed as prejudicial
to the political party in power, or as giving aid
and comfort to the party in opposition in the
house of commons.
Functions The position of governor-general in Canada,
^ or in any of the other four dominions, is, admit-

govemor- •' t^ • . , . .

general tedly, much as Denison described the position
tZs^ of the governor of New South Wales, in i860.
But the office is more than the most visible link
that binds the Dominion to Great Britain and
the empire. Some of the functions that attach
to the office are ceremonial. Others are only
[ 264 ]

GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND CABINET

formal. Formal as they are, they must be faith-
fully discharged, or there might be crises when
the day-by-day business of the Dominion would
come indefinitely to a standstill.

It was a maxim of Wellington's, in the political Weiiing-
years of his long career, that come what might ^^^
to political parties at Westminster, the king's
business must go on; and the important mission
of the governor-general is to see that, no matter
what may happen to contending political parties,
the king's business in Canada goes on.

More than once it has been suggested in Canada a
that the governor-general should be elected. ^^^^^
There are Canadians — many of them — who govemor-
could discharge the executive functions of the gov- ^^ggj,..
ernor-general; and little harm would result if able
some of the ceremonial functions were abandoned.
But no popular election could possibly carry into
the office a man sufficiently aloof from political
parties and political controversies and agitations
to exercise the delicate and important consti-
tutional functions that come at times into the
day's work of the governor-general under the
present system of representative and responsible
government.

It is the complete aloofness of the governor-
general from the fortunes of all political parties
in Canada; his disinterestedness in all politics
in the Dominion except the smooth and contin-
uous running of government; and the fact that
his term in Ottawa is fixed, and he is indebted

1 265 2

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

to no party, no interest, and no man in Canada
for his appointment, that gives value to the
governor-general's position.
Men who It is sometimes asserted that if Great Britain
c^^dA ^^^ "° king, a king must be created, if the system
and the of government by parhament and cabinet, as it
empu-e j^^g been developed since 1688, were to continue.
The same might be asserted of the governor-
generalship of Canada. It is inconceivable that
representative and responsible government could
continue, as it has been developed since 1841,
without a governor-general sent out from England;
and so long as the existing form of government
continues, the men in political life in Great
Britain who, for terms of four or five years,
exchange Westminster for Ottawa to serve as
governor-general, render good service not only
to Canada, but to the empire and to British
political civilization.

[266]

CHAPTER XI

parliament: the senate

FROM 1856 to 1866 the council of the legis- Principle
lature of the United Provinces was partly °*

elected

nominated and partly elected;^ and the two upper

provinces — Ontario and Quebec — were divided J^**™^®'
into senatorial electoral districts. At Confedera-
tion the elective principle was discarded; and by
the British North America act it was provided that
there should be a senate and a house of commons,
and that members of the senate should be ap-
pointed by the crown, acting through the governor-
general.

In practice this obviously meant that the Senators
senators were to be appointed by the cabinet at ^pp°^*®<*
Ottawa; for since the end of the Metcalfe regime cabinet
of 1 843-1 845, it had not been in the power of a
governor-general to appoint even a postmaster
or a collector of customs, except on the advice
of the executive council or the cabinet.

The statutory qualifications for senator are Quaiiii-
(i) that he shall be of the full age of thirty years; ^f"^"^
(2) that he shall be either a natural-born or senator
naturalized subject of the king; (3) that he shall
hold freehold property within the province for

^ Cf. Statutes of the Province of Canada, 19 and 20 Vic-
toria, c. cxl.

[267]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

which he is appointed, of the value of $4000
over and above all incumbrances; (4) that his
real and personal property shall be worth $4000
over and above his debts and Habilities; (5)
that he shall be resident in the province for
which he is appointed; and (6) in the case of
Quebec, that he shall have his real property
qualification in the senatorial division for which
he is appointed or shall be resident in that division.

I. Abandonment of the Elective Principle

Objection In February, 1865, when the resolutions of the
^ J. Quebec conference were before the legislative

discarding ^- ....

elective assembly of the United Provinces, objection was

^^*^^® made both to the abandonment of the elective

principle for the senate and to the continuing of

senatorial divisions for Quebec, while no such

provision was made for senatorial divisions in

the other provinces.

Grounds George Brown, of Ontario, who was of the

on which administration that carried the Quebec resolutions

discarded through the legislature of the United Provinces,

answered both of these criticisms. One of the

reasons for abandoning the elective principle

was the dread that an elective upper house might

encroach on the powers of the lower house. It

might claim power over money bills, which the

lower house claimed as its right.

Elected "Could they not," asked the leader of the

senate and Qntario Liberals of the era of Confederation,

money

bius "justly say that they represent the people as

[268]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

well as we do, and that the control of the purse
strings ought therefore to belong to them as much
as to us? They might amend our money bills.
They might throw out our bills if they liked,
and bring to a stop the whole machinery of
government."

Another reason for abandoning the elective Cost of
principle as it had been tried from 1856 was that ^^^
the election of senators from districts of large
area made it difficult to find men who were
willing to be candidates. "The constituencies,"
continued Brown, in speaking of the forty-eight
electoral divisions for the legislative council of
the United Provinces, "are so vast that it is diffi-
cult to find gentlemen who have the will to incur
the labor of such a contest, who are sufficiently
known and popular enough throughout districts
so wide, and who have money enough to pay
the enormous bills that are sent in after the combat
is over." ^

These were the reasons advanced in 1865 for Radicals
abandoning the elective principle — a principle ^^l
for which radicals of the school of Papineau and principle
Mackenzie had contended ten or fifteen years
before the rebellions of 1837, and for which
radicals had contended from the union of 1840
until 1856, when the principle was adopted for
both houses of the legislature.

One reason for the abandonment was not
publicly advanced by any of the Fathers of
^ Mackenzie, "Life of George Brown," 306-307.

C269]

eration
resolutions

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Greasing Confederation. It was known that seventy-two
toe ways genators, with salaries, and holding office for life,
Confed- would be appointed at Confederation; and a
pact that these appointments should be made
from among men already in the legislative coun-
cils of the United Provinces and of the Maritime
Provinces undoubtedly greased the ways for the
Quebec resolutions in the legislatures of what are
now sometimes described as the senior provinces
of the Dominion.

II. Senatorial Divisions in Province of Quebec

Senatorial How it comes about that today, as since 1867,
^visions senators at Ottawa from Quebec represent sena-
Quebec torial divisions, while senators from Nova Scotia,
New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Ontario,
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British
Columbia represent their provinces at large,
can be learned from the speech of the Liberal
leader of Ontario when the Quebec resolutions
were before the legislative assembly of the United
Provinces. Many important concessions were
made to the French province to insure the
success of the movement for Confederation.^

^ "No other constitution would give French-Canadians
such liberty. If French-Canadians were to break the consti-
tution, what kind of a constitution would they now get from
the majority of the people of Canada? Would they get the
same rights? No. I believe in the constitution that Cartier
got for us. By this constitution the majority of the people
cannot harm us. The signature of the king of England is
there, and no force can change it one iota." — Speech by

[270]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

The concession of senatorial districts was held to
be necessary to safeguard the sectional interests
of the province.

" Our Lower Canada friends " — said Brown ^ —
" felt that they had French-Canadian interests
and British interests to be protected; and they
conceived that the existing system of electoral
divisions would give protection to these separate
interests. We, in Upper Canada, on the other
hand, were quite content that they should settle
that among themselves, and maintain their
existing divisions if they chose. But so far as
we in the west were concerned, we had no such
separate interests to protect. We had no di-
versities of origin or language to reconcile; and
we felt that the true interest of Upper Canada
was that her very best men should be sent to
the legislative council wherever they might hap-
pen to reside, or wherever their property was
located.'* 2

For the legislative councils of the old British
North American provinces the only special claim
that was ever made was that as their members
were nominated by the crown, acting through
the governors, they afforded a safeguard to the
British connection. When all the provinces were
Lieutenant-Colonel P. E. Blondin, ex-member of house of
commons, grandson of Edmund Barnard, associate of Papi-
neau in rebellion of 1837, at meeting in Montreal, May 7,
1917, to stimulate recruiting of French-Canadians for Cana-
dian overseas forces. — Gazette, Montreal, May 8, 19 17.

1 February 8, 1865. * Mackenzie, 309.

[271]

Safe-
guarding
the

interests
of the
French
province

Upper
cham-
bers as
safe-
guards
for the
British
connec-
tion

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

in possession of representative and responsible
government — after 1851 — the legislative coun-
cils ceased to have this value, because a gov-
ernor-general or a governor could appoint to the
legislative council only on the recommendation
of the executive of the province, which owed its
existence from day to day to a majority in the
popularly elected assembly, and the maintenance
of the British connection was never taken into
account by the executive councils in their ap-
pointments to the legislative councils.
The Since Confederation, when the usefulness of

anTtoe ^^^ senate at Ottawa has been challenged, it
provinces has been asserted that the senate represents the
provinces, much in the same way as the senate
at Washington represents the states.^ Quebec,
since 1867, has continuously had more pecuHar
interests to safeguard than any of the other
provinces. For French-Canadians, religion and
language are the most important of these interests.
The population in Quebec of British origin is
largely urban. Its special care is the industrial,
commercial, maritime, and financial interests of
Montreal, which are not the interests of the rural
population.

From 1867 to 1913, 113 bills originating in the
house of commons were rejected by the senate.
An examination of these rejected bills would not

1 Cf. Wrong, "Second Chambers in Canada," The New
Statesman^ London, February 7, 19 14; Gazette, Montreal,
April 27, 1915.

[272]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

disclose that many of them assailed the interest a claim
of any of the provinces; and it would seem that *^
the claim that the senate represents the provinces on only
and safeguards their interests grows exclusively °**®^®8
out of the peculiar interests of Quebec. This
much is certain: one of the earliest recognitions
of the principle that the senate represents the
provinces is contained in the section of the con-
stitution of 1867 that continues for Quebec the
senatorial divisions that came into existence in
1856, when for the first time in any country
under the British crown, part of the members
of the upper house of a legislature were popu-
larly elected, and like members of the lower
house were responsible to their constituents.

III. Membership of Senate from 1867 to IQ16 —
Provision to End Deadlocks

At Confederation there were seventy-two in-
senators from the three geographical divisions ^®^®^
created in 1867. There were twenty-four from number
Ontario, twenty-four from Quebec, and twenty-
four from the Maritime Provinces. In the years
from 1867 to 1905 British Columbia came into
Confederation, and Manitoba, Saskatchewan,
and Alberta were organized as provinces. Addi-
tions to the senate followed the incoming of
British Columbia and the organization of the
three prairie provinces; and from 1906 to 191 6
the number of senators stood at eighty-seven.

[ 273 ]

senators

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Fourgeo- I" 1916, at the instance of the Dominion
graphical parliament, the section of the British North
In senate America act that determines the number of
senators, and their distribution among the
provinces, was amended by parliament at West-
minster; and the senate has since consisted of
ninety-six members. There are now four geo-
graphical divisions:

Ontario 24

Quebec 24

Maritime Provinces 24

Nova Scotia 10

New Brunswick 10

Prince Edward Island 4

Canada beyond the Great Lakes . 24

Manitoba 6

Saskatchewan 6

Alberta 6

British Columbia 6

New-
found-
land's
quota

Provision
to end
dead-
locks of
house
and
senate

The door to Confederation has always been
wide open to Newfoundland. Had Newfound-
land thrown in its lot with the Dominion it would,
before 1916, have been entitled to four senators
at Ottawa. By the 1916 amendment to the
British North America act it would now be entitled
to six senators.

In the event of a deadlock between the senate
and house of commons additional senators may
be appointed; but the number of these appoint-
ments has always been fixed by the British North
America act and its amendments. From 1867
to the amendment of 1916 the number was three
or six — one or two from each division. It is now

[274]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

^ four or eight; and Including seats for senators
from Newfoundland, until there is another amend-
ment to the British North America act, the total
number of senators cannot exceed no. In the
event of the appointment of senators to end a
deadlock, the governor-general "shall not sum-
mon any person to the senate until each of the
four divisions is represented by twenty-four sen-
ators and no more."
Criticism The Fathers of Confederation had to answer
deadlock ^^^^i^^sms of this provision of the constitution,
provision as they had of the abandonment of the elective
principle, the retaining of senatorial divisions
only in Quebec, and life membership in the senate.
It fell to George Brown to answer all these criti-
cisms, apparently because the criticisms came from
Liberals in Ontario, in which province Brown,
after the death of Baldwin in 1858, was the leader
of the Liberal party.
Quebec's It was objected that if members of the senate
objection ^gj.g ^Q i^g appointed for life the number should
unlimited be unlimited, so that in the event of a deadlock
Increase between the senate and the house there should

In

numbers be power to ovcrcome the deadlock by the appoint-
of senate j^gnt of additional members. "Under the British
constitution, in the case of a legislative union,"
said Brown, in answering this criticism, "that
might be a legitimate provision. But honorable
gentlemen must see that the limitation of the
numbers in the upper house lies at the base of
the whole compact on which this scheme rests.

C276]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

It is perfectly clear, as was contended by those
who represented Lower Canada in the conference/
that if the number of legislative councilors was
made capable of increase, you would thereby
sweep away the whole protection they had in the
upper chamber." ^

of life
member-
ship of
senate

IV. Life Tenure of Senators — Salary and
Privileges

George Brown was a convert to the principle Defense
of life membership in the senate. He frankly ^ncipie
admitted his conversion when he was called upon
to defend the principle in the legislative assembly.
Answering the objection that there ought to be
a limit to the term of senators, he told the assem-
bly that he had been in favor of a limited term.
"I thought it would be well," he said, "to provide
for a more frequent change in the composition
of the upper house, and lessen the danger of the
chamber being largely composed of gentlemen
whose advanced years might forbid the punctual
and vigorous discharge of their public duties."

The objection to this — Brown continued — was very
strong. It was said: "Suppose you appoint them for nine
years, what will be the effect? For the last three or four
years of their term they would be anticipating its expiring,
and anxiously looking to the administration of the day for
reappointment; and the consequence would be that a third
of the members would be under the influence of the executive.'*
The desire was to render the upper house a thoroughly inde-

Con-
ception
of senate
of fathers
of

Confed-
eration

* At Quebec.

* Mackenzie, 307-308.

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

pendent body — one that would be in the best position to
canvass dispassionately the measures of the lower house,
and stand up for the public interests in opposition to hasty
or partisan legislation.*

Conditions A senator can resign at any time by a writing
that vacate m^Jer his hand addressed to the governor-general;

seatin ^ ^. '

senate and the seat or a senator becomes vacant m any
of the following cases: (i) If for two consecutive
sessions of parliament he fails to attend the
senate; ^ (2) if he becomes the subject or citizen
of a foreign power; (3) if he is adjudged bank-
rupt, or insolvent, or becomes a public defaulter;
(4) if he is attainted of treason or convicted of
felony or of any infamous crime; (5) if he ceases
to be qualified in respect of property or residence.
Another It is a constitutional fiction in Canada that

tot°o^ wages or salaries are not paid to senators or
fiction members of the house of commons, or to members
of the provincial legislatures. As a matter of fact
wages and traveling expenses have been paid
to legislators ever since the first legislature in
Canada came into existence in Halifax in 1758.
Otherwise the existence of popularly elected

1 Mackenzie, 308.

2 The seat in the senate of the oldest senator, Hon-W. J.
Macdonald, of British Columbia, has been declared vacant
by reason of his absence for two consecutive sessions. He
occupied his seat for forty-four years, and was one of the
half-dozen left of all the appointments made by Sir John A.
Macdonald. The seat of Hon. Dr. J. E. Robertson, of Prince
Edward Island, was declared vacant for the same reason, in
the same motion. — Tribuney Winnipeg, April 29, 1915.

[278]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

legislatures would have been impossible. But
payments to members of parliament at Ottawa,
and of the provincial legislatures, are described
in enactments and in parliamentary debate,
as indemnities; and the constitutional fiction is
that these payments are not in return for services
rendered, but to recoup members for loss they
may sustain in attending to their parliamentary
duties.

Senators and members of the house of commons salaries
have always received equal indemnities. For °^ ^^
some years after Confederation the payment
was $600 per session, with allowances for main-
tenance on the journeys to and from Ottawa, and
a mileage allowance of ten cents a mile.

Several times between 1867 and 1905 the indem- Free
nity was increased. For some years it stood at ^^^j^
$1500; and in 1905 an act was passed which fixed and
the payment at $2500 a session. At that time a ^^°^
law was also passed under which senators and
members of the house of commons travel free
on all Canadian railways. They have also the
privilege of franking letters and parcels through
the mails, a privilege which members of parlia-
ment at Westminster have not enjoyed since the
penny post was established in the United Kingdom
in 1840. During the session at Ottawa letters
can be sent to senators and members of the house
of commons free of postage.

[279]

state cere-
monies

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

V. The Chamber of the Senate

Throne The chamber of the senate, colloquially known
^ as the red chamber, from the color of the uphol-

senate . , _

stery and hangings, is modeled on the chamber of
the house of lords at Westminster. There is no
woolsack; for Canada has no lord chancellor
to act as the presiding officer of the senate. But,
as in the house of lords, there is a throne; for the
senate chamber is the scene of the state cere-
monial attending the opening and proroguing of
parliament.
Scene of The commons are summoned thither by the
gentleman usher of the black rod, when the
king's speech at the opening or closing of the
session is about to be read in English and
French by the governor-general. It is in the
senate chamber also that the royal assent is
given to bills that have gone through all their
stages in both houses.
The bar The chait of the speaker of the senate is a little
°^*^f. to the left of the dais on which stands the throne;
and immediately in front of the chair is the table
at which sit the clerk of the parliament and clerk
of the senate, and the clerk assistant. The place
of black rod is at the bar, at the entrance to the
chamber; and it is at this bar that the speaker,
the sergeant-at-arms, and the commons stand
when they have responded to the summons of
black rod to attend on the governor-general in
the senate chamber.

C280]

of

senators

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

The chamber is spacious and handsome, with
large galleries for visitors — galleries which are
crowded when the governor-general attends in
state to open a new session of parliament.

The house of commons at Ottawa followed the Seating
seating plan long in use in the house of representa-
tives, and still in use in the senate, at Washington.
Each member sits at a desk. In the senate chairs
are provided — a departure from the usage of
the house of lords, where, as in the house of com-
mons at Westminster, members sit on benches.
The chairs, two deep, face each other the length
of the chamber; and between the front rows there
is a broad aisle extending from the throne to the
bar. Beyond the bar is the antechamber, which
is not accounted a part of the senate chamber.
Senators who are supporters of the government
sit, as at Westminster, to the right of the speaker.
Members of the opposition sit to the left.

Partly in accordance with long usage, and partly The
in accordance with statute, the ministry at West- *^^^*
minster is divided — usually unevenly — between senate
the house of lords and the house of commons.
Every member of the cabinet at Ottawa must
by usage be either of the house of commons or
of the senate.^ But neither by usage nor by law

* "It was reserved for the Australian Commonwealth
act (enacted at Westminster thirty-three years later than
the enactment of the constitution of Dominion of Canada)
expressly to state that a minister must become a member
of the legislature within a prescribed time." — H. E. Egerton,
"Federations within the British Empire," 123-124.

[281]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Govern-
ment
leader in
senate

is it necessary that any member of the cabinet
should be of the senate. There have been
cabinets of which no member was of the senate.^
It is seldom that more than one or two members
of the cabinet are of the upper house; and thus
it comes about that in the senate chamber there
is nothing that corresponds with the treasury
bench in the house of commons.

There is, however, always a leader for the
government in the senate. The exposition of the
policies of the government is deputed to this
leader; and it is his duty to pilot government
bills through the upper house.
Questions To the government leader in the senate inter-
rogatories are also addressed; for questions to
ministers, with all the advantages, direct and
indirect, that accrue therefrom in a democratic
form of government, are as much a parliamentary
institution at Ottawa as they are at Westminster.

There is also a leader of the opposition in the
senate. The member to whom this position is
assigned is elected in party caucus — a caucus
that under normal conditions is held during the
first days of a new parliament. If the new par-
liament has brought with it a new government,

1 "At Confederation, and for many years thereafter,
ministers holding portfolios sat in the senate. There are
none such now. Mr. Loughed leads the senate capably,
but he is not the head of a department, and this state of things
is not good for the country, nor good for the senate, nor does
it tend to strengthen the constitution." — Gazette^ Montreal
(Canada's oldest Conservative newspaper). May 2, 1917.

C282:

Opposition
leader in

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

and if there was a member of the cabinet in the
senate of the preceding parHament, the position
of leader of the opposition goes, almost as a matter
of course, to this senator.

VI . A Merging of the Old and the New —
Procedure in the Senate

In the early years of Confederation, while the Dominion

provincial spirit was still strong, it was often a ^^^^~

complaint of members of the house of commons legis-

from the Maritime Provinces that members from Ji^*^®°^

Upper

Ontario and Quebec were too much inclined to and
regard the parliament of the Dominion as an ^^^\
enlargement and continuation of the legislature
of the United Provinces. It was not unnatural
that the members from what are now the central
provinces should so regard the Dominion parlia-
ment. It was in the assembly of the legislature
of the United Provinces that the struggle for
responsible government had been successfully
waged. Success in that struggle had paved the
way for Confederation. Conditions in the United
Provinces had made Confederation imperative
and greatly hastened its realization.

The new parliament had been established in Newoc-
Ottawa, which in 1866 had become the capital I^^P^t^^*

. legislative

of the United Provinces; and it was holding buuding
its sessions in a parliament house that had been °^^f^*®<^

. . Proyinces

built for the legislature of the United Provinces.

Party lines as they were developed in the first

five years of Confederation were similar to party

[283]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Party Hnes in the United Provinces. In the early
before years of Confederation the Liberal-Conservatives
and after ranged themselves on the side of protective tariffs
erati^*^' ^"^ against democratic electoral franchises, and
the Liberals on the side of free trade and democ-
racy, much as had been the alignment of political
parties on these questions in the old legislature
from 1 841 to 1866.
Usages The usages and procedure of the old legislature,

^^ ^ moreover, were continued in the Dominion parlia-

procedure ^

of old ment; and for members of the senate or house
legislature ^f commons who had been of the legislative
council or assembly of the United Provinces,
there was little outward change after the consti-
tutional transition of 1867.
Procedure The procedure and ceremonial of the senate of
in senate j^j^ ^^.^ jj^^jg different from those of the legis-
lative council of 1 841-1866; for procedure in the
earlier era, as in the later, was modeled as closely
as possible on that of the house of lords.
Speech A new session is opened with the speech from

^m the ^j^g throne — a speech which is prepared for the
governor-general by the cabinet, and in which
the legislative work of the session is briefly
outlined. An address in reply is adopted, and
the senate is then ready for any business that
may be awaiting it.
Procedure Bills originate in the senate — private members'
on biUs jjjjig ^j^j j^jjjg fQj. (divorce — rather than govern-
ment bills. Leave to introduce a bill is given
by the senate, and the bill is read a first time.
[284]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

These stages are formal. It Is seldom that there
is any discussion either of a motion for leave to
introduce or at first reading. At second read-
ing the general principle of a bill is discussed;
and after being read a second time it goes to
committee.

The bill may go to committee of the whole
house, or to a standing committee. In either
case clauses and details are discussed in committee.
It is reported back to the senate, with or without
amendment, and is then ready for third reading.
At this stage amendments are still possible, and
it is also possible to reject a bill at third reading,
or to refer it back to committee.

After a bill is read a third time it is carried to House
the house of commons, and if amendments are ®™®°<^"

ments

made there it is returned to the senate for con- to a
currence or non-concurrence with the amend- ^f,^*®

Dill

ments. Discussion between the two houses over
bills is by message, not by conference, as is the
rule at Washington, and as was the usage at
Westminster until 1851.^

Finance bills, or bills which, if they became Finance
law, would impose a charge on the treasury of ^^^^^^
the Dominion, cannot originate in the senate.
The provision that every bill for appropriating
any part of the public revenue, or for imposing
any tax, must originate in the house of commons, is
intended to crystallize the constitutional practice
at Westminster, and make it plain that the people

^ Cf. Porritt, " Unreformed House of Commons," I, 560.

C285:

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

hold the purse-strings.^ It is within the power
of the senate to reject a finance bill, but it can
make no amendment to a bill of this character.
Senate Unlike the senate at Washington, the Canadian

°°kUmr^ senate has no part in originating or molding
tariff biUs tariff legislation. Individual senators may have
some influence with the cabinet when a tariflF
bill is being framed by a committee of the cabinet
for acceptance first by the cabinet, and then by
the house of commons. But as a body the senate
has never had any influence in determining the
details of that part of the National Policy of the
Dominion that centers in the tariff and the bounty
system. In such legislation, in practice, the only
function of the senate is to give formal con-
firmation to bills sent to it from the house of
commons.

As regards the initiation of bills, the activities
of the senate are much less than those of the house.-
of commons, where most of the members of the
cabinet have their seats. In the forty-six years
from 1867 to 1913, 5871 bills were passed by the
house, and sent to the senate. In this period,
1294 bills, originating in the senate, were sent
to the house of commons.

Bills for divorce, which by usage always
originate in the senate, are included in the total
of 1294 bills. In the first thirty years of Con-
federation petitions for divorce were not numerous.
In no year before 19CX) did the number of divorce
1 Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 95.
[286]

much less
active
body
than the

BUls for
divorce

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

bills which received the royal assent exceed six.^
Petitions were few because in the Maritime
Provinces and in British Columbia there are
courts for matrimonial causes. These four prov-
inces are in practice outside the jurisdiction of
the senate as regards divorce. French Canada,
from its large Roman Catholic population,
presents no petitions for divorce.

A few petitions come from the English-speaking Area of
and Protestant population of Quebec. Other- 5^°^°"
wise divorce petitions come only from the part which
of the Dominion that lies between the Ottawa p®*^*^°^

for

River and the eastern foothills of the Rocky divorce

Mountains; and until 1900 there were not more ^®
than two and a half million people in this vast
territory. Of these, two millions were in Ontario.

Divorce bills increased in number between women

IQOO and 1916. There were fourteen in 1906; f^,,

r . ^ 1 • 1 1 r r lobbyists

nmeteen m 191 1; and m the last nve years of for
this period there were from forty-five to fifty ^^'^^
petitions at each session of parliament. At
times the precincts of the senate were thronged
with women who were lobbying for or against
these divorce bills.'^

These bills, which are discussed at third read- Dis-
ing, take up much of the time of the senate. In ^^!^f°
the common acceptance or the term they cannot reading
be described as legislative measures.

1 Cf. Canada Year Book, 191 1, 429.

2 Cf. Northrup, "Divorce Bills in the Senate," GazrtU,
Montreal, January 11, 1916.

[287]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The

senate as
a revising
chamber

Senate
not an
impartial
chamber
of review

Spasmodic
service as
a revising
body

VII. The Senate as a Revising Body — Popular
Indifference to its Existence and Proceedings

It is a modern claim for the house of lords that
it acts as a revising chamber. The same claim
is made for the senate at Ottawa. To what
extent the senate acts as a revising chamber can
to some degree be judged from the record of its
work from 1867 to 1913. It amended 1246 of
the 5871 bills it received from the house of com-
mons, or 21.5 per cent. It rejected 113 bills,
or 2 per cent.^

As furnishing a basis for the claim that the
senate is of value as a revising body these figures
covering a period of forty-six years are of only
limited service. They cannot be taken at their
face value. They cannot be accepted as a measure
of the service of the senate as an independent
and impartial chamber of review, because since
1874, and especially since 1896, it has been well
known that the vigilance of the senate in amend-
ing or rejecting bills depends on conditions which
should have no influence with a really independent
or impartial chamber of revision.

In the forty-two years from 1874 to 1916 —
a period during which the Liberals were in power
from 1874 to 1878, and again from 1896 to 1911,
and the Conservatives from 1878 to 1896, and
again from 191 1 onward — the vigilance of the
senate as a chamber of revision was not continuous.
^ Cf. Ross, "The Senate of Canada," 76.

[288]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

It was spasmodic. The senate was vigilant only
in the years that followed a change of govern-
ment. Its vigilance depended on whether or not
the political complexion of its majority matched
that of the administration as supported by the
majority in the house of commons.

Second chambers in the legislatures of the Second
British North American provinces were contin- ^^'
uously unsatisfactory from 1791 to 1866. Par- contin-
ticularly was this the case with the legislative ^^J]^
councils of Upper and Lower Canada and of the factory
United Provinces. ^

In framing the British North America act the Confed-
Fathers of Confederation desired to create a ^^^g^i
senate that would begin a new and better era in to begin
the history of upper chambers in Canada. The ^^°^J
professed expectation of the framers of the con- upper
stitution was that the upper chamber at Ottawa ^*™^**"
would be "an independent body, moderating Canada
between parties — a body of judicial temper,
and of rarer atmosphere than the house of
commons." 2

The expectation of 1 864-1 867 has not been even An
partially realized. The position of senator is ^^'
a highly privileged one. He is free from individ- not
ual claims by constituents on his time and energy '®*^®^

^ Cf. Durham's Report, II, 82; and H. L. Debates, June
IS, 1854.

2 " The Round Table," III, 719. " The senate was intended
to be the drag on the house of commons coach, a check upon
hasty legislation arising out of feverish popular agitation." —
GazettCy Montreal, May 2, 1917.

C289]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

during the pariiamentary session. He takes no
part in elections. Political propaganda has never
made any large demands on his time. A senator
is free constitutionally to play a bold, strong,
and independent part in the political life of the
Dominion. But privilege and freedom have been
of no avail. Senators, as members of one division
of parHament, have never played a prominent
part, to say nothing of a bold or strong part, in
Dominion politics.
Only five From Confederation to 191 7, George Brown,
mTonli ^^° ^^^ leader of the Liberal party in Ontario;
fame in Sir John J. C. Abbott, who was premier of the
hoT Dominion 1891-1892; Sir Mackenzie Bowell,
1867 to who was premier from 1894 to 1896; Sir Oliver
"^^ Mowat, who was premier of Ontario from 1872

to 1896 and minister of justice at Ottawa from
1896 to 1897; and Sir Richard Cartwright, who
was minister of finance at Ottawa from 1874 ^^
1878, and minister of trade and commerce from
1896 to 191 1, were the only men of national fame
who were of the senate.
Senators Ovcr 300 scnatots — to be exact, 304 — were
to'^thr' appointed in the years from 1867 to 1914.^ Not
man in the more than ten of them were of front rank in
street " Dominion politics, or were men who, after Confed-
eration, earned for themselves even mention in
the political history of Canada. Wrong, a writer
on Canadian constitutional history of interna-
tional fame, asserted in 1 914 that the average
1 Cf. Ross, 121-124.
[290]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

Canadian — Balfour's "the man in the street" —
would be puzzled if asked to draw up a list of
half a dozen of the senators at Ottawa.^ A
similar statement might have been made at any
time in the forty years that preceded the great
war.

Except for an agitation against the senate, Popular
carried on by the Liberal party for a few years ^*^^®^"
before the Liberals took office in 1896, the people senate
of Canada have been continuously indifferent '^^ "^
to the senate and its proceedings. Canadian ings
newspapers for the most part ignore its debates.

There is, in practice, no press gallery in the ignored

senate. There is ample accommodation for re- ^^

. , news-

porters. But the newspapers will not assign men papers

to the senate. A reporter, who is a salaried
employee of the senate, furnishes, free of cost,
summaries of the debates to all the newspaper
correspondents at Ottawa. His work is of little
public value; for nine out of ten of the daily
newspapers regard senate debates as not worth
the cost of telegraph tolls. Similar neglect is the
fate of the senate with the weekly and semi-
weekly newspapers all over the Dominion.

"A measure or criterion that we have of the Popular
value which is placed upon speeches by members ^*^^®'"-
of parliament,'* said Cartwright, government realized
leader in the senate, in 191 1, "is the synopsis |^J^
which we find in the public press from day to

^ Cf. Wrong, "Second Chambers in Canada," The New
Statesman, London, February 7, 1914.

[291]

senate

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Reason
for

popular
indiffer-
ence

day as to what took place in this chamber. We,
in this chamber, have appropriated a very sub-
stantial sum for the purpose of disseminating to
the press a synopsis of our deliberations. And
what do we find ? We find that the value placed
by the press upon these deliberations is indicated
in about a quarter of a column in the ordinary
newspaper of the day, and sometimes not even
that.'' 1

The reason for popular indifference to the senate
is that its creation in 1867 did not begin a better
era in the history of second chambers in Canada.
The senate, at no time since 1867, has aroused
such intense popular hostility as was aroused by
the legislative councils of Upper and Lower
Canada of i 791-1840. It has never flouted
popular opinion. Nor has it ever entered on a
contest with the house of commons over any
measure in which there was keen popular interest.

Unlike the legislative councils of Upper and
Lower Canada, the senate has always been free
legislature of office-holders. Unlike the legislative councils
under the constitution of 1791, also, it has never
attempted the position of predominant partner.
None the less, part of Newcastle's character-
ization of the legislative council of the United
Provinces in 1854 — his insistence that the
council did not exercise the influence in the
province that it ought to possess — might be
applied to the senate from 1867 to 191 7.
1 Senate Debates, March 29, 191 1, p. 508.

[292]

Never an
ambitious
branch of

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

The senate admittedly has not exercised the
influence in the Dominion or in parliament that
was expected by the Fathers of Confederation. ^
There are no public records of refusals to accept
nomination to the senate as there are to accept
membership in the legislative council of the United
Provinces. There is never any lack of claimants
for appointment — claimants with efficient press
agents — when vacancies occur in the senate
owing to death or to the automatic ending of the
careers of senators in consequence of failure —
mostly due to old age — to attend its sessions.

It is a matter of history, however, that a seat
in the cabinet has seldom been offered to a
senator; and since 1871, when administrations
at Ottawa began to have power to make nomi-
nations, it has been notorious that the men nwst
anxious to become senators — the men to whom
about ninety-eight per cent of the nominations
went between 1871 and 1916 — were men who
regarded a senatorship and a life salary as their
due for services in Dominion or provincial pol-
itics to the party in power.

^ " For one cause or another the senate has scarcely had fair
play. When formed, the intention was that it should be
non-partisan, a sort of judicial tribunal supervising and re-
viewing the legislation of the commons with an eye single to
the merits of that legislation. In the course of years this
purpose has somewhat failed." — GazetUt Montreal, May 2,
1917.

Class of
men who
seek
appoint-
ment CO
senate

[293]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

VIII. The Senate and the Spoils System —
Friction between the House and the Senate

Senator- "From the first," writes Wrong, "appointments

■^^ * to the senate came under the full control of the

of party mechanism of the party. The security of the

**'^*^° position for life, and the freedom from the labors

of an election, have made a senatorship a desirable

crown of party service; and to this use the

office has been put. The view is generally

current in Canada, that only elderly men should

be appointed to the senate." ^

Only party "Men who have given long service in the house

Interests ^^ commons, " continues Wrong, " sometimes claim

sidered a senatorship for their declining years. Other

claims are from those who have given similar

service in the party organization, or it may be

have contributed liberally to the party funds.

No government. Liberal or Conservative, has

made any serious effort to save the post of senator

as a reward for any other kind of public service,

and in the present condition of public thought it

would be quixotic to expect that anything but

party interests should be considered." ^

^ At the time the Parliamentary Guide for 1912 was
compiled, four senatorships were vacant. Of the 83 senators
then on the roll, two were under 50 years of age; 14 were
between 50 and 60; 24 between 60 and 70; 32 over 70 and
under 80; and 11 over 80 years. There have been instances
of men of 95 and 96 in attendance as senators.

2 Wrong, " Second Chambers in Canada," The New States-
many February 7, 1914.

[294]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

From the early years of Confederation appoint- To
ments to the senate were always regarded as the 71?°"
patronage of a political party. The principle that the
to the victors belong the spoils is nearly as old in *^'°"*
Canada as it is in the United States; and in the
years before the war at Ottawa its application
was almost as wide as it ever was at Washington.

From Confederation to 191 8, when, as a war
measure, there was some reform in the distribu-
tion of patronage, the principle was continuously
applied to the speakership of the house of com-
mons and of the senate,* and to appointments
to the higher positions on the clerical staff of
parliament, to appointments as judges, and to
many of the prized positions in the civil service
of the Dominion. The principle was also applied
to a large range of government purchases of sup-
plies, and particularly to contracts for printing
and advertising, which went only to newspapers
which supported the political party in power.^

^ The speaker of the senate, who Is paid a salary of ^4000
and provided with an apartment within the parliament build-
ing, is appointed by the government. The speaker of the house
of commons, who also receives $4cxx> a year and is provided
with an apartment, is elected by the house at the opening
of a new parliament. But the successful candidate for the
chair is in practice always nominated by the government.

* On the order paper of the house of commons on April
25, 1917, there was notice of a resolution to be moved from the
opposition benches condemning the spoils system. It read
as follows: "That, in the opinion of this house, the prevailing
system of party patronage constitutes a menace to honest

C 295 1

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Senate The spoils systcm was most rigidly adhered

and the ^^ '^^ appointments to the senate. "In nearly
QTstem half a century," writes a Canadian critic of the
senate, "the claims of party have been ignored
in only a single appointment. The Canadian
constitution reposes a vast patronage in govern-
ments. The situation in Canada is exactly the
situation that would exist in the United States
if the president appointed every senator, every
state governor, and every federal and state judge
throughout the Union. This is perhaps the reason
why changes of government occur so seldom in
the Dominion. The prospect of a life seat in the
senate attracts many powerful supporters in the
constituencies. It assists discipline, and reduces
contumacy in the house of commons." ^
Friction Friction between the senate and the house of

commons is infrequent. It occurred in the
quarter of a century before the great war only
in the first few years of the Liberal govern-
ment of 1 896-1 91 1, and in the first few years of
the Conservative government that was in power
from 191 1 to 1917. In each case the friction was
traceable to the fact that both political parties

and efficient government, incites to great waste of resources
and extravagance, in its application to expenditures and
appointments for military purposes, greatly injures the proper
fulfillment of our duty to the nation, tends inevitably to cor-
rupt and lower the tone of public morals, and should forth-
with be eliminated from our federal administration."
1 "The Round Table," III, 719-722.

[296]

between

senate

and

house

Infrequent

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

had appointed none but partisans to the senate
when the appointing power was in their control.

The first seventy-two members of the senate Appoint-
were appointed by royal proclamation. These ™®"*^
appointments had been agreed upon before the senate
new constitution became effective. From 1867 ^g^^to
to 1873 a Conservative government, with Mac- i878
donald as premier, was in power. As vacancies
due to death occurred, and as additional prov-
inces came into Confederation — Manitoba in
1870 and British Columbia in 1871 — the ap-
pointments to the senate were made by
Macdonald. Thirty-two senators had been so
appointed before Macdonald went out of office
in 1873. Only one was of the Liberal party.^

A Liberal government, with Alexander Mac- Liberals
kenzie of Ontario as premier, was in power from J^^o^ty
1873 to 1878; and in these years sixteen senators,
all of the Liberal party, were appointed. Mac-
donald and the Conservatives were returned to
power in 1878, and the Conservatives were con-
tinuously in office until 1896. In these eighteen
years eighty-five senators, all Conservatives, were
appointed by the successive Conservative govern-
ments. The result was that when the Liberal
government, with Laurier as premier, came into
power in 1896, it was confronted with the fact that
out of eighty-three senators, only thirteen, all ap-
pointed before 1878, were of the Liberal party.

^ Cf. Willison, "Some Political Leaders in the Canadian
Federation," 50.

[ 297 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The The Liberals were in power from 1896 to 191 1.

tevaw^ Eighty-one senators, all Liberals/ were appointed
1896-1911 in these fifteen years; and when the Conserva-
tives, with Robert L. Borden as premier, took
office in 191 1, of the eighty-seven senators only
twenty-two were Conservatives.
Partisan After each of these changes in government in
rfs^te ^^9^ ^"^ ^9^^' when the majority of the senate
realized that for four or five years, at least, it
would be in opposition to the government, and
to the majority in the house of commons, there
was a quickening of activity in rejecting and
amending government bills. The power of re-
vision was exercised from 1896 to 1 901, and from
191 1 to 1916, with a vigilance that was altogether
lacking in the longer periods when the majority
of the senate was of the same party as the major-
ity of the house of commons and the government.

IX. Attitude of Political Parties towards the Senate
Meas- In the years 1 896-1 901, during which the Liberal

Lir °'i government was confronted with a hostile majority
goyem- in the senate, the senate rejected four or five

ment

rejected ^ "Sir John Macdonald appointed John Macdonald, of

Toronto, to the upper chamber. But the Conservative
leader never found any other Liberal with the necessary
qualifications for a senatorship. From 1878 to 1902 no
Liberal was appointed chairman of a senate committee. We
cannot trace to Liberal governments — 1 874-1878 and 1896-
191 1 — even one such error as Sir John Macdonald com-
mitted."— Willison, "Some Political Leaders in the Con-
federation of Canada," 50.

[298]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

government bills. One was a measure for extend-
ing the Intercolonial Railway — a government
undertaking — from Levis to Montreal. Another
bill, rejected in 1897, would have authorized the
construction of a government railway from the
Stickene River to Teslin Lake — a railway which
was designed to form part of the rail and water
route to Dawson City.

The senate between 191 1 and 1916, when a same
Conservative government was faced with a '**® '**
Liberal majority, rejected six or seven bills, or uresof
so amended bills as to make them unacceptable Conserv-
to the house of commons and the government, govem-
One of these measures was a bill, passed by the ™®^*
house of commons in 191 2, under which Canada
was to provide three battleships as an addition
to the British navy. A second bill, also in 191 2,
was for the creation of a permanent tariff com-
mission; and a third, passed by the house in
19 14, was to provide for increases in the salaries
of railway mail clerks.

With harmonious majorities in the senate and Eras of
house of commons, government bills are never *^^°°y
rejected, or even amended in any way that is docuity
unacceptable to the government. At these times
there is not a more docile second chamber in the
English-speaking world than the senate at Ottawa.

At these times its sittings for public business A "me
are not continuous from day to day like the ^" ^
sittmgs of the house of commons. Sittmgs commons
seldom extend beyond the dinner hour; for almost

[299]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the sole business of the senate as regards gov-
ernment bills is to say ditto to the house of
commons.^ Only a new government, which is
temporarily without a majority in the senate,
need fear the power that the senate can exercise
as a chamber of revision.
Senators The incoming governments of 1896 and 191 1
°®^®^ strongly objected to the hostility encountered
by some of their bills in the senate. So did the
supporters of these governments in the house of
commons and in the press. But time is on the
side of the government.^ Senators never resign
except when, as sometimes happens, they are
appointed lieutenant-governors of provinces. But
most of them are elderly. Death or failure to
attend for two consecutive parliamentary ses-
sions creates on an average five or six vacancies
a year.
Waiting No matter which political party is in power,

^* there is always a long waiting list for appoint-

ment to the senate. On the list are names of men
in the house of commons, who are tired of close
attendance on the house, with the physical and
nervous strain it entails, and tired also of contested
elections and of being at the beck and call of
constituents.

* "If there be any pertinent criticism to be made of the
senate, it is that the chamber has fallen into a state of desue-
tude. It has become in a way a mere recording body, a 'me
too* machine. This condition is far from desirable." —
Gazette, Montreal, May 2, 1917.

2 Cf. Riddell, " Constitution of Canada," 102.
[300]

cent
demandt

senate
refonn

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

Men are also on the list who have held cabinet Men on
office in provincial administrations, and who are ^^^^^
out of a job. Others are owners or editors of Ust
newspapers, who conceive that a seat in the senate,
a salary of $2500 a year, a luxurious clubhouse
in Ottawa, free of annual dues, and free railway
travel over the Dominion, would be some return
for the services they have rendered to their
political party.

As vacancies in the senate occur or come into Evanes-
sight, the agitation for senate reform, growing
out of irritation over the rejection of the bills of for
a new government, completely dies away. The
demand ceases to interest the politicians in power
as the procession of the government's nominees
into the senate increases in length.^

The Conservatives were in a minority of forty- Nature
three in the senate in 191 1, when the Borden ^_®®
government was organized. New appointments cuWes
by May, 1914, had decreased the adverse majority
to six. "Nature," wrote a Canadian chronicler
of the changes in the senate from 191 1 to 1914,
"may be fairly depended upon to wipe out the
surplus of Liberal senators before next session; ^
and then with the Conservatives in control, the
senate can be counted quite a model body, which
needs no change." ^

1 Cf. Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 102-103.

* Deaths of senators were so frequent in the first six years
of the Borden government that by April, 1917, the minority
of forty-three of 191 1 had become a majority of eight.

' Mercury^ Renfrew, Ontario, May 8, 1914.

C301]

with the
senate

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

And Is This was the attitude of the Conservative

°^^g^ government, and its house of commons supporters,
toward senate reform after nature and the govern-
ment had adjusted the balance of power in the
senate. The attitude of a Liberal government is
precisely the same when once it is in possession
of a majority in the senate.^
Senate The Liberals came into power in 1896 after a

reform general election in which they had gone to the
by liberals constituencies on the Ottawa program of 1893.
m power 'pj^g ^^^ government chafed for four or five years
under the disadvantage of an adverse majority
in the senate. But as vacancies occurred the
government filled them with its nominees; and
despite the fact that the resolution of 1893,
pledging the Liberal party to a reform of the
senate,^ was submitted to the Ottawa convention
by three men who were afterwards of the cabinets
of 1 896-1 91 1, not a word was heard from the
government about senate reform during the
fifteen years that the Liberals were in power.^

1 " Since advocacy of senate reform Is the strict and in-
alienable prerogative of oppositions, the senate as now con-
stituted seems to rest upon a reasonably stable foundation."
— Willison, "Some Political Leaders In the Canadian Federa-
tion," 51.

2 Cf. Official report of the Liberal convention, Ottawa,

l893» 134-

2 "Notwithstanding the fact that one of the planks of the
Liberal platform in 1893 was the reform of the senate, during
the whole fifteen years the Liberal party were in power, there
was no reform of the senate other than through the efforts

[302]

PARLIAMENT: THE SENATE

The senate has been of some Httle service PubUc
in improving details of bills sent to it from the ^^^^^

.of senate

house of commons. For five provinces also it
has served as a divorce court. These are its
public services.

Two distinctly party services have also been its
rendered by the senate. Twice since 1896 its ^®*^^^^
existence has made it possible for a political political
party, defeated at a general election, to harass p*^®*
and thwart a new government. Its existence also
has added quite largely to the patronage of
governments, and has thus enabled governments
to keep in line and under party discipline a far
larger number of active and office-seeking parti-
sans than is represented by the actual number of
appointments made by any government to the
senate.

The senate, chiefly by its failure to realize the its
professed expectations of the Fathers of Con- ^^^^
federation, by its failure to make a beneficent to
impression on politics in Canada, or at any time ^^<*«^*s

' ' rr , • • ,1 ofparUa-

m Its ntty years existence to convince the people mentary
of Canada that it was of any possible public ^*^*"-
usefulness,^ is, from the standpoint of students

of Divine Providence. No action along that line was taken
by the government or by any member supporting the govern-
ment, with the exception of Mr. Maclntyre." — W. M.
German, Liberal member from Ontario, in debate on constitu-
tion of senate, house of commons. May 7, 1917.

^ "W, M. German's proposal in the house of commons
today to reform the senate by making it elective instead of
selective, met with little favor. The mover of the resolution

[303]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of the working of parliamentary institutions, the
most interesting second chamber in the English-
speaking world. It is especially so, when it is
kept in mind that it represents the fourth attempt
since 1791 to establish a second chamber, modeled
after the house of lords, in the portion of the
British empire that is now comprised in the
Dominion of Canada.

and all others who took part in the debate paid tribute to the
personnel of the senate, past and present, but regretted that
it had ceased to be an active legislative body, and in a measure
lost the confidence of the people." — Ottawa correspondence,
Gazettey Montreal, May 7, 1917.

[304]

I

CHAPTER XII

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

N the first session of the first parliament of Number
the Dominion there were i8i members of °^ ^

, members

the house of commons. Ontario was represented
by 82 members; Quebec by 65; Nova Scotia
by 19; and New Brunswick by 15. After the
redistribution of representation in 1914, the num-
ber stood at 234.^ In 1867, when only four
provinces were in Confederation, the population
of the Dominion was 3,250,000; at the census
of 191 1, on which the redistribution of 1914
was based, it was 7,206,000.

In the intervening forty-four years two of the
old British North American provinces, British
Columbia and Prince Edward Island, had come
into the Dominion; and parliament at Ottawa, by
virtue of amendments to the constitution which
had increased its powers, had created the prov-
inces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta,
and had conferred on these provinces, and also
on the Yukon Territory, the right to represen-
tation in the house of commons.

^ Cf. An act to readjust the representation in the house
of commons, assented to June 12, 1914 — 4-5 George V.,
c. SI-

[ 305 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Appor-
tionment
of repre-
sentation

I. The Distribution of Representation

These additions to the membership of the house
were made in strict accordance with section 51
of the British North America act, the section
which defines the powers of parliament in the
apportionment of representation among the sev-
eral provinces.

Section 51 — a disturbing section since 1903
to the older provinces, which, under its strict pro-
visions, must submit to reductions in their repre-
sentation — reads as follows :

On the completion of the census in 1871, and on each
subsequent decennial census, the representation of the
four provinces shall be readjusted by such authority, in
such a manner, and from such time, as the parliament
of Canada shall from time to time provide, subject and
according to the following rules:

(i) Quebec shall have the fixed number of 65
members.

(2) There shall be assigned to each of the other prov-
inces such a number of members as will bear the same
proportion to the number of its population (ascertained
at such census) as the number 65 bears to the number
of the population of Quebec (so ascertained).

(3) In the computation of the number of members
for a province, a fractional part, not exceeding one half
of the whole number requisite for entitling the province
to a member shall be disregarded; but a fractional part
exceeding one half of that number shall be equivalent
to the whole number.

(4) On any such readjustment, the number of mem-
bers for a province shall not be reduced unless the pro-
portion which the number of the population of the prov-
ince bore to the number of the aggregate population of

[306]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

Canada at the then last preceding readjustment of the
number of members for the province is ascertained
at the then latest census to be diminished by one
twentieth part or upwards.

(5) Such readjustment shall not take effect until
the termination of the then existing parliament.

At each decennial redistribution of represen- Losses
tation, parliament when it enters on this task ^ ^
is confronted with these provisions of the con- butioa
stitution; and when, as in 1903 and again in 1914,
the older and more settled provinces of Ontario,
Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward
Island know, from the census returns, that they
are to lose some part of their representation,
there is a reminder from the minister who intro-
duces the redistribution bill that no blame can
rest on parliament for the losses that provinces
must undergo.

II. Quebec the Pivotal Province

"We have," said Laurier, premier of the Liberal Pariia-
administrations of 1896-1911, when he intro
duced the bill of 1903, "only to take the pro- in
visions of section a of the constitution, and ®°f_*=*^
the figures of the census, and find the result, tributton
In this matter parliament is not a free agent.
It has no discretion to exercise. It is simply
the instrument and creature of the law. In
this particular bill we have only to take the
result of the census of 1901, and make the redis-
tribution accordingly. We give to each province

[307]

ment
not free

bUls

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the number to which it is entitled, some having less,

some more, but all being bound by the same rule." ^

Quebec Quebec is the only province which can look

quota Qj^ without direct concern when a redistribution

unalter-
able bill is before the house of commons. Increased

representation for the new provinces, and for
British Columbia, the four provinces which,
after 1900, attracted much of the stream of im-
migration, may lessen the influence and weight of
the French province at Ottawa. But no matter
what the census returns may show, Quebec's
quota of sixty-five remains unalterable, unless
there is an amendment to section 51 — an amend-
ment of which during the first half-century of
Confederation there was not even a hint at Ottawa.
Unit of In the redistribution of representation Quebec

is thus the pivotal province. "Taking the popu-
lation of Quebec at 2,003,232," said Borden,
premier of the Conservative government that
was responsible for the redistribution bill of
1914, "and dividing it by 65, we obtain the unit
of 30,819. Applying this unit to the popu-
lation of the various provinces, we find that
Alberta is entitled to a membership of 12.12 —
the decimal is disregarded, and Alberta receives
a membership of 12. In the case of British
Columbia, the number is 12.70. The decimal
being in excess of five, British Columbia receives
a membership of 13." ^

1 H, C. Debates, March 31, 1903.

2 Ibid., February 10, 19 14.

C308]

repre-
sentation

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

The territories west of the Great Lakes came Changes
into the pariiamentary representation at the ^
redistribution of 1892. Four members were sentatioa
then assigned to what were called the northwest ^^
territories. It was 1905 before portions of these
territories were organized as the provinces of
Saskatchewan and Alberta. The changes in
the representation brought about since 1892
by the operation of section 51 of the British
North America act, and by the amendments made
to it at Westminster in 1871 and 1886, are recorded
in the accompanying table:

Province

1892

1903

190S

1914

Ontario

65
20
14

I

5
4

86

6S
18

13
10

7

4

10

I

86

65

. 18

13
10

7
4

I

7
10

82

Quebec

^1
16

Nova Scotia

New Brunswick

II

Manitoba

IS

13

3

British Columbia ...

Prince Edward Island ....

Northwest Territories

Yukon

I

Alberta

12

Saskatchewan

16

Totals

213

214

221

234

The Dominion parliament has left to the pro- Electoral

vincial legislatures the determination of the *'^"

franchises on which members of the house of deter-

commons shall be elected. This is in accordance mined by

with the federal principle — the principle which vindai

from the first has prevailed in the United States. ^®8is-
To the state legislatures also has been assigned,

C309]

by parlia-
ment

redis-
tributions

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

from the first, the division of the states into

congressional districts.

Electoral Canada has not followed the example of the

deTer-"^^ United States in the redistribution of representa-

mined tion. It has never permitted the provincial

legislatures to map out the electoral divisions or

constituencies from which representatives of the

province are elected to the house of commons.

III. The Era of the Gerrymander

Partisan The first three redistributions of representation
— those of 1872, 1883, and 1892 — were made
by Conservative governments, and in the re-ar-
rangement of the constituencies in 1882 and 1892
the Liberal minorities in the house of commons
were not permitted any part. The Liberal
opposition, led in 1882 by Edward Blake and in
1892 by Wilfred Laurier, had no more say in the
redistricting of the provinces than they had in
the redistribution of seats at Westminster which
accompanied the extension of the parliamentary
franchise in the United Kingdom in 1884.

Redis- The bill of 1882, allotting each province its

quota of members, was introduced in the house
of commons. As part of the bill there was a

privUege schedule of the electoral divisions in each prov-

01 party , , . '^

in power ince. It was useless for the opposition to take
a map, as they could have done, and show how
glaringly some constituencies had been gerry-
mandered in the interest of the Conservative
party. The decennial redistribution of repre-
C310]

tribution
regarded
as

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

sentation was regarded in those days as offering
an opportunity to advance the interests of the
poHtical party that was in power.

During the Conservative regime of 1 878-1 896
there was no pretense to fairness in the readjust-
ment of the parHamentary constituencies. The
phrase, long in use in Dominion politics, "hiving
the grits," had its origin in those years. It
described the throwing together of communities
that were predominantly Liberal, without heed
to county boundaries, to make other constituen-
cies safely Conservative. Gerrymandering began
in 1872. It was particularly rampant at the
redistributions of 1882 and 1892.^

At no time in the first fifty years of Confeder- Party
ation was party bitterness more marked than
in the years from 1878 to 1896. Much of the
bitterness, a bitterness which characterized de-
bates in the house of commons, and political
discussions on the platform and in the press,
grew out of the gerrymanders. It was partly
attributable to other partisan legislation affect-
ing elections by the Conservative government.
It was partly attributable to a manipulation of
electoral franchises in 1885, which was not cor-
rected until 1898, when a Liberal government
repealed the act of 1885 and established the

1 "Gerrymandering is a Yankee institution, a Yankee in-
vention which the National Policy — the policy of a high
tariff — does not keep out of Canada." — Sir William Mulock,
Ottawa Liberal convention, June 21, 1893.

[311]

bitter-

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

principle that under the federal system the elec-
toral franchises must be determined, not by the
federal parliament, but by the legislatures of the
provinces.
Liberals The Liberals persistently denounced the gerry-
^™' manders when the bills of 1872, 1882, and 1892
to non- were before parliament. They were denounced
J^J^ also at the general elections of 1882, 1887, and
tribution 1891; and in 1893, when the Liberal national
convention was held at Ottawa, a resolution was
adopted that committed the Liberal party to a
reform in the method of redistributing the prov-
inces for representation in the house of commons.
"To put an end to this abuse, to make the house
of commons a fair exponent of public opinion,
and to preserve the historic continuity of coun-
ties," continued the resolution, "it is desirable
that in the formation of electoral divisions,
county boundaries should be preserved, and that
in no case should parts of different counties be
put in one electoral division." ^

IV. The Reform of igoj

Liberals At the general election in 1896 the Liberals
^^ were returned to power. In 1903, for the first
their time in the history of the Dominion, a Liberal
* government was responsible for framing and
carrying through parliament a bill for a redis-
tribution of the representation. The government

* OflScial Report, Ottawa Liberal convention, 129.
[312]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

availed itself to the full of the opportunity to
fulfill the pledge made in the years when the
Liberals were in opposition.

We on this side of the house — said Laurier, when he intro-
duced the bill in the house of commons — have always com-
plained that in previous redistributions the opposition was
unfairly treated. In 1892 we proposed a conference over the
bill — a conference at which there should be representation of
both political parties. But though our proposition was not
accepted, we do not intend to depart from the principle which
we then laid down. What we claimed for ourselves when we
were in a minority, we are now ready to grant to our opponents
when they are in a minority.

There is no schedule to this bill. If this bill is accepted by
our friends on the other side of the house, we intend, after it
has been debated, and read a second time, to refer it to a special
committee composed of seven members, on which the opposition
will be represented by three, to be selected by themselves.
We propose to invite our friends now sitting on the opposition
benches to meet us in the committee room, and there discuss
with us the division of the constituencies which shall be
empowered to elect the members of this house.^

The complete fulfillment by the Liberal govern-
ment in 1903 of a pledge which had been given
by the Liberal party when it was in opposition,
ended permanently, it would seem, the scandals
of the gerrymander. The Conservatives were
in opposition from 1896 to 191 1. But from 1903
to 191 1 they had no grievance with regard to
the arrangement of electoral divisions; and in
1 9 14, when a Conservative government was

Partisan
redis-
tributions
recalled

Electoral

map

arranged

by

confer-

Conserv^
atlves
In 1914

also
adopt
confer-
ence
plan

* H. C. Debates, March 31, 1903.

C313]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

responsible for a redistribution bill, the precedent
of 1903 was followed in all details.

The bill was introduced by Borden. Again no
schedule was attached; and after the bill had
been read a second time, the readjustment of
the electoral divisions was relegated to a special
committee on which were four representatives
of the majority in the house of commons and
three of the Liberal opposition.*

No equal
electoral
divi-
sions

Larger
units for
urban
divisions

V. Inequalities in Electoral Divisions

Equal electoral divisions have never been
attempted by either Conservative or Liberal
governments. Favorable treatment has always
been accorded to the rural divisions. Under the
apportionment of 1903, Soulanges, a rural division
of Quebec, with a population of 9400, had one
member of the house of commons, and there was
only one for Maisonneuve, a manufacturing and
residential suburb of Montreal, which according
to the census of 1901 had a population of 170,987.
Lisgar, a rural division of Manitoba, had a popu-
lation of 23,501. In Winnipeg, which, like
Lisgar, had then one member, the population
was 128,157.2

Both political parties accept the principle of
a larger unit for urban than for rural constituen-
cies. Borden recalled this fact when he was

* Cf. H. C. Debates, February 10, 1914.
2 Ibid., February 10, 19 14.

[314]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

piloting the redistribution act of 191 4 through
the house of commons.

It is said — the premier reminded the house — that in a
city there ought to be a higher unit, for the reason that a city-
possesses greater solidarity and compactness. Its interests
are more uniform, and they can make themselves felt more
effectually and cogently than the interests of a rural constit-
uency. It is said also that many men who represent rural
constituencies reside in the cities, and in that way the cities
have a certain voice in the legislature which is denied to rural
constituencies.

Importance also has been laid by some members of this Corn-
house upon the argument that there is perhaps a more stable ^^^
interest in those who dwell upon the land than is to be found
in the case of a certain floating element of city population, and
Finally there is the English principle of community of historic
interest, compactness and historic association — a principle
that is always regarded in British redistribution bills. ^

of
interest

clations

These arguments in favor of a smaller unit
of population for rural than for urban constit-
uencies were accepted and indorsed by Laurier.

Without going into all the reasons — he said — there is Large
one supreme reason. It is that in a country like Canada, '""'^
where there is a very large territory with a sparse popu- .
lation, if you give the same unit of population to cities and
counties, in rural constituencies you would have such a large
area of territory as to be almost impossible to cover. That is
quite sufficient to justify the principle which has been adopted
on every occasion on which we have had a redistribution.

Unlike the older universities of England, Ireland, and
Scotland, none of the fourteen universities of Canada elects
a member to the house of commons. It was intended by the
legislature of Upper Canada that there should be a university

* H. C. Debates, Februaiy lo, 1914.

C315]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

constituency in that province. An act was passed in 1820
(Geo. Ill, c. II § IV, St. of Upper Canada) by which it was
provided "that whenever an university shall be organized,
and in operation as a seminary of learning in this province,
and in conformity to the rules and statutes of similar insti-
tutions in Great Britain, it shall and may be lawful for the
governor to declare by proclamation the tract of land ap-
pendant to such university, and whereupon the same is
situated, to be a town or township, and that such town or
township so constituted, shall be represented by one member."
"No person," continues the section, "shall be permitted
to vote at any such election for a member to represent the
said university in parliament, who besides the qualification
now by law required shall not also be entitled to vote in the
convocation of the said university." There was, however,
no election of a member for the university between 1820
and the union of Upper and Lower Canada in 1840. At
the union of the provinces there was no mention of univer-
sity representation, and no suggestion of it at Confederation.^

Single- With only three or four exceptions, all the

wSt-^ 234 electoral divisions are single-member con-
uencies stituencies. Divisions of counties are known as
"ridings," a term that has been in use in British
parliamentary geography at least since 1821,
when the right to elect two members was trans-
ferred from the long notoriously corrupt borough
of Grampound to the West Riding of Yorkshire.
Constit- The term "division" is applied only in cities
uencies j^^ Canada which return three or more members.

aistin-

guished Electoral divisions are not numbered, as in the

byname Uj^i^gj States. Geographical names are used,

such as Toronto East, or Toronto West; and

1 H. C. Debates, February 17, 1914.

C316]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

such names as Algoma, Frontenac, Two Moun-
tains, Antigonish, Pontiac, and Yale Caribou
are given the ridings of counties.

As a member of the house of commons must "The
never be mentioned in debate by name, but always ^^^'
referred to as the honorable member for Pon- member
tiac or whatever consituency he represents, both °^~
a new and an old world flavor is imparted to de-
bates by giving names instead of numbers to all
the constituencies that elect members to Ottawa.

VI. Unsuccessful Experiment with a Uniform
Dominion Franchise

At Confederation a large measure of freedom Elections

was conferred on the Dominion parliament in ^^ ^

regard to the franchises on which the house of 1882

commons at Ottawa is elected. By section 41 °^q^^_

of the British North America act, it was provided ciai

that until the parliament of Canada otherwise ^
decided the electoral laws of the provinces should
apply to the election of members of the house
of commons.

The year of the passage of the British North influence

America act was the year in which, for the first British

time in modern history, all male householders in refonn

parliamentary boroughs in the United Kingdom J^7°on

were enfranchised. It was a great step towards electoral

democracy when the British electoral law of ^*^ ®
1867 was enacted; and there is some reflection
of the new democratic spirit in the section of the

C317]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

British North America act which was apphcable
to Algoma.
House- Algoma is today included in the province of

^°sr e C)ntario. In 1867 it was a territory; but it was
in Algoma then contemplated that it would have represen-
tation in the house of commons at Ottawa; and
by section 41 of the act it was decreed that until
the parliament of Canada otherwise provided,
at any election for a member of the house of
commons from Algoma, in addition to persons
qualified by the law of the United Provinces of
Ontario and Quebec to vote, "every male British
subject, aged twenty-one years or upwards,
being a householder, shall have a vote."
Conserv- At five general elections after the British
atives North America act had come into operation —

agitate ^

for m 1867, 1872, 1874, 1878, and 1882 — members

^^^ of the house of commons were chosen on franchises

franchise

which had been determined by the provincial
legislatures. They were elected on the same
franchise as members of the legislature.

With the exception of the election of 1874,
at each of these general elections the Conservative
party was returned to power. Macdonald was
premier of all these Conservative governments;
and Macdonald, and a group of Conservative
members, of extreme Tory politics, who were
closely associated with him, never liked the federal
principle applied to electoral franchises.

Macdonald, in the first session of the first
parliament of the Dominion, assailed this prin-

C318]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

ciple; and between 1867 and 1885 he introduced Federal
no fewer than six or seven bills with the object ^^®
of transferring from the provincial legislatures 1898
to parliament the determination of the franchise
for elections to the house of commons. But the
Liberal opposition stood out for the federal
principle, and Macdonald could not persuade all
his Conservative supporters to vote with him.
It was 1885 before he succeeded in carrying the
Dominion franchise bill through parliament.

Under this law of 1885, a uniform franchise Eight
was established in all the provinces. The right ^*^^*^^
to vote was given in respect of eight qualifications, franchise
These were (i) owners and occupiers of real estate
of the value of $300 in a city, and $200 in a town;
(2) persons in receipt of incomes, or yearly
earnings of at least ^300 from some profession,
office, trade, or investment in Canada; (3) life
annuitants of $100 a year; (4) farmers' sons,
living at home; (5) sons of owners of real property;
(6) tenants of real property paying more than
$2 a month rental; (7) fishermen owning boats,
nets, fishing gear, or shares in a registered ship
to the actual value of at least $150; and (8)
Indians in possession and occupation of distinct
tracts of land in an Indian reserve, the improve-
ments on which were valued at not less than
$150.

The act created a wide franchise, but it was Property
a franchise based on property. It was thus in
accordance with the principles then held both by vote

[319]

as basis
for

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the Conservative party in England and by the
Conservative party in Canada. It was con-
trary to the principles of the Liberal party in
Canada, which as regards the franchise had
outrun the Liberal party in England and Scot-
land; for it was committed to the principle of
manhood suffrage, a principle that by 1885 the
Liberals in Ontario and in other provinces had
already carried into law.
Argu- Macdonald's case for substituting a Dominion

™®^* franchise for the provincial franchises of 1867-
federai 1 885 was that the old plan was an anomaly,
franchise <q^ j^ ^^j^^ contrary," he said, "to first principles.
The representatives of the people in parliament,
representing the people in a Dominion sense,
must have, and ought to have, control of all
reforms and changes in the representation."
civU In some of the provinces, notably in the Mari-

se^ts ^- Provinces, which are served by the Inter-

and the , . ' -^

franchise colonial Railway — the government railway —
the legislatures had excluded men on the pay roll
of the Dominion government from the franchise.
Macdonald had these exclusions in mind when he
submitted his case for the Dominion franchise
to the house of commons. "It is out of the
question," he said, "that we here, representing
the people of the Dominion as a whole, should
find ourselves, for local reasons or local purposes,
in any given province, actually deprived of people
who would elect us." ^

1 H. C. Debates, April 16, 1885.
[320]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

Ostensibly uniformity and the estopping of More
provincial legislatures from excluding civil serv- ^^°^'
ants of the Dominion from the franchise were
the grounds on which the act of 1885 was based.
Another reason for it undoubtedly was the fact
that the act placed the compiling of the electoral
lists in the hands of nominees of the govern-
ment, and also added largely to the patronage of
the government.

It was provided by the act that there should Revision
be a revision of the electoral rolls each year. °J

rr>i r ... ^ ., , .. electoral

The first revision in 1886 entailed an expenditure rolls
of over $400,000. The government was afraid
to ask parliament for annual appropriations on
this scale. It therefore carried through parlia-
ment bills suspending the sections of the act of
1885 which made annual revisions of the electoral
rolls mandatory; and although the law was on
the statute book from 1885 to 1898, there were
only three revisions of the rolls.

There were seven provinces in 1885. In five Manhood
of them — British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, «^^^«
New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island —
manhood suffrage had been established by act
of the legislature. In Quebec and Nova Scotia
the franchises were based on property — on
qualifications not much unlike those of the Do-
minion franchise of 1885.

In all the provinces the Dominion act was Opposi-
condemned as a departure from the federal ^°°
principle. By the Liberal party it was also franchise

C321]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

condemned because it was opposed to Liberal
principles, and because of the jobbery and manoeu-
vering in the interest of the Conservative party
which it made possible.
Liberals The Liberals from 1885 to 1896 denounced the
pledge Dominion franchise act — in parliament, on the

them- . ^

selves platform, and in the press— as strongly and
to repeal persistently as they denounced the gerrymandering
1885 of electoral divisions by the redistribution acts
of 1872, 1882, and 1892. At the national con-
vention of 1893 — the only national convention
of the Liberal party in the first fifty years of
Confederation — the party committed itself to
the repeal of the act of 1885.

It pledged itself to repeal on these grounds:

That the act since 1885 had cost the Dominion treas-
ury over a million dollars, besides entaiHng heavy ex-
penditures on both political parties.

That the heavy cost had prevented annual revisions
of the electoral rolls, as originally intended; and in the
absence of such revisions, young voters, entitled to the
franchise, had in numerous instances been prevented from
exercising their natural rights.

That the act had failed to secure uniformity, which
was the principal reason assigned for its introduction.

That it had produced gross abuses by partisan revis-
ing barristers appointed by the government; and

That its provisions were less liberal than those already
existing in many provinces of the Dominion.^

1 Official Report, Liberal convention, 1893, 122.

C322]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

VII. The Return to Provincial Franchises

Two years after the Liberal government came Rever-
into power it implemented this pledge of 1893;
and since 1898 members of the house of commons ciai

fran-
chises

slon to
provin-

have again, as from 1867 to 1885, been elected
on the same franchises as members of the pro-
vincial legislatures. "The qualifications neces-
sary to entitle any person to vote at a Dominion
election in any province," reads a section of the
election code, as it was enacted in 1898, "shall
be those established by the laws of that province
as necessary to entitle such person to vote in the
same part of the province at a provincial election."

The objection that Macdonald made in 1885 safe-
to the electoral laws of the provinces — the objec- ^^^^
tion that in some of the provinces employees of chise
the Dominion government were denied exercise °^
of the franchise — was not overlooked at the servants
remodeling of the electoral code in 1898. A
section was embodied in the act which provides
that no person, otherwise qualified as an elector,
shall be disqualified from voting at a Dominion
election because he is employed in any capacity
in the public service of Canada or of a province.

Only the strong and forceful personality of Conserv-
Macdonald, and the whip hand he constantly ^^^l\
kept of his followers in the house of commons, reform
enabled the Conservative government to carry
the Dominion franchise act of 1885. It was
greatly disliked by quite a number of Conserv-

[323]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

atives in parliament and in the constituencies.

In 1898, when the law was repealed, there were

no expressions of regret, and no protests from the

Conservative benches.
Electoral Fot six years after 191 1 a Conservative govern-
reforms r^ent was again in power. It did not revert to

of Liberal ^ ...

govern- the old system; and redistribution of seats effected
°^®^* by conference between the representatives of
both political parties at Ottawa, and provincial
electoral franchises as the franchises on which
members of the house are elected, would now
seem to have become permanently established
as usage and law.^ Credit for both these demo-

^ During the parliamentary session of 1917 a war-time
elections act was passed. It enfranchised the wives, widows,
mothers, and sisters of Canadian soldiers and sailors, who had
gone overseas to serve with the British military and naval
forces; disqualified British subjects "of alien enemy birth,
or of other European birth, or of alien enemy mother-tongue
or native language," who had been naturalized later than
March 31, 1902; and also disquaUfied men who had been
exempted from military service, or had applied for exemption
from the operation of the conscription act of 1917, on the
ground that they had conscientious objections to serving with
military forces. "Its provisions," said Meighen, secretary
of state, in introducing the bill in the house of commons,
are to operate only during the period of the present war and
of demobilization thereafter. That is to say, so far as the
bill amends the Dominion elections act, it amends it only
to cover the now apparently certain event of an election
during the war or before demobilization. After that the bill
ceases to affect the Dominion elections act; the general law
becomes the same as it was before, the same as it is today."
— H. C. Debates, September 6, 1917.

[324]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

cratic reforms must be given to the Liberal govern-
ment of which Laurier was premier.

The general requisites for voting at Dominion Quaim-
elections are that a man shall be a native-born ^**^*^
Canadian, or a subject of the king by birth or electors
naturalization; that he shall be of the full age
of twenty-one; and not disqualified by reason
of insanity or by conviction of crime.

Manhood suffrage has been long established in Manhood
all the provinces except Nova Scotia and Quebec. ^^"^^
The residential qualification in the manhood- provinces
suffrage provinces varies from six months in
Manitoba, to a year in British Columbia. Resi-
dence in the electoral division varies from one
month in Manitoba, to nine months in Ontario
— nine months before the time fixed by law for
the opening of registration.

In Nova Scotia, where representative govern- Property
ment has been established longer than in any ^^^"
other outlying part of the British Empire, the in Nova
vote is based on real or personal property, or the ^^^
occupation of real estate. Nova Scotia has clung
with tenacity to the ancient English principle
in regard to the franchise. One qualification is
assessment of real property valued at $150 or
over, or of personal property or real and personal
property together valued at $300. Men with an
income of $250 a year are entitled to vote; so are
fishermen, with boats and gear and real estate
assessed at an actual value of $150, provided that
such property is within the county where the

C325]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Property

and

Income

qiuilifi-

catlons

in

Quebec

Votes of

members

of

teaching

orders

Fishing-
gear
qualifi-
cation
for
franchise

vote is given. Yearly tenants of real estate,
which is assessed at $150, are entitled to vote;
and so are the sons of ov^ners of real estate, where
they are actually resident on the qualifying
property.

With one exception — that of teachers in schools
under the management of commissioners or
trustees — the franchise in Quebec is based on
property, or on income. It can be exercised by
owners or occupiers of real estate valued in cities
at $300, or in other municipalities at $250, or
which yields a value of ^20 a year. It can be
exercised by tenants in cities who rent real estate
of the value of $30 a year, and of ^20 a year in
other municipalities.

Teachers in schools under commissioners or
trustees are also enfranchised — a provision in
the law intended to meet educational conditions
in the French province, where many of the schools
and colleges are staffed by members of the teach-
ing orders of the Roman Catholic church.

Rentiers or retired farmers, with a rental of at
least $100 a year, are enfranchised, and so are
farmers' sons, working on their parents' farms,
if divided equally between them as co-proprietors,
and sons of owners of real property resident with
their parents. As in Nova Scotia, fishermen who
own boats or gear of an actual value of at least
$150 are entitled to vote.

[326]

usages
in a

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

VIII. Landmarks in the Evolution of the Electoral
System

Many of the old laws and usages of elections old
in England were adopted in the British North "^^^^^
American provinces from Prince Edward Island laws and
to British Columbia, in the years from 1758 to
1867 — from the first establishment of repre- new
sentative government in Nova Scotia to the ^°^^^
creation of the Dominion of Canada. The early
election laws were patterned after the English
election code; and English usages, as distinct
from laws, were established in the British North
American provinces because it was immigrants
from England who were in charge of elections in
the pioneer days of the provinces.

Among these importations were laws and usages Forty-
which (i) estabhshed the forty-shilling freehold shuung
as a qualification for the vote in the counties — holder
a qualification that in England dated back to ^^the
1430 and survived until the sweeping reform in voter
the electoral system of the United Kingdom in
191 8; (2) admitted of a man voting in as many
electoral divisions as he held qualifying properties
in; (3) excluded civil servants from the franchise;

(4) made the possession of real or personal prop-
erty a requisite for membership of a legislature;

(5) established hustings at an election — the
platform in the open air at which the sheriff and
candidates and their supporters assembled on the
day fixed by the sheriff for the nomination; (6)

C327]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

established the English custom of chairing the
successful candidate after the announcement by
the sheriff of the result of the election; and (7)
the much older English custom of girding a newly-
elected knight of the shire or representative of
a county with a sword.
The As Canada in the first fifty years of Confeder-

move- ation progressed towards democracy, and as bar-
towards riers against democracy imported from England ^
democ- began to be regarded as out of date and out of
harmony with Canadian political and social
conditions, the old electoral laws were repealed,
and the old world usages were discarded.
Passing The forty-shilling-freehold qualification for

worid ^^^ ^^^^ disappeared before Confederation. Only
laws and members of the senate at Ottawa are today
^*^^®^ required to own property as a requisite for
nomination. The law requiring a property quali-
fication for members of the house of commons was
repealed by the Dominion parliament in 1872.
The electoral franchise of civil servants at Domin-
ion elections has been secured to them since 1885;
and today there are no hustings, and few county
towns in the Dominion at which has survived
the old English custom of girding a knight of the
shire with a sword.

The plural voter — the man who can exercise
the franchise in several constituencies because he

1 Edward Porritt, "Barriers against Democracy in the
British Electoral System," Political Science ^uarterlyy Vol.
XXVI, No. I.

C328]

plural

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

has property qualifications in these places — Where
has survived longer than any of the other impor-
tations of the old electoral system of England.
He still survives in Nova Scotia; and he was not
dislodged from the electoral system in the province
of Quebec until 1916. But in Quebec the plural
voter was only a factor in one or two of the
divisions of Montreal; and even in the days when
there were two or three provinces in which he
survived, his influence was greatly checked by
the fact that since 1873 the polling at a general
election has been all on the same day.

IX. Qualifications of Members of the House of
Commons

The qualifications of members of the house Pariia-
of commons at Ottawa, unlike those of a member °^®^*

. . deter-

of the senate, were not defined by the British mines
North America act. It was left by parliament J^^"
at Westminster in 1867 to the parliament of of
Canada to determine both the qualifications and ™«°i^«'
disqualifications of members of the popularly com-
elected house. "'^"^

"Any British subject," reads section 69 of
the Dominion election code of 1 898-1908, "may
be a candidate in an election for a seat in the
house of commons." "No qualification in real
estate," reads the only other paragraph in the
section, "shall be required of any candidate."

A Canadian, who has neither a home nor any

C329]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Noresi- material possessions in the United Kingdom,
^^^m ^^ eligible as a parliamentary candidate at any
cation election in England, Scotland, or Ireland, as soon
as he arrives in the country. In fact, he may
be adopted as a candidate, and elected without
his even leaving Canada; and the eligibility is
reciprocal. An Englishman, Scotsman, or Irish-
man, or a British subject from any part of the
Empire, no matter how short a time he may have
been in Canada, is as eligible, under the law, for
parliament as a native-born Canadian who has
never been beyond the boundaries of his own
province.
Open As in the United Kingdom, neither by law nor

field for j^y usage is it necessary that a member of the
baggers house of commons at Ottawa reside in the con-
stituency that he represents.
Pro- Thirty members of the house of commons elected

portion jj^ iqn were not residents of the constituencies

of non- ^

resident from which they were returned. At other general

members elections after 1898 the proportion of non-resident

members was about the same; and from the

absence of law or usage requiring residence in a

constituency Canada, like England, has derived

obvious and permanent advantage.

Non- These easy conditions, with the freedom they

^®^'" afford both to candidates and constituencies,

dency

and make a parliamentary career possible for a man

^®®'"® of ability who has an instinct for politics. A man

pouticai so equipped can regard an election to the house

"^® of commons not merely as an episode in his life.

[330:

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

He can regard it as opening to him a career in
Dominion politics — a career in the service of
the state; for if he is defeated in one constit-
uency at a general election, he can offer himself
for another constituency at a special or by-
election, or at the next general appeal to the
electorate.

Under any other system than that in use at British
Westminster for three and a half centuries, and ^'^ ,,

' , Canadian

in Canada from the earliest days of representative gains
institutions in the old British North American ^°"^

abandon-
provinces, the British system of government mentof

through parliament and through a cabinet, all of ^^^L,

whose members must be in parliament, would quaiifi-

never have reached its present high state of de- *^*^"
velopment and efficiency.

The names of scores of men, who in the three Fifteenth-
centuries from the reign of Tames I to that of *^®"^

° "^ , enact-

George V, rank high as reformers or parlia- ments
mentarians or statesmen, would be missing from
the pages of history had the laws of Henry V
and Henry VI, that decreed that members of
the house of commons, citizens and burgesses,
as well as knights of the shire, must be "dwelHng
and resident" within their constituencies, not
fallen into desuetude long before the end of the
sixteenth century.

It was the lawyers — the gentlemen of the long Lawyers
robe of the Inns of Court in London — who, by f."^®^'

English

their pressure on electors in cities and boroughs, carpet-
wore down the English election laws of 1429, *>a8sers

C330

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Empire's
debt to
carpet-
baggers
of
Tudor

English
prece-
dent
followed
in
Canada

Resulting

1432, and 1444-1445, requiring that members of
the house of commons must live in the counties,
cities, or boroughs they represented.

The British Empire is thus indebted to the
lawyers of the Tudor era, who, for their own
advantage, thrust aside the old requirement that
members of the house of commons must be resi-
dent in their constituencies. The innovation
had advantages to recommend it. It was con-
ceded to be of national service as early as 1620.
In the eighteenth century, when the cabinet
system was being slowly developed, the freedom
of choice of the constituencies was especially
valuable; and in 1774 all the laws requiring
residence were repealed.^

The English precedent was followed when
representative systems were adopted in the
British North American provinces, and again
when the constitution of the Dominion was
framed. There were no provisions that residence
in a constituency should be required of a candidate
for election.

A result of this freedom — a result of by no
means small importance — is the effect that the
permanency of groups of well-known parlia-
mentary leaders at Ottawa has on political
education, and in stimulating political ambition.
The names of Macdonald, Brown, Blake, Cart-
wright, and Tupper — to take instances only of
Canadian statesmen who have passed away —

1 Cf. Porritt, "Unreformed House of Commons," I, 122.

C332]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

from 1867 to 1 910 were as much household words
in Canada as the names of Salisbury, Chamber-
lain, Bright, Disraeli, and Gladstone were in
England from 1867 to 1906, when Chamberlain
made his last speech in the house of commons
at Westminster.

These five Canadian statesmen were always Leader-
sure of large audiences in any city from the ^^
Atlantic to the Pacific. The speeches they made pariia-
in parliament or on the platform were widely °^!f*^*
read, — as are the speeches made today by fame
Laurier, Foster, or Borden, — and in any democ-
racy the utterances of the political leaders are
the most effective means of popular political
education.

X. Disqualifications of Parliamentary Candidates

First in the category of ineligibles are men ineu-
who have been convicted of corrupt practices at **^*®®
elections. Next come government contractors.
Members of provincial legislatures are also in-
eligible.

From 1867 to 1872 there were many members of Dual
parliament who were also members of the legis- ^°^^^"
latures of Ontario and Quebec. The Liberals,
session after session, opposed this dual member-
ship; for it admittedly gave opportunities for
log rolling by the Dominion and the provincial
governments.

The case of the Conservative government
against the abolition of dual representation was

[333]

ineU-
gible

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Shortage that there were not then sufficient men of political
***uticai ^t>ility in Canada to fill all the seats in parlia-
abiiity ment and in the legislatures. It was contended,
to 1867 moreover, that to prohibit a man from being a
member of parliament and at the same time a
member of a provincial legislature was an undue
interference with the freedom of choice of the
electors.^
Members Public opinion, however, was strongly against
J** dual representation. It condemned the suspicions

latures and abuses to which it gave rise in the years
when there were still many unsettled questions —
financial and legal — outstanding between the
Dominion and the provinces; and in 1872 an
act was passed by parliament which made a
member of a legislature ineligible as a candidate
for the house of commons.^
PubUc Following English precedent, sheriffs and regis-

and^cMi trars of deeds are on the ineligible list. Clerks
servants of the peace and crown attorneys are also ineligi-
ble; and so is "every person accepting or holding
any office, commission, or employment, perma-
nent or temporary, in the service of the govern-
ment of Canada at the nomination of the crown
or at the nomination of any of the officers of the
government of Canada, to which any salary, fee,
wages, allowance, emolument, or profit of any
kind is attached." Ministers, of whom in 1918
there were twenty- three, are exempt from the

1 Cf. H. C. Debates, March i, 1870.

2 35 Vict. c. XV.

[ 334 ]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

section of the election law which excludes office
holders — provincial as well as Dominion — from
parliament.

XL Duration of Parliaments

General elections in Canada, unlike congres- statutory
sional elections in the United States, do not come ^^^ °*

. parlla-

at fixed and regular periods. The election of a ment
new house of commons begins a new parliament.
Under the British North America act the term
of a parliament can run for five years. It is,
however, possible for the governor-general to
dissolve a parliament at any time, in one of two
eventualities. He must grant a dissolution if
his ministers — the cabinet — ask for it; and he
can, exercising the prerogative of the crown,
order a dissolution at a crisis which in his opinion
renders it necessary that there should be a general
appeal to the constituencies.

With two or three exceptions, parliaments Pariia-
since 1867 have run nearly their full course of ^^\^
five years. One of these exceptions was the not run
parliament of 1 872-1 874, the duration of which ^"
was much shortened by the downfall of the
Macdonald administration in November, 1873,
due to the scandal in connection with the granting
of the first charter for the Canadian Pacific
Railway.

Alexander Mackenzie, leader of the Liberal
opposition, was called upon by Dufferin, the
governor-general, to form a new government.

[335]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Dis- The call to Mackenzie came after Macdonald,

solutions }iavin2: been defeated in the house of commons,

due to , . .

pouticai had, according to constitutional usage, tendered
"^®* his resignation to the governor-general.

A group of Conservatives had voted with the
Liberals for the motion censuring Macdonald
and his government. But these Conservatives
had not thrown in their lot with the Liberals on
other questions than the Canadian Pacific scandal;
and the Liberals in the session of 1873 were
outnumbered by the Conservatives by six.
Dis- No contentious business could have been carried

S 1874 through the house under these adverse conditions.
At the request of the new administration parlia-
ment was dissolved on January 2; and at the
elections on January 22 the Mackenzie adminis-
tration was returned with a majority of sixty
in a house of 206 members.
Opposi- Another instance of a parliament that was

tion forces (jjggQiyej somc time before the end of its term
solution was that of 1908-1911. Like the parliament of
in 1911 1 872-1 874 its lifetime was shortened by a crisis —
a crisis not due to a scandal, but to the persistent
and successful obstruction, by the Conservative
opposition, of the bill of the Laurier government
for reestablishing commercial reciprocity with
the United States.
Crisis The opposition was determined to force a dis-

^^^^ solution. The obstructionists were so successful

reciproc- ... ^y'

ity bill that the reciprocity bill, necessary to make effec-
tive the reciprocity act already passed by congress

[336]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

at Washington, did not get beyond its preliminary
stages in the house of commons. The opposition
forced the Laurier administration into a place
where it had either to withdraw the bill, or to
ask the governor-general to grant a dissolution.
The government preferred a dissolution; and
after the general election in September, Laurier
and his following of the Liberal party found
themselves in a minority of thirty-seven in the
new house of commons.^

As at Westminster, it is only under the most
exceptional circumstances that a governor-general
at Ottawa can dissolve parliament by the exer-
cise of the prerogative, and not on the advice
of his ministers.

XIL Dissolution of Parliament — General
Elections

The last session of a parliament before dissolu- The
tion ends in exactly the same way as any other ^^^^^ *
session. There is the usual speech from the ment
throne in the chamber of the senate. Senators
and members of the house of commons disperse
to their homes; and at a later date, determined
upon by the cabinet, there issues a royal procla-
mation dissolving parliament.

The proclamation discharges the existing parlia-
ment — the parliament that had been prorogued
at the end of the session — from its duties of

* Conservatives, 133; Liberals, 86; Independents, 2.

C337]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Dis- attendance; declares the desire of the crown,

solution acting through the governor-general, to have
procia- the advice of its people, and the royal will and
mation pleasure to call a new parliament. It is further
announced in the proclamation that an order has
been issued to the clerk of the crown in chancery

— a state official at Ottawa — to issue the neces-
sary writs for the new parliament.

King's The writs go out in the name of the king.

They go to the sheriffs or other returning officers

— a separate writ for each electoral division.
In the writ the sheriff is informed that "by the
advice of our privy council for Canada, we have
ordered a parliament to be holden at Ottawa,"
on a date that is named. The sheriff is com-
manded, notice of the time and place of the
election having been duly given, to "cause election
to be made, according to law, of a member to
serve in the house of commons of Canada, for
the electoral district" of Algoma, or whatever
the district may be.

Com- The sheriff is further commanded to "cause

™^<^ the nomination of candidates at such election"
sheriff to be held on a day named in the writ. The
election is held seven days after the nomination;
and after the votes have been counted it is the
duty of the sheriff — again quoting from the
writ — to cause the name of the member elected,
"whether he is present or absent, to be certified
to our clerk of the crown in chancery, as by law
directed."

[338]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

The procedure is almost identical with that Election
followed in the election of members to the house ^°^^

dure

of commons at Westminster, procedure now al-
most six centuries old.

Before the writs are received by the returning Extra-
officers much has happened in connection with !°^^
the pending election which may be described proce-
as extra-constitutional, in that it is not governed ^^^
by any section of the British North America
act, nor by any enactment of the Dominion
parliament.

Party conventions have been held in each con- Con-
stituency at which candidates have been chosen. ^^*^°^*
The premier of the government in existence at the mani-
dissolution of parliament has issued his manifesto ^®^*°®®
to all the electors of the Dominion, and a similar
manifesto has been issued by the leader of the
party in opposition. Each candidate has also
issued his address to the electors of the constit-
uency from which he desires to be returned to
parliament; and each candidate has made his
campaign at mass meetings in the electoral
division.

The returning officer in his official capacity No
knows nothing of political parties. At his session, ^°^*""
in the court house or the town hall, on nominat- recogni-
ing day, any twenty-five electors may nominate "°JJ^
a candidate; and it does not come within the parties
duties of a returning officer to make any inquiries
as to the party affiliations of the electors who
sign the nominating paper.

[ 339 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Return-
ing
officer
and

nomina-
tions

All that the returning officer is legally required
to ascertain is (i) that the person named in each
nominating paper has consented in writing to
the nomination, except where such person is
absent from the province, when such absence
must be stated in the nominating paper; and
(2) that accompanying each nominating paper
there is a deposit of $200.

Canadian
inno-
vation on
British
code

British
parlia-
mentary
candi-
dates
pay
official
expenses
of
elections

XIII. Candidates and the Official Expenses
of Elections

Canada, in its election code, has departed in
one important particular from the usage of
elections and the laws applicable to members of
the house of commons at Westminster.

By usage for many generations before 171 2,
and by numerous enactments since 171 2, candi-
dates for the British house of commons have
always been saddled with the official expenses
of elections. They pay the fees of the returning
officers, and the cost of constructing polling
booths or of hiring rooms for polling booths.
They pay the cost of printing the ballots, and of
official advertising. They pay the fees of the
poll clerks, and of the men who count the ballots;
and they pay also all charges for the services of
extra policemen who may be required to keep
order on election day.

Before a nomination of a candidate Is accepted
by a returning officer in the United Kingdom,

C340]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

the candidate must make a deposit large enough Deposit

to cover his quota of the official expenses — ^^_ ^^

expenses which, for each candidate, vary from date
£ioo in a borough constituency to £1500 in a
county division with a large electorate.

Official expenses at elections in Canada, except official

in one eventuality, are a charge on the Dominion expenses

treasury. Under the election code of the United elections

Provinces, in the days of nomination at the ^

hi . .. ... Canada a

ustings and open voting — proceedings which pubUc

the law stipulated must be held in the open charge

air — none of the official expenses were by law

thrown on the candidates, and there was no

change in this respect until the first election

code of the Dominion was enacted by parliament

in 1874.

In this code it was provided that each candidate, Charges
before his nomination could be accepted, must °^^y_
make a payment of ^50 towards the expenses dates
of the returning officer. The code of 1874 was f^
framed and carried through parliament by a to I882
Liberal government.

At the redistribution of representation in 1882 Amend-
— a redistribution notorious for the systematic ^®°*
gerrymandering of electoral divisions by the election
Conservative government, of which Macdonald
was premier — an amendment was made to the
electoral code of 1874. The section providing
for the payment of $50 towards election expenses
by candidates was repealed. In its place was
inserted a remarkable section which still remains

[341]

code in
1882

undemo-
cratic
pro-

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

in the electoral code. It is remarkable, because
it was undemocratic in conception; and for thirty-
five years it has been undemocratic in operation.
It is, moreover, without a parallel in the election
codes of English-speaking countries.
An Under this section of the electoral law each

candidate, before his nomination is accepted by
the returning officer, must deposit with that
iaw*S^ official a sum of $200. To a successful candidate
1882 the deposit is promptly returned. It is not

returned to an unsuccessful candidate if he fails
to obtain a number of votes at least equal to
half the number polled by the candidate elected.
In this event the deposit is forfeited to the
king, for the public uses of Canada, and is applied
by the returning officer toward the payment of
election expenses.

XIV. A Statutory Penalty for an Unsuccessful
Candidate

Object The object of thus penalizing an unsuccessful

°* candidate is professedly to prevent irresponsible

men from thrusting themselves into an election.
It has the effect of checking contests against mem-
bers of a preceding parliament who secured their
seats by large majorities. It accounts for many
uncontested elections — for what are described as
walk-overs or elections by acclamation.

A candidate who has been returned by an
overwhelming majority, to emphasize the measure

[342]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

of success, frequently uses the phrase that his Candi-
opponent "lost his deposit," a remark that indi- j^^gg^^^
Gates that he regards his seat in the house of deposit
commons as unassailable.

The system of only two parties in politics — Two-
Conservative and Liberal — is much more firmly ^^

system

established in Canada than it was in England in
during the half century before the war. At ^^^^^
Westminster, after the Irish Nationalist party
was organized in the parliament of 1 867-1 874,
the old system of two parties broke down; and
from 1900 to 1 91 4 there were five distinct organ-
ized parties in the house of commons.

The two-party system in Canada is even more An
firmly established than it is in the United States, ^sraiian

. party

An agrarian party that developed some strength that
in Ontario — the Patrons of Industry — elected co^^psed
two or three members to Ottawa in 1896. But
it was a short-lived movement; and at no time
in Canada was there a movement, carried on
independently of both Conservative and Liberal
parties, that for success in securing representation
in the federal legislature can be compared with
the movement of the Progressive Republicans
at the congressional elections of 191 2 and 1914. ^

Nearly I3,cxx> votes were polled for labor No
candidates in the Dominion general election of ^,

o members

191 1. But in no house of commons from 1900 to at
1916 was there a single independent labor member, ^^^"^^
despite the fact that there are a score of con-
* Cf. Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 105-106.

C343]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

stituencies in which men employed in factories
or in coal mines constitute the majority of the
electorate.
Labor For ten or twelve years before the war the

^^J^ Dominion Trades and Labor Congress — a per-
eiection manent organization with headquarters in Toronto
eposi — ^^ ^j^g g^^ ^^ each new session of parliament
petitioned both Liberal and Conservative govern-
ments to repeal the section of the electoral code
which requires a deposit from a candidate for
the house of commons. In 1914 the deputation
from the congress — an organization which com-
prises in its membership most of the leaders of
the labor party in provincial and municipal
politics — coupled with the request for repeal
a suggestion that a candidate might be required
to* obtain a much larger number of signatures
to his nomination paper than the twenty-five
demanded by the existing code.

The petition for this reform was presented to
Doherty, minister of justice, in the Borden govern-
eiection ment. It evoked more sympathy from him than
it had done from any minister, Liberal or Conserv-
ative, in any previous year. "Under the present
law," he said, "a candidate is practically betting
$200 that he will secure half as many votes as
the candidate who is elected." "We say to a
candidate," he added, lapsing into the colloquial,
"go down in your clothes and get $200, or you
can't have a run at this thing." ^

^ Globe, Toronto, March 14, 1914.
C344]

A

gamble
on an

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

The penalizing section was aimed at the ix>ng
Liberals, who in 1882 were in opposition. In ^^
operation it has had a more far-reaching effect pouticai
than the Conservative authors of the clause p®^®^
conceived. It has been of service to the Liberal
party at Ottawa as well as to the Conservative
party. It has been of even more service to the
Liberals than the Conservatives; for the require-
ment of a deposit of $200 tends to prevent a gen-
eral election from being used as an opportunity
for unauthorized political propaganda; and usu-
ally, in any English-speaking country, it is the
professedly liberal orthodox political party that
sustains most loss of electoral strength from the
propaganda of unorthodox political groups such
as the Labor and Socialist parties.

The law of 1882 is, moreover, obviously an An aid
aid in maintaining discipline in the two existing ^^
parties in the house of commons. The undemo- disci-
cratic character of it, in a country where electors ^^^
in seven provinces vote on manhood-suffrage
franchises, has consequently been persistently
ignored by Liberal as well as by Conservative
politicians at Ottawa.

XV. Simplicity of Election Procedure

As contrasted with congressional elections in Only one

the United States, elections to the house of t^be

commons at Ottawa are exceedingly simple, marked
There are three or four constituencies, as, for

C345]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

example, Ottawa and St. John, in which electors
vote for two candidates. In the other 220-odd
electoral divisions, when an elector goes to the
polls all that he can do is to vote for one or other
of two candidates.
No At Dominion elections only members of the

emWems ^^^^^e of commons are chosen. Provincial or
on municipal elections are never held at the same

baUots time. There are no party emblems on the bal-
lots, no word or mark to indicate with which
political party the candidate is affiliated.
No The term "Liberal" or "Conservative" has

statutory j^gygj. |)ggj^ embodied in a Canadian act of par-

recog- , ....

nition liament. These political parties exist, and have
°Siticai existed since 1792. But it is possible to go through
parties all the Constitutions framed for the old British
North American provinces, for the Dominion of
Canada, and for the three provinces created by
the Dominion parliament since 1867, as well as
through all the laws governing elections and
concerning parliament, without finding a single
acknowledgment of the existence of either Con-
servative or Liberal party. Political parties and
their activities in and out of parliament are extra-
constitutional; and in Canada, in accordance
with British precedent, they are without statu-
tory recognition.
Order The names of candidates are printed on the
°' ballot papers in alphabetical order. The size,

on baUot letterpress, and every detail of the ballot paper
are determined by the electoral code of the

[346]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

Dominion. To prevent the printing of fraudu-
lent ballots, the paper used for the official ballots
is issued by the king's printer at Ottawa.

The ballot paper, in an electoral division which Form of
returns two members, is in this form: **^^°*

-i WM. R. BROWN

X of the city of Ottawa, Barrister.

Q FRANK BAMON

^ of the city of Ottawa, Artist

Q JOSEPH O'NEII.

1 C^ of the city of Ottawa, Gentleman.

A JOHN R. SMITH

TX of the city of Ottawa, Merchant.

The hours of polling are from nine to five Hours
o'clock. Ballots are counted at the polling sta- °*
tions by the deputy returning officers, "in full
view of the poll clerk, and the candidates or their
agents," and before midnight on election day

[347]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the government in office has been unofficially
informed of its fate. It learns from the news-
paper bulletins whether it has been granted
another lease of power by the electorate, or
whether, in a few days, it must give place to an
administration formed by the leader of the
opposition in the late parliament.
Return Each writ is promptly returned to the clerk

of writ Qjp ^j^g crown at Ottawa; and the final act of the
returning officer is the publication of abstracts
of the statements of expenses incurred by candi-
dates at the election.
Election Each candidate is by law required to appoint
**^®^' an election agent; and only through this agent
can payments be made of expenses incurred by
the candidate in connection with the election.
Extra- At elections in the United Kingdom the maxi-

eiection mum sum that can be expended by a candidate
expenses Jg fixed by law. The sum is determined by the
number of electors, and by the general character
of the constituency — a larger amount being
allowed for connty divisions than for divisions
of cities or for boroughs. In Canada there is no
such restriction on election expenses. Except for
the deposit, election expenses are within the con-
trol of the candidates, and it costs much less to
contest a constituency in Canada than in Eng-
land or Scotland.
Election Petitions arising out of elections — petitions

petitions ^j^^^ have for their object the unseating of mem-
bers for bribery or corruption, or other contra-

C348]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

ventions of the electoral code — are tried before
two judges of the superior court of the province
in which the election in dispute was held. The
Dominion parliament inherited from the leg-
islature of the United Provinces the system of
referring controverted election cases to select com-
mittees of the house of commons. This system
was that in use at Westminster from 1770, when
the Grenville act was passed, until 1868, when
parliament transferred the adjudication of elec-
tion cases from committees of the house to judges
of the high court.

Canada in 1873 followed the Westminster prec- Trial o«
edent of 1868; and since then all election cases ®^®*=**<*°'

cases by

have been heard by judges of the superior court judges
of the provinces, with a right of appeal to the
supreme court of the Dominion — a court which
holds its sessions at Ottawa. The judges, after
hearing an election case, report their decision
to the speaker, who in turn reports it to the
house of commons. In the event of the unseating
of a member, a motion for a new writ is moved
in the house.

A member of the house of commons can resign Resig-
at any time by a formal notification to the ^**°"
speaker of his intention to do so. In this par- mem-
ticular the Dominion house of commons has ***"
made an innovation on the procedure of the
house of commons at Westminster, where a
member can free himself from service only by
applying for, and being appointed to, the steward-

r. 349 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

ship of the Chiltern Hundreds, or of a crown
manor. These are technically offices of profit
under the crown. Acceptance of one of these
offices by a member vacates his seat.
Anti- While the Dominion parliament has devised a

e"**iSi rnore easy method by which a member can free
proce- himself of the tie to his constituency and to the
house of commons, it still retains the old proce-
dure of Westminster. Occasionally a member
who desires to retire accepts an appointment to
a country postmastership that happens to be
vacant. He holds the office for a day or two, and
then tenders his resignation to the postmaster-
general.

diire
retained

[350]

CHAPTER XIII

THE cabinet: the king's privy

A

council for CANADA

T a general election, if the result is the Fate of
return to the house of commons of a ^^^*'
majority pledged to the support of the adminis- deter-
tration in power, there is no change in the ™^
premiership, and usually only a few changes in general
the personnel of the cabinet. eection

On the other hand, if the opposition in the
late parliament has secured a majority, the pre-
mier, with as little delay as possible, tenders his
resignation to the governor-general.^ By the
resignation of the premier — as at his death —
all the other members of the cabinet hand in
their resignations.

Appointment to all cabinet offices is made by Appoint-
the governor-general only on the recommend a- ™^^ef*
tion of the premier. It is the right and privilege
of the premier to choose his colleagues, and to
submit their names to the governor-general for
appointment. Every member of a cabinet, so

^ "The present practice is for the government to resign as
soon as it is certain that it is defeated at an election; but it
cannot yet be called unconstitutional for the defeated govern-
ment to hold office until it is voted down in the house of
commons." — Riddell, " Constitution of Canada," Note VII,
jo6.

C35«]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

chosen, knows that in the event of the death
or resignation of the premier, he must, in accord-
ance with the principle on which government
by parliament and cabinet is based, at once
resign his portfoHo.

I. The Formation of a Cabinet

For- The governor-general, on the resignation of a

^ °° premier whose party has sustained defeat at an
cabinet election, sends for the leader of the opposition,
who is charged by the governor-general with the
formation of the new cabinet.
Number In the first administration after Confedera-
^jjjjjg_ tion — the Macdonald administration of 1867-
tMiai 1873 — there were fifteen ministers, one of whom
was without portfolio. From 1867 to 1891 the
presidency of the council was a separate office.
From 1 891 to 1917 the offices of first minister
and president of the council were held by the
same member of the cabinet; and from 1909 to
191 7 the premier also held the office of secretary
of state for external affairs — an office created
by act of parliament in 1909 in consequence
of the increased international relations of the
Dominion.

With a view to more systematic and acceler-
ated development of' the public lands and of the
resources of the Dominion after the war, there
was created in 1917, the department of immigra-
tion and colonization. To this new department

C352]

office

the
great

THE CABINET

were assigned powers, duties, and functions which, increase
from Confederation to 1917, had been in the de- n^gn^ber-
partment of the interior. In 1917 also, at the ship
organization on September 12, of the union gov- ^binet
ernment, with Borden as premier,^ the office of due to
president of the council again became a separate
office. These changes in 1917 increased the num-
ber of ministerial offices to twenty-three.^

1. First minister.

2. Secretary of state for external affairs.

3. President of the king's privy council for
Canada.

4. Minister of finance.

5. Minister of trade and commerce.

6. Minister of public works.

7. Minister of railways and canals.

1 At this reorganization, what, from 191 1, had been a
Conservative ministry became a coalition or union win-the-
war administration. There were of the new administration
fourteen Conservatives, eight Liberals, and one leader of the
newly organized grain growers' party in the prairie provinces.
Six of the members of the new cabinet were, in October, with-
out seats in the house of commons or the senate. Parliament,
however, was not in session in the autumn of 19 17; and no
attempt was made by the new members of the ministry to
enter parliament until the general election on December 17,
1917, the election at which the union administration and its
war policy was indorsed by the constituencies.

2 In the administration organized in October, 19 17, there
was also a minister of overseas service — a war-time office
that is not likely to survive the war and the restoration of the
military forces of the Dominion to a peace basis.

[353]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

8. Minister of marine and fisheries and of
naval defense.

9. Minister of the interior.

10. Minister of immigration and colonization.

11. Minister of militia and defense.

12. Minister of agriculture.

13. Minister of customs.

14. Minister of inland revenues.

15. Minister of justice.

16. Postmaster-general.

17. Minister of labor.

18. Secretary of state.

19. Minister of mines.

20. Attorney-general. ^

21. Solicitor-general.

22. Parliament secretary of the department
of external affairs.

23. Parliamentary secretary of militia and
defense.^

Salaries The aggregate salaries of the first minister
^^ and secretary of state for external affairs, two
ters offices Usually held by the same man, are $12,000.

With the exception of the two parliamentary
secretaries, whose salaries are $5000, the other
ministers receive $7000. These salaries, in each
case, are in addition to the parliamentary indem-
nity of $2500.

1 The office of attorney-general is usually held in conjunc-
tion with that of minister of justice.

2 These parliamentary secretaries, like the solicitor-general,
are of the ministry but not of the cabinet.

C354]

THfi CABINET

II. Conditions Determining the Distribution
of Cabinet Offices

In framing a new cabinet, in making recom- Reswc-

mendations to the governor-general for appoint- *^°°^

ments to these ministerial offices, the premier premier's

has (in normal times) much less freedom of ^^^^^'^^ °'

I'll 1 • • • TT7 cabinet

choice than has the prime minister at West- coi-
minster. ^^«"«*

At Westminster, a premier, after a general
election which has newly returned to power the
party of which he is the leader, must consider
the claims to office of the men who are associated
with him in the leadership of the party. Men who
have established a claim upon him are of both
the house of commons and the house of lords;
and there must be a division — now always an
unequal one — of cabinet and ministerial offices
between the commons and the lords. At such
times the house of commons is the predominant
partner, and to its members go the larger number
of ministerial appointments.

At Ottawa an incoming premier seldom need Senate
concern himself about the claims to cabinet office f°°* *j.
of members of the senate. All claims a politician at
may have established on his party are settled in °^^j^^
full by his appointment to the senate. The of
senate, moreover, has never developed any leaders *^^^®*
who for long made any place for themselves in
political life.

Leaders of established position, who are grow-

[ 355 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Provin-
cial
states-
men with
claims
to
cabinet

Securing
seats
in

parlia-
ment
for
pro-
vlacial
states-
men

ing old, occasionally get themselves transferred
from the house to the senate; but it is seldom,
indeed, that a senator of the rank and file has
established any claim on his party that need be
recognized when a new cabinet is formed. The
upper house at Ottawa is thus not a factor in
the formation of a cabinet to anything like the
extent that the house of lords is, and always has
been, when a cabinet is coming into being at
Whitehall.

At Westminster a prime minister must weigh
the claims of men only who are already in parlia-
ment. A prime minister at Ottawa must do
more than this. He must consider the claims
of men of his party in the house of commons,
and also of men who are not in parliament, but
whose claims rest on party service in office, or
in opposition, in the provincial legislatures.

It is usual for the premier of the Dominion to
summon to his cabinet men who are premiers of
provincial governments or leaders of the opposi-
tion in provincial legislatures. Men so summoned
to Ottawa are, of course, without seats in the
house of commons. If they accept the premier's
oflFer, as they almost invariably do, they must
resign their seats in the provincial legislatures and
any office they may hold in the provincial govern-
ments. Seats in the house of commons must be
secured for them without delay, for only mem-
bers of parliament can hold cabinet offices.

In a newly-elected house of commons there

C356]

THE CABINET

are always members who are willing to resign Accom-
their seats on the promise of a nomination to ™°****^

* _ mem-

the senate. These accommodating members bers

accept a postmastership or some other minor ^^_*

office. Their seats thus become automatically mons
vacant, and the vacancies are promptly filled by
the election of the members of the new cabinet
who were without seats in parliament.

In considering the claims of the leaders of the Geo-
political party at Ottawa and at the provincial ^f^"^
capitals, the new premier must also regard and
(i) the claims of French-Canada; (2) the claims "^f°"*
of the other eight provinces; (3) the claims of ditions
the English-speaking population of Quebec; and ^^^
(4) the claims of the Roman Catholic population tion of
of the Dominion that is not French. ^ ^®*

Three cabinet or ministerial offices are usually
assigned to French-Canada.^ The same number

^ At the general election of 191 1 the Nationalist party of
Quebec threw in its lot with the Conservative party under
the leadership of Borden. The platform of the Nationalists,
adopted at Eustache, Quebec, in July, 19 10, declared against
any participation by the Dominion in imperial wars outside
Canadian territory, and against any attempt at recruiting
troops in Canada for Great Britain; and expressed opposi-
tion to the establishment in Canada of "a naval school with
the help, and for the benefit, of imperial authorities." The
Nationalists, in the election campaign, also opposed any addi-
tions to the British fleet at the expense of the Dominion.
They carried eighteen or nineteen seats; and as a condition
of support of the Borden government they demanded
(i) that the portfolios of public works, inland revenue, and
the post office be assigned respectively to Monk, Nantel, and

C 357 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

as a rule go to Ontario. At least one cabinet
office must, by usage, be assigned to each of the
provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Mani-
toba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Colum-
bia; and since the appointment of Edward Kenny,
of Nova Scotia, in 1869, as representative of the
English-speaking Catholics ^ no cabinet has been
long without a representative of the English-
speaking Roman Catholic church.^

There is a custom, but not a custom invariably
followed, to assign certain cabinet offices to par-
ticular provinces. The department of marine
and fisheries is usually assigned to a member from
one of the tidewater provinces. To a New Bruns-

Pelletier, all Nationalist leaders in Quebec; and (2) that no
Protestant from Quebec hold a portfolio in the cabinet. Bor-
den complied with these conditions. Cf. H. C. Debates,
January 26, 1917; Canadian Pari. Guide, 1912, 25-26; and
Ottawa dispatch to the Gazettey Montreal, dated November 28,
1917, summarizing J. S. Ewart's reasons for supporting Laurier
at the general election of December 17, 1917.

1 Cf. H. C. Debates, February 17, 1871.

2 The claim of the English-spefaking Roman Catholics was
first recognized in the days of the United Provinces — in the
days of what were described as "broad-bottomed administra-
tions." (Cf. Buckingham and Ross, "Life of Alexander
Mackenzie," 307.) Like the claim for recognition of English-
speaking Roman Catholics in the senate, it has been recog-
nized for fifty years by both Liberal and Conservative govern-
ments. A politician of Irish extraction — almost invariably
a lawyer and generally a member of the house of commons
from the province of Quebec — usually represents the English-
speaking Roman Catholics in the cabinet.

C358]

THE CABINET

wick member has several times been assigned the
department of railways and canals. This office
goes to a New Brunswick member because the
headquarters of the Intercolonial Railway — ■ the
government railway — are at Moncton, New
Brunswick; and, moreover, by far the larger part
of the mileage of the Intercolonial is in the prov-
inces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

The department of the interior, previous to The
191 7, was usually assigned to a member from ^^'t^e
the prairie provinces. It went to a member depart-
from the grain-growing country because the
government lands in the organized provinces,
as distinct from those in the territories, are mostly
in the provinces which lie between the Great
Lakes and the Rocky Mountains; and, more-
over, because the purpose of the immigration
propaganda, under the supervision of the depart-
ment of the interior from 1867 to 191 7, was to
attract immigration into these provinces.

A department of immigration and colonization Depart-
was created in 1917. Following precedents, dat- ^®°'
ing back to the early years of Confederation in immi-
regard to the department at Ottawa having ^°^
charge of immigration and colonization, the port- coiom-
folio of the new department went to a member ^***°^
from the prairie provinces — Calder, of Saskatche-
wan.

All these conditions and factors confront the
premier at Ottawa when he is forming his cabi-
net; and in recent years, certainly since 1896,

[359]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Govern- when Lauricr formed his cabinet, the freedom
^gg of choice of a premier has been further restricted
and the by the claims of the financial interests of Mont-
°j ^® real and Toronto, and the tariff interests cen-
minister tering in these cities, that they have a voice in
Jj^^j.g the selection of the minister of finance.

Laurier recognized this claim in 1896. It is a
claim that was also fully conceded by Borden
when he formed his first cabinet in 191 1.
inno- Distribution of cabinet offices based on geo-

vations graphical considerations, and on claims of race,
usages religion, and special financial and material in-
British terests, is an innovation on the usages and
cabinets traditions of cabinets at Westminster. The in-
novation has been developed by the differing
conditions of Canada and the United Kingdom;
by the operation of the federal principle; and
by the need for conciliating assertive interests —
racial and religious^ — which is as old in Cana-
dian politics as the ill-assorted legislative union
of Upper and Lower Canada of 1 841-1867.

1 " Sir Wilfred Laurier is not the only sinner. Practically
every party leader in Canada managed Quebec as Sir Wilfred
has managed that province. A little more than an equal
division of the spoils of office, concessions here and conces-
sions there to race and creed, and there you have the states-
manship of Canadian premiers of both Conservative and
Liberal stripe." — Tribuncy Winnipeg, December 20, 1917.

C360]

THE CABINET

III. Ministers without Portfolio

Another innovation is the presence in the
cabinet at Ottawa of ministers without port-
foHos. At Westminster, from 1832 to 19 14, there
were only four cabinets in which there were
members who held no office. In the first cabinet
of the Dominion — 1 867-1 872 — there was a
minister without portfolio. In every cabinet
since there has been a minister to whom no office
was assigned, and who consequently drew no
salary. In some cabinets there were two, or even
three, ministers without portfolios.^

These ministers are sworn of the king's privy
council for Canada. They attend cabinet meet-
ings and share in the collective responsibilty of
the cabinet. But as they draw no salaries other
than their parliamentary indemnities, it is diffi-
cult to criticize their actions in the house of com-
mons if occasion for criticism should arise.

In the case of a cabinet minister, who is in
receipt of a salary, it is possible to challenge
any action of his by moving a reduction in the
vote for the department of which he is the par-
liamentary head when it comes before the house
of commons in committee of supply.

There have been instances where the inclusion
in the cabinet of a minister without portfolio
added considerably to the debating strength of

^ Cf. Audet, "Canadian Historical Dates and Events,"
113-114-

C361]

Ministers
without
depart-
ments
and
witliout
salaries

House <A
com-
mons
and
minis-
ters
without
port-
folios

Addi-
tions to
debating
strength
of
cabinet

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the cabinet in parliament. Notable instances of
this were the inclusion in the Mackenzie cabinet
of 1 873-1 878 of Edward Blake, who was leader
of the Liberal opposition from 1878 to 1890;
and the inclusion of Abbott, afterwards premier
of the Dominion, in the Macdonald cabinet of
1878-1891.

No similar instances of a cabinet recruiting
its debating strength by the inclusion of a min-
ister without portfolio occurred after Abbott's
appointment in 1887. The appointments, in
more recent times, were made (i) to secure for
the cabinet the aid, counsel, and influence of
strong men, who were not free to devote them-
selves entirely to politics; (2) to satisfy the
claims of a province which otherwise might not
be represented in the cabinet; and (3) to honor
a man who had claims on the party in power, to
give him a larger importance in the world of
politics, and in the social life of Ottawa, than
would attach to him if he were only of the rank
and file of the government's supporters in the
house of commons or the senate.

The dignity, so bestowed, carries with it the
right to the prefix "honorable'* for life. It is
not unlike the honor bestowed on men at West-
minster who desire neither a baronetcy nor a
peerage, but who prize a summons to the privy
council, a summons that carries with it the rank,
dignity, and title of "right honorable."

More than half of the members of the ministry

[362]

THE CABINET

at Westminster — the men who hold subordinate Ministry
offices in the government, and resign when the '^^^^^^
premier goes out of office — are not of the
cabinet. At Ottawa since 1895, when the bu-
reaus of customs and inland revenues were made
departments of state, the solicitor-general and the
parliamentary secretaries of state departments are
the only ministers who are not in the cabinet.

IV. Honors for Canadian Premiers — Titles and
Hereditary Honors

Three of the premiers of the Dominion of order of
Canada — Macdonald, Thompson, and Tupper ?Jj
— were knights before they attained to the pre- and st.
miership. Mackenzie, the Liberal premier of ^®°*^se
1 873-1 878, was three times offered a knighthood,
and on each occasion declined the honor.^ Abbott,
Bowell, Laurler, and Borden, whose names com-
plete the list of premiers from Confederation to
the great war, were all created knights of the
Order of St. Michael and St. George, within a
few months after they had assumed office; and
for nearly half a century a knighthood was re-
garded at Ottawa and at Whitehall, as the due of
any man who became premier of the Dominion.

A still greater distinction is usually bestowed Membor-
by the sovereign on premiers at Ottawa. Mac- !^^°'
donald, Thompson, Laurler, and Borden were coxmcu
each sworn of the privy council at Whitehall, f'j?^*®"
and thereby became "right honorable."
^ Cf. Buckingham and Ross, 551.

C363]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

A From 1872 to the war, from the time Mac-

empire- donald became a privy councilor to 191 5, a sum-
wide mons to the premier of Canada, or to the premier
value ^^ ^"y other of the five dominions, to the privy-
council was only a method of conferring a dignity
empire-wide in its value. It gave a defined place
in the order of precedence at ceremonies of state.
But it involved no duties at Whitehall, because
previous to the war only men who were of the
cabinet in Downing Street were called upon to
perform the routine duties of privy councilors.
The privy council meets as a body only on the
death of the sovereign.
Premiers During the war, Borden, the premier of Canada,
domin- ^"^ ^^^ premiers of the other four dominions,
Ions attended meetings of the cabinet in Downing

BritiS* Street. A premier of a dominion had never be-
cabinet fore attended a meeting of the British cabinet.
Borden's participation in the cabinet meetings
of July, 191 5, revolutionized the "theory and
practice of the system by which the British
Empire had been governed for more than a cen-
tury and a half." ^
A war- A new constitutional link of empire was thus

^\f forged — one of many new links, constitutional
empire and extra-constitutional, forged by the war; and
from July, 1915, a new significance attached to
the fact that premiers of the dominions are of
the privy council at Whitehall.

The premier at Ottawa, in the years from 1870
1 Daily Telegraph, London, July 15, 1915.

C364]

THE CABINET

to 1 91 8, was not the only member of the cabinet Premier
distinguished by a knighthood. There were Canada
usually three or four knights in the cabinet; and
and knighthoods in Canada were in these thirty- ^^^^^'^^
eight years conferred on other men besides honors
those in political hfe. There was a time when
titles were conferred only at the instance of the
colonial office in London. But as the powers of
the Dominion cabinet, under the unwritten part
of the constitution, were gradually extended,
the colonial office lost the sole initiative in the
bestowal of honors on men in the oversea
dominions.

For at least thirty years before 191 8 — a Knigkt-
year in which the cabinet and the house of ^00^^ *<>'
commons, following a popular lead from the guished
constituencies, adopted a new and more demo- c*°*-
cratic attitude towards titles — it had been
possible for the premier at Ottawa to make a
recommendation, through the governor-general,
for the conferring, by the sovereign, of a knight-
hood on any of his colleagues in the cabinet or
in parliament; on the premier of a province;
on a judge of the superior courts; on a dis-
tinguished civil servant; or on any man in the
political, scientific, industrial, commercial, or
journalistic world of the Dominion, whom the
premier and the cabinet deemed worthy of such
distinction.

In more recent years baronetcies, and in at
least two cases peerages, were bestowed on men

C365]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Baronet-
cies and
peerages

To whom
socially
ambitious
politi-
cians had
to look

PoUtics
and

titles at
Ottawa
and
West-
minster

Political
patron-
age

Popular

attitude

in

Canada

towards

titles

domiciled in Canada, on the recommendation,
or at least with the sanction or approval, of the
premier.

In these years — 1885 to 1918 — men who
were in politics, and who were ambitious for a
title, expected recognition of their claims only
from the premier of a government of which
they were supporters in or out of parliament.

Conditions at Ottawa in this period in this
respect were similar to long-existing conditions
at Westminster, except that it was never even
hinted at Ottawa, that titles were bartered for
subscriptions to campaign funds of political
parties; while at Westminster the squalid con-
nection between some knighthoods, baronetcies,
and peerages, and the election funds of political
parties, was notorious for nearly a generation
before the beginning of the war in 1914.

In Canada, in these years, the ability to recom-
mend for titles had popularly come to be regarded
as an addition to the patronage in the bestowal
of the premier.

Except among candidates for these honors,
and among their womenfolk, titles were never in
esteem in Canada. Knighthoods for men in
the front rank in political life were tolerated as
incidental to the connection with Great Britain;
and they were regarded, moreover, as not disturb-
ing to social order and social conditions in the
Dominion. But there developed a widespread
dislike of the bestowal of baronetcies and peer-

C366]

THE CABINET

ages; for a baronetcy or a peerage descends
from father to son. The title and the distinc-
tion, in the case of these dignities, do not end
with the death of the man on whom they were
conferred, as is the case with the lower rank of
knighthood.

There was a protest in the house of commons An up-
at Ottawa in the session of 191 4 against con- ^g^st
ferring titles on Canadians; and in 1917, after them
a baronetcy had been conferred on a resident
at Toronto, long prominent as a dealer in
hog products on a vast scale, and a peerage had
also been bestowed on the owner of a newspaper
published in Montreal, the agitation against
titles, begun in the house of commons in 1914,
extended itself east and west from Ottawa.

The question was agitated in provincial legisla- An
tures; and at conventions of church oreaniza- *pp®^

' . *=* to the

tions, and of gram growers, farmers, and trade union
unionists, resolutions were adopted urging the 8°^®™-
then newly organized union government to re-
frain from recommending Canadians for titles
of nobility.

Baronetcies and peerages, in particular, were Baronet-
condemned in these resolutions, or in the pre- L^f,f°^„

' ^ peerages

ambles to the resolutions, as manifestly out of assaUed
harmony with political, economic, and social
conditions in the Dominion.^

^ Cf. Gazette, Montreal, September 10, 1917; Grain Growers*
Guide, March 14, 1917; Joseph Martin, "The Menace of
Canadian Titles," Maclean's Magazine, Toronto, August, 1917;

C367]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Prompt Only once before in the history of the Dominion

res^nse f^^^ jg^^ ^^ j^jg j'^ ^ government at Ottawa

govern- react to a popular agitation in the constituencies
°^®°* as promptly as the union government did to
the war-time agitation against titles. This was
in 1906, when the Laurier government repealed
an act passed by parHament in 1905 establishing
a pension system for ex-members of Dominion
cabinets.

It was known at Ottawa as soon as the house
of commons elected in December, 1917, assembled
before for its first session on March 18, 191 8, that there
commons ^Quld be a renewal in parliament of the agitation
raise the of 1914, and of the then more recent popular
question agitation of the question.

The union government did not wait for action
by the house. It anticipated action in the com-
mons by adopting a minute of council, dated
March 25 — a minute which was subsequently
transmitted to Whitehall — in which four recom-
mendations in respect to the bestowal of titles on
Canadians, domiciled in Canada, were submitted
to the colonial office and the imperial govern-
ment. The recommendations were:

Govern

ment

acts

"The Badge of Autocracy," Globe, Toronto, August 22, 1917.
"Even nov*^," said the Tribune, Winnipeg, August 18, in com-
menting on Martin's protest in Macleans Magazine, "these
peerages should be plucked out of the life of Canada, and a
declaration made by the parliament of our Dominion that the
democracy of which we boast is real and should remain
untainted."

C368]

THE CABINET

1. No honour or titular distinction (saving those granted No more
in recognition of military service during the present war or heredi-
ordinarily bestowed by the sovereign propria motu) shall ^^ ®*
be conferred upon a subject of his majesty ordinarily resi-
dent in Canada except with the approval or upon the advice

of the prime minister of Canada.

2. The government of the United Kingdom shall exercise
the same authority as heretofore in determining the charac-
ter and number of titles or honours to be allocated to
Canada from time to time.

3. No hereditary title of honour shall hereafter be con-
ferred upon a subject of his majesty ordinarily resident in
Canada.

4. Appropriate action shall be taken, whether by legis-
lation or otherwise, to provide that after a prescribed period
no title of honour held by a subject of his majesty now or
hereafter ordinarily resident in Canada shall be recognized
as having hereditary effect.

The bestowal of knighthoods was not ended Respon-
by this action of the government. But with ^|^^^J^*Jt°^
the far-reaching reform so brought about it for
became no longer constitutionally possible for
the cabinet to ambush itself behind the preroga-
tive of the crown, as had been possible under the
old procedure at Ottawa, governing recom-
mendations for honors made by the premier.
A recommendation for a knighthood is now
manifestly an act, in practice, by the cabinet —
an act which can be discussed or challenged in
parliament, like any other act for which the
cabinet is responsible.^

^ Cf. "Last Prerogative Goes," 5ttn, Toronto, April 11,
1918.

[369]

honors
conferred

an aris-
tocracy

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The last The reform of 1918 did end the bestowal of
°tt*^**t baronetcies and peerages on Canadians resident
to create in the Dominion. It ended the third attempt
since England first obtained a foothold on the
northern half of the American continent to create
a titled aristocracy in the new world. These
attempts were: (i) that of James I in 1624 to
establish the Order of the Baronets of Nova
Scotia; (2) the attempt that Pitt made in the
Quebec act of 1791; and (3) the much more
recent creation of baronetcies and peerages for
Canadians, against which the agitation of
1914-1918 was directed.^

V. Reelection of Cabinet Ministers

Appoint- Every member of the cabinet, who is of the

ment to house of commons, in accepting an office to which

office a salary is attached, must seek reelection. The

Involves principle of the law which requires reelection is

that members of the house of commons, who

accept offices which may be held while they are

of the house, must accept office openly, and

must give their constituents an opportunity of

passing judgment on their acceptance of office.

Origin of In England the law governing acceptance of

office dates back to 1705. It is still in force; and

law

requiring

reelection

1 Cf. Discussion of motion by Nickle, of Kingston, On-
tario, for address to the king asking that hereditary titles
be not conferred on Canadians. H. C. Debates, April 8,
1918.

[370]

re-
elections

cabinet
ministers

THE CABINET

a similar law has been in force in Canada since
representative government was first established
in Nova Scotia in 1758.

Members who have accepted office at the for- Few
mation of a new cabinet are seldom put to the
trouble and expense of a contested election, of
They are often reelected without returning to
their constituencies. If a cabinet minister is con-
compelled to enter upon a contest for reelection, **^***^
and if he is defeated, it does not follow that he
disappears from the cabinet.

The cabinet, through the party machinery, Opening
can always "open" a safe constituency. It can ^^j.
always induce one of its supporters in the house uency
of commons to relinquish a seat in the lower
house in exchange for life membership of the
senate; and the defeated cabinet minister is
promptly reinstated in the house of commons.

The law making reelection a condition of office
is continuously in force. At any period in the
lifetime of a cabinet, or in the term of a parlia-
ment, a member of the house of commons who
accepts cabinet office knows that he must seek
reelection, and that he may have to face a con-
test in his constituency.

VI. Powers, Functions, and Responsibilities
of the Cabinet

The formation of a cabinet is complete as soon Executive
as its members have taken the oath of office, ^

/.,..,. ., Dominion

and have been sworn of the king s privy council

[ 371 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

for Canada.^ It immediately assumes its exec-
utive duties, and begins its preparations for
the assembling and work of the newly-elected
parliament.
Governor- The Cabinet is the executive of the Domin-
generai j^^^ j^ j^ ^j^^ medium of all communications

and

cabinet with the governor-general, who in his turn is the
medium of all communications, outward and in-
ward, with the secretary of state for the colonies
at Whitehall.

Minutes Communications from the cabinet are in the

oouncu form of minutes of council. Appointments and
contracts are also made by minutes of council.
Orders-in-council, which have the force of law
— orders which are made under many various
statutes — issue from the privy council, in other
words, from the cabinet.

Cabinet Responsibility for all bills for raising revenue,

and for all the estimates that are submitted to
parliament providing for the current expenses of
the Dominion, lies with the cabinet.

The finance bill, colloquially known as the
"budget," is prepared by the minister of finance.

1 Every man who is sworn of the king's privy council for
Canada is a privy councilor for life. The nine or ten members
of the Borden cabinet of 1911-1917 who retired in October,
1917, to facilitate the formation of a union-win-the-war
administration remained of the privy council after they had
ceased to be members of the cabinet. But the privy council
at Ottawa never meets as a body, not even on the death of the
sovereign. In the working of the constitution all the duties
of the privy council are delegated to the cabinet.

[372]

and
budget

THE CABINET

Each minister prepares or supervises the prepara- Framing
tion of the estimates of the department over °^,

budget

which he presides. But before the bill of the
minister of finance or the estimates for a depart-
ment can be submitted to the house of commons,
they must receive the approval of the cabinet;
for the cabinet as a whole is responsible to parlia-
ment for the estimates and the budget.^

The same principle holds in respect to govern- Govern-
ment bills concerning matters other than taxa- ^°*
tion and expenditure. It is open to a member framed
of the cabinet, before a government bill is sub- ^^jj^g^
mitted to parliament, to take issue with his
colleagues as to the policy embodied in the meas-
ure, or as to its principle, or as to details of the
bill. If his colleagues refuse to accept his view,
and he persists in his opposition, constitutional
usage demands that he resign.

It is the constitutional privilege of a minister PrivUege
who resigns from the cabinet — subject to the ^g^^^.
permission of the governor-general, which is who
never withheld — to make a statement from his ^^^^^^

on

seat in parliament of the reasons for his disagree- question
ment with his colleagues, and of the grounds on i^ . .
which he resigned. Permission from the governor-
general is necessary, because without it proceed-
ings in privy council cannot be divulged.

Only in parliament can an ex-cabinet minister
make his first statement of the reasons for his
resignation. The statement must be made in
1 Cf. Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 95-96.

[373]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

parliament, in order that an answer may be forth-
coming from the premier.^
Infre- Resignations from the cabinet on account of

quency disagreements of ministers on questions of poHcy,
resig- or as to principles involved in government bills,
°**^°^ are infrequent. There were only five such resig-
nations in the twenty years preceding the war.
Instances Two members of the Bowell ministry of 1894-
resi - ^^9^ resigned in 1895 owing to differences
nations with their colleagues on the Manitoba school
°uestion question. They were differences arising out of
of proposed remedial legislation under the con-

principie tention-bteeding clause 93 of the British North
America act. These were resignations from a
Conservative administration.
Section 93 There were two resignations from the Liberal
*«*^ government that was in power from 1896 to 191 1.
Blair, of New Brunswick, minister of railways
and canals, resigned in 1904, because he was
opposed to a bill for the construction of a second
transcontinental railway. In 1905, Sifton, min-
ister of the interior, resigned owing to differences
with his colleagues over concessions to the sepa-
rate school interests in the bills creating the
provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta. Three
of the five resignations between 1894 and 19 14
were thus due to issues originating in section 93
of the constitution of 1867.

Monk, of Quebec, resigned from the Borden
cabinet in 191 2, because he could not concur in
1 Cf. H. C. Debates, March i, 1905.
[374]

THE CABINET

the decision of the cabinet to make an emergency Navy
contribution of $35,000,000 to the British navy, ^/^J^
"with the sanction of parliament, but without
giving the Canadian people an opportunity of ex-
pressing its approval of this important step.*' ^

A minister who persists in his opposition to a Risks
bill at cabinet stage sometimes embarks on a ^^^^_ *
course that may cost him more than his office nation
and his seat in the council chamber. He may
break with his party; find himself unwelcome
at caucus; forfeit his position as almoner of
patronage in his electoral division; and jeopardize
his seat in the commons at the general election.

It is recognized, however, at Ottawa, as at Member
Westminster, that there is no place in the cabi- °^^. ,

' *^ . . cabinet

net, as it has developed at Westminster since the must go
revolution of 1688, and in all the dominions since ^"*^®

way with

1 841, for a member who cannot go all the way his
with his colleagues on any bill which the cabinet J^^"
is about to submit to parliament. A cabinet
minister who disagrees with his colleagues, and
persists in disagreeing, has no alternative but
resignation; for a bill submitted to parliament
as a government measure may — often does —
involve the fate of the government. Every mem-
ber of the cabinet must, therefore, support it in
parliament by voice and vote.

There are frequently political questions under
discussion, both in the constituencies and in
parliament, concerning which the cabinet, as a
* "Canadian Annual Review," 1912, 181-182.

C375]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Open whole, has come to no agreement. These are
2"®^" known as "open questions/' The enfranchise-
ment of women, as it was agitated in Canada
from 191 1 to 1916, is a typical example of an
open question, and of the attitude of the cabinet
in regard to such questions.
Enfran- In a debate on this subject in the house of
chise- commons, in the session of IQ16, one member

ment . .

of of the cabinet — Rogers, of Manitoba, then

women minister of the interior — spoke in favor of the

open , .

ques- parliamentary enfranchisement of women; while
1916^ Borden, the premier, would at that time give the
movement no support; and a motion in favor of
votes for -women at Dominion elections was de-
feated.^ The minister of the interior, by his
speech, and by his difference on this question
with the prime minister, infringed no rule or
usage of the cabinet. The motion on which the
speech was made did not originate with the
cabinet; and woman suffrage was treated as
an open question.
Private- At this time — February, 1916 — women in
mem- Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta were in

ber's . ' , '

motion posscssion of the right to vote at all provincial
^**^°^ and municipal elections. A bill to the same end
enfran- had passed the British Columbia legislature,
and was awaiting the decision of the electors.
The motion that was before the house of commons
was for an amendment of the Dominion election
code by which the women enfranchised by the
1 H. C. Debates, February 28, 1916.

C376]

chise-
ment

THE CABINET

provinces would have the right to vote at elec-
tions to the house of commons.

Had the premier intimated when the motion circum-
was proposed that the government would accept ^^^^^
it, and introduce a bill to amend the election which

code, woman suffrage would no longer have °p®°

•1-1 f • ^^^^

remamed m the category oi open questions, tion

The amending bill would have received the loses that

. . status

approval of the cabinet before it could have
been introduced into the house of commons as
a government measure; and in parliament, as
in the cabinet, it must have had the approval
and support of all the cabinet ministers.

The duties of a cabinet minister are (i) to Duties
assist in council, and to share in the collective **' . ,

• •!• r 1 1 • r cabinet

responsibility of the cabinet for the acts, meas- minister
ures, and policies of the government; (2) to
frame the policies of his department, and with
the aid of a deputy-minister, a permanent civil
servant, to supervise the administrative work of
his department; (3) to receive deputations on
all matters connected with his department; (4) to
pilot through the house of commons bills that
originate in his department; (5) to carry the
estimates of his department through committee
of supply; (6) to answer all questions in the
house of commons concerning the policies and
activities of his department; and (7) to support
and defend the policies and measures of the ad-
ministration in parliament, and when need be
on the platform in the constituencies.

[377 ]

CHAPTER XIV

PARLIAMENT AT WORK: THE
HOUSE OF COMMONS

Assem- l^T EITHER by the constitution, nor by any
biing ^'^ j^^ ^£ ^j^g Dominion, is there a fixed time
pariia- for the assembling of parliament, as there is
^^^* for the assembling of congress at Washington,
deter- "There shall," reads the British North America
^^^ act, "be a session of parliament once at least in
every year; so that twelve months shall not
intervene between the last sitting of the parlia-
ment in one session and its first sitting in the
next session." The financial year of the Do-
minion ends on March 31, and this condition
practically determines the time at which a new
session of parliament begins.
Con- Parliament is convened by proclamation, issued

vened ^^ ^^^ governor-general. The date of its assem-
procia- bly is determined by the cabinet, on whose advice
mation ^j^^ governor-general issues the proclamation.
The sessions in normal years extend from Novem-
ber until April or May.
Organ- At the assembling of a new parliament the

^^ house of commons is without a speaker. The
house continuing officers of the house are the clerk,
the assistant clerk, and the sergeant-at-arms.
Much of the work preliminary to the organiza-

C378]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

tion of the house is, by usage, delegated to the
clerk. The newly-elected members take the oath ^
and sign the roll at the table in the chamber of
the commons in the presence of the clerk; and
until a speaker has been elected, the clerk is the
presiding officer.

I. The Speaker and His Office

The speaker is the chairman of the commons Duties
for the purpose of maintaining order and declar- ° ^^^^
ing or interpreting the rules of the house. He is
also, unless the house otherwise directs, the
spokesman and representative of the house in
all communications made in its collective capac-
ity to the crown.

At Ottawa the position of the speaker as re- Speaker's
gards political parties is midway between the ^^^*"
position of the speaker at Washington and that with his
of the speaker at Westminster. At Westminster ^*^
the speaker, as soon as he has been elected to
the chair, ceases to be a partisan. He never
enters a political club. Unlike every other mem-
ber of the house of commons he makes no political
address when he seeks reelection from his con-
stituency at a general election. He never pub-
licly discusses politics. He is outside the arena
of political parties. He serves for two or three
parliaments, or for as long as he can stand the

* "I do swear," reads the oath, "that I will be faithful
and bear true allegiance to his majesty King George V."

[379]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Speaker
at

West-
minster

Speaker
at

Washing-
ton

Cabinet

and

choice

of

speaker

at

Ottawa

Strain and burden of an exceedingly arduous
office.

It is a tradition at Westminster of now a hun-
dred years' standing that a speaker must not
continue of the house of commons after the end
of his service in the chair. For a century it has
been regarded as incompatible with the dignity
of the chair that a speaker should fall back
into the rank and file of the house; and since
Addington vacated the speakership to become
chancellor of the exchequer and premier of the
administration of 1 801-1804, ^^ speaker at West-
minster has ever resigned to accept office in the
cabinet. A peerage and a pension have been
the rewards of speakers at Westminster since
the early years of the nineteenth century.

At Washington the speakership goes to the
leader of the party that is in a majority in the
house of representatives, and after election to
the chair he continues as leader of his party.
Service in the chair at Washington, moreover,
has frequently been a stepping stone to the
position of candidate at national conventions for
the presidency of the United States.

The choice of speaker at Ottawa, as at West-
minster, lies with the cabinet. An election to
the chair is not made by the house acting quite
apart from the government, although at West-
minster the usage is that the nomination of
speaker must not be moved in the house of com-
mons by any member of the cabinet.

[380]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

There is no such usage at Ottawa. The nomi- Premier
nation is moved by the premier, who, almost in- 5^*^^^^
variably, is of the commons and is leader for the of
government in the house. It is sometimes seconded ^p®^®'
by another member of the cabinet, and usually
supported by the leader of the opposition. At the
time these speeches are made — always speeches
emphasizing the importance and dignity of the
office and the eligibility and fitness of the member
nominated — the chair is without an occupant.

The mace, the symbol of the office, is absent Function
from the table in front of the chair. Members, °1 *^^®^^

at

accordingly, address their remarks by name to election
the clerk at the table; for the clerk must desig- °' ,

1 • • L 1 • • 1 • speaker

nate, by pointing to them as they rise in their
seats, the members who have the floor to move,
to second, and to support the nomination.^

A division is seldom taken on the motion for divi-
the election of speaker. Rarely is a second candi- ^°^
date nominated; for the opposition is aware that election
a nomination to the chair, moved by the premier, °*
will be supported by the full strength of the gov-
ernment in the house of commons.

The member elected as speaker at Ottawa is Quaiifi-
seldom of the leaders of his political party, al- <^tions
though in addition to his obvious mastery of the speaker
rules and procedure of the house, and his ability
to preside, he must have established some claims
on his party.

1 Cf. election of Edgar Rhodes as speaker, H. C. Debates,
January 18, 1917.

C381]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Speaker In the chair he must be non-partisan in his

attend°* tulings and in his recognition of members who

caucus desire to address the house. He must favor

neither the government nor the opposition. He

does not go into party caucus; and in no sense

is he a leader of his party.

Speaker's It is not, howevet, the usage at Ottawa, as it

^ti^n ^^ ^^ Westminster, that the speaker shall com-

withhis pletely sever himself from his political party.

^^^ Speakers make political addresses in their own

constituencies and elsewhere. They distribute

government patronage in their constituencies,

like all other members elected to support the

government; and there have been instances —

one as recent as January, 1917 — in which a

speaker has vacated the chair in order to accept

office in the cabinet.

II. Speakers Alternately from English-Speaking
and French-Speaking Canada

On© One reason for the larger freedom at Ottawa

o^for ^^ ^^^ speakers there, unlike speakers at West-
speaker minster, serve only during the lifetime of one
parliament. Conditions at Ottawa, partly due to
race and language, and partly to long-prevailing
ideas as to the distribution of all government
patronage, have militated against the Westminster
precedent of continuing a member in the chair
for two or three parliaments, regardless of the
fortunes of political parties at general elections.

C382]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

There is a new speaker at Ottawa for each Division
new house of commons; and it has Ions; been a °L

° . offices

custom that when one poHtical party continues between
in power for two or three parliaments, if the ^^
speaker in one parhament is of British extraction
the next one shall be a French-Canadian.

It is a rule also that the offices of speaker and Deputy-
of deputy-speaker can at no time be held by men ^p®^*'
of the same race. If the speaker is a French-
Canadian, the deputy-speaker, who is also chair-
man of committees, must be an English-speaking
Canadian; for the rule of the house is that "the
member elected to serve as deputy-speaker shall
be required to possess the full and practical
knowledge of the language which is not that
of the speaker for the time being." ^

The clerkship and the assistant clerkship of clerks
the house, and the offices of sergeant-at-arms *°**
and deputy-sergeant-at-arms — all appointive as geants-
distinct from elective offices — are, by usage, *t-a™i»
also similarly divided between the two races.

Nearly all the offices, important and unimpor- Minor
tant, connected with parliament, with the senate
as well as with the house, are distributed in accord-
ance with these rules or usages. A roll call of
the staffs of the two houses, including even the
boys in knickerbockers who act as pages, would
contain the names of almost as many French-
Canadians as Canadians of British ancestry.

* Rules of the H. of C, 1909, 7; "Canadian Annual
Review/' 191 1, 304.

[383]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Origin The rules and usages by virtue of which this

division distribution of offices is made are older than Con-
of offices federation. They date back to the early years
of the United Provinces, when Quebec and On-
tario elected exactly the same number of mem-
' bers to the legislature, and when these were the
only provinces in the union.
French Quebec today elects only 65 of the 234 members

2^^ of the house of commons. Its population is not
equal One foutth of the population of the Dominion,
division j^g contribution to Dominion revenues does not

or

offices exceed one sixth. But an equal division of the
offices of the house of commons is regarded by
Quebec as necessary to the preservation of its
rights and privileges; and so long as each political
party, when' it is in power, is dependent on sup-
port from French-Canada, it will be nearly as
difficult to ignore the claim of Quebec to these
parliamentary honors and offices as it would be
to repeal the clause in the British North America
act that safeguards the separate schools system.

III. The Crown and the Speaker — The Crown

and the House

Pledges As soon as the motion for the election of the

j^^® speaker has been carried, the speaker, addressing

speaker the house, not from the chair, but from the steps

to the chair, pledges himself to maintain the

rights and privileges of the commons, and asks

the aid of all his colleagues in so doing. He then

takes the chair, and the sergeant-at-arms, who

C384]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

is the custodian of the mace, lays the mace on
the table.

Even yet the house is not completely organ- Approval
ized. Another step must be taken before all the f g^^j.
constitutional usages have been observed. The by
crown must approve of the choice which the house ^°^^
has made of speaker.

For this purpose the commons are summoned state
by black rod to the bar of the senate. They go ^^J'^j^
in procession from their chamber to that of the senate
senate. In this procession the sergeant-at-arms,
bearing the mace, goes first, closely followed by
the speaker, who is attended by a group of his
fellow-members of the house of commons.

At the bar of the senate the speaker announces Speaker
his election to the governor-general, and submits ^^^^^
himself, as is the custom at Westminster, "with
all humility,'* for the approbation of the crown.
Approval and confirmation are announced from
the throne; and the speaker then demands "the
ancient and undoubted rights and privileges of the
commons." These are granted, and the speaker
and his retinue return to the house of commons.

At the opening session of a new parliament House
the house of commons has still one more duty to ^^^^^
discharge before it is ready to consider the speech inde-
from the throne with which every new session is p®"*^®^*^®
opened. Following a usage of the house of com- crown
mons at Westminster, which can be traced at
least as far back as 1558,^ the house of commons
* Porritt, "Unreformed House of Commons," I, 543.

C385]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

at Ottawa reads a bill in order to assert its right

of deliberation without reference to the cause of

summons as stated in the royal proclamation

convening parliament, or to the business to which

the attention of parliament has been directed in

the speech from the throne.

Biu No. 1 A dummy bill, long known at Ottawa as " Bill

No. I," "respecting the administration of oaths

of office," is handed by the clerk to a member on

the treasury benches, — the benches on which sit

the members of the cabinet, — who introduces it to

the house, and moves that it be read a first time.^

Dis- No further progress is ever attempted with

appear- g-jj -|^^ ^ j^ disappears from the order paper

of of the house the day after it has been read a

BUI No. 1 £j.g^ time, and is not seen or heard of again until

the opening of the next session of parliament,

when it is once more brought out from cold

storage to serve its purpose as an assertion on

the part of the house of its independence of the

crown.

IV. The Leader of the Opposition

Leader Organization of the house is not complete until

°* !^^_. another and an extra-constitutional step has been

majesty s . .

oppo- taken. The leader of his majesty's opposition
has yet to be elected. A salary of $yooo a session
has, since 1905, been paid to the leader of the
opposition, in addition to the allowance of $2500
that he receives as member of the house. Pay-

1 Cf. H. C. Debates, January 19, 1917.

C386]

sition

at
caucus

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

ment of a salary to the leader of the opposition
is an innovation on the usage at Westminster.
It is, so far as the British Empire is concerned,
an innovation peculiar to the house of commons
of Canada.^

The method by which the leader of the opposi- Elected
tion is chosen is also an innovation on procedure
at Westminster. He is elected at a caucus which
is attended only by the members of the opposi-
tion in the house of commons. Senators who are
of the opposition do not attend the caucus; and
except very infrequently senators, whether sup-
porters of the government or of the opposition,
take no part in caucuses held in the commons
wing of the parliament building.

The caucus is an extra-constitutional institu- impor-
tion which has never been established at West- ]^^°°^

rrom

minster by either of the two historic parties in washing-
British politics. In Canada it is admittedly an *°°
importation from the United States.

It was well established in the era of the United
Provinces at least as early as 1854;^ and it was
generally in use in the United Provinces, in the
constituencies as well as at Ottawa, at Con-
federation.

* "This affords a not very remote analogy with the advo-
catus diaboli in courts which are to pass upon the proposed
canonization of a saint — and to the employment and pay-
ment by the state of counsel for an accused upon his trial.'*
— Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 107.

* Cf. Buckingham and Ross, 121.

C 387 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Cabinet Both the party supporting the government and

MUCUS ^^^ party in opposition maintain the caucus
system. Members of the cabinet, who are of the
house of commons, discuss in the caucus of their
party the poHcies, bills, plans, and sometimes the
appointments of the government.

In the caucus of the opposition at the opening
of the first session of a new parliament, the
leader of the party in the house of commons is
elected, and the attitude to be taken towards
government measures and policies is determined.
Caucus The caucus at Ottawa, while admittedly pat-

beidnd terned after the caucus at Washington, is at
closed least one stage behind the caucus of the house
doors ^£ representatives in development. The constit-
uents of a member of the house of commons
have as good a constitutional right to be informed
of what he says and how he votes in caucus, as
of his speeches and votes in the house of commons.
No At Washington since 1913 this right of con-

*°nd"e stituents has been recognized. Representatives
report of the press are admitted to caucus. At Ottawa
°^**® the rights of constituents in this matter have

pro- .°

ceedings been ignored for fifty years. A caucus is always
held behind closed doors; and there is no full
and independent public record of its proceedings,
as there is of debates and votes in the house of
commons.

The act of parliament of 1905 which authorizes
the payment of a salary to the leader of the oppo-
sition, when it was before the house as a bill,

[388]

conten-
tious

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

was treated as an agreed or non-contentious Salary
measure. It was a bill for increasing the allow- °|'®*^®^
ances of members and senators from $1500 to oppo-
$2500; establishing pensions of ^3500 a year ^^*^°^
for ex-members of the cabinet; ^ and providing
a salary for the leader of the opposition.

All the details of the bill had been agreed on Anon-
at a caucus of the supporters of the government,
and at a caucus of the members of the opposition; bui
and as both political parties were satisfied with
all its provisions, the measure fell into the cate-
gory of non-contentious bills.

The circumstances under which the bill was An era
submitted to the house by the government — feeiln**^
the era of good feeling in which it was born —
explain the brevity and looseness of the section
by virtue of which the salary of the leader of the
opposition is paid. It neither defines an opposi-
tion, nor indicates by whom and how the leader
of the opposition shall be chosen.

All that the section declares is that **to the a vague
member occupying the recognized position of ^^^^
leader of the opposition in the house of commons worded
there shall be payable an additional sessional
allowance of $7000."

There is no provision in the law for a certificate Warrant
of election, nor for a report to the house of com
mons of the result of the election. The member of
elected in caucus takes his seat on the bench on ^"^

^ The pension section of the act of 1905 aroused wide-
spread popular indignation, and was repealed in 1906.

C389]

section

for
payment

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the opposition side of the house, assigned by
custom to the leader of the opposition, and his
appearance there is the warrant for the payment
of the salary.

V. The Seating of the House — Grouping of
Parties

Descrip- The chamber in which the commons hold their
^^ sittings is oblong.^ It is divided by a spacious

chamber aisle extending from the main entrance — the
entrance at which the bar is erected, and at
which the sergeant-at-arms is stationed — to the
clerk's table and the speaker's chair, which is on
a dais nearly the height of the table.
Treasury Members sit at desks in rows on each side of
the aisle, rows which rise in tiers running back
to the ends of the chamber. In the front row,
to the speaker's right, sit the members of the
cabinet. The most commanding place in the
row is assigned to the premier, who is the leader
of the house. By unwritten law the desks in this
front row are always occupied by ministers, as
active members of the privy council. In the rows
rising behind sit members who were elected to
support the government.

^ The chamber of the commons, also that of the senate,
as well as many offices in parliament house, were destroyed
by fire on February 3, 1916. A new and enlarged parliament
house, on the site of the old building, was being erected at
the time this study of the evolution of the Dominion of Canada
was in preparation.

C 390 ]

bench

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

The desks in the front row to the speaker's Front
left are occupied by the leaders of the opposition. °^
As members of a previous cabinet, they have a bench
prescriptive right to these places, because they
also are of the privy council for Canada, although
on their ceasing to act as ministers they no longer
attend at council.

Cabinet ministers thus face the leaders of the Rank
opposition. They are almost near enough to ^^^
them to carry on a conversation in a whisper oppo-
across the aisle. The rank and file of the oppo- ^^'^^^
sition occupy the rows of desks behind those
assigned to their leaders.

At Westminster members of the government cierk
and the leaders of the opposition speak from the ^^
clerk's table that serves as a division between the
treasury bench and the front opposition bench.
No such use is made of the table at Ottawa.
It is reserved for the clerk and the assistant clerk,
and as the place of the mace while the house is
in session and the speaker is in the chair.

The mace is on the table only at such times, with-
When the house is in committee, and the ^^^^

of mace

presiding officer is the chairman of committees in
and not the speaker, the mace is taken from ^™^
the table.

The larger use of the table of the house of com-
mons at Westminster — its centuries' long use
as the place from which ministers and leaders
of the opposition address the house — is due to
the difference in seating of the two chambers.

C391]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Termi-
nology of
West-
minster
In use at
Ottawa

Privilege
of floor

Govern-
or-
general
and the
house

Only benches are provided for members of the
house of commons of the mother of parhaments.

At Ottawa every member is provided with a
chak and a desk; and it is from their desks that
members address the house. This difference
in furnishing has not, however, prevented the
adoption at Ottawa of terms descriptive of parts
of the chamber in use at Westminster since gov-
ernment by party was estabhshed there more
than two centuries ago. Despite the absence of
benches, the row of desks at which members of
the cabinet sit is described as the "treasury
bench"; and the row to the left of the speaker
as the " front opposition bench."

The privilege of the floor of the house of com-
mons is much more restricted than that of the
house of representatives at Washington. It is
nearly as closely restricted as at Westminster,
where a stranger is never permitted beyond the
bar. At Ottawa the privilege is not granted to
senators or to ex-members of the house, nor is
it extended to visitors, however distinguished,
except by motion adopted by the house. The
floor is reserved for members, and for such of the
house of commons staff" whose duties make it
necessary that they pass inside the bar.

A gallery facing the speaker*s chair is reserved
for the family and entourage of the governor-
general. It is part of the unwritten constitution
of the United Kingdom that the King must not
be present at a sitting of the house of commons.

[392]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

The governor-general is the representative of the
crown in Canada, and as such he must never be
present in the house of commons at Ottawa.

VI. The Housey the Public, and the Press

There are galleries on all four sides of the cham- Public
her, all freely open to visitors. A motion can be ^ ® ®*
made by a member at any time that the speaker
order strangers to withdraw. Not more than
two or three times in the first half-century of
Confederation were strangers excluded from the
galleries.

The press gallery is immediately above the Press
speaker's chair. One custom of this gallery is *^*^
peculiar to Ottawa among press galleries in
parliaments of the English-speaking world. Re-
porters representing newspapers which support
the government sit, like the government members,
to the speaker's right. Reporters for opposition
newspapers sit to the left of the chair.

After a general election which has involved Political
a change of government, reporters, like members, ^^^^
change sides in the chamber. The custom in press
accordance with which this change of seats in
the press gallery is made illustrates relations long
existing between political parties and the press.

Canada is a country of many newspaper organs Party
and singularly few independent journals. There °*"^*°'
are not more than three or four politically inde-
pendent daily newspapers in all the cities from

C393]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Halifax to Vancouver. Only in these few news-
papers is there independent eulogy or criticispi
of the government or of the opposition. The
other daily newspapers are organs, either of the
party in office or of the party out of office.
Govern- Conservative newspapers, during a tenure of
re^ds power by the Conservative party, are rewarded
for by the bestowal of cabinet office or senator-

^^^^^ ships on the controlling owners; by knighthoods
owners and Other titular honors; by the distribution
of government patronage to owners or editors;
by orders for government printing; and by
government advertising.
Widely At the end of the term of a Conservative

^eT^" government there is scarcely a Conservative
lar- daily newspaper organ whose owners and editors

^®^^ have not received some reward or largess from

the government. With a change of government,
favors to Conservative newspapers come to an
abrupt end. It then becomes the turn of the
Liberal newspaper organs to receive similar
honors and rewards.
Press Any policy or measure of the government, or

any policy of the opposition, which secures the
indorsement of the party caucus, is, as a result
of these close and long-standing relations between
political parties and the press, certain of the eulogy
and support of the newspaper organs of the
party.

For eighteen years the Liberal party contin-
uously opposed the protectionist tariffs enacted

C394]

and

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

at the instance of the Conservative governments organs
of 1 878-1 896, and also opposed a system of boun- ^®
ties for industries that had been established by cue
the Conservatives. A Liberal government came ^^g
into power in 1896; and in 1897, bills were framed
by the cabinet continuing and extending the
protectionist tariff, and also greatly extending
the system of bounties for the iron and steel in-
dustry which the Conservative government had
begun in 1883.

Both these bills — bills which completely re- a
versed the fiscal policy of the Liberals during their "^^^
eighteen years of opposition — were indorsed by
by a caucus of the Liberal members of the house ^^^^^

. . . organs

of commons; and within a few days this complete, ini897-

unexpected, and startling change of policy had ^^®^
received the indorsement and support of the
Liberal organs in all the nine provinces.

From Confederation to 191 1 the Conservative voite
party advocated reciprocity with the United ^J*'®
States. In three of its tariff acts the Conserv- conserv-
ative government inserted sections which pro- ***^®

, . organs

vided that as soon as Canadian farm, forest, in 1911
and mineral products were admitted free of duty
into the United States, similar products of the
United States should be admitted duty free into
Canada.

Three or four times in the years from 1867 to conserv-
191 1 members of Conservative administrations **^^®
journeyed from Ottawa to Washington to urge reciproc-
governments there to accept the long-standing ^^

. C 395 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Reciproc-
ity

aban-
doned
by

Conserv-
atives
in 1911

Conserv-
ative
organs
follow
Ottawa
lead

offers of reciprocity embodied in Canadian tariffs;
and during these thirty-four years organs of the
Conservative party never ceased to emphasize the
importance of reciprocity to the farmers, lumber-
men, miners, and fishermen of the Dominion.

In the United States tariff act of 1910, the
government at Washington proclaimed its willing-
ness to establish reciprocity, not by treaty, as in
1854, but by concurrent legislation. The Liberal
government of 1 896-191 1 promptly and cordially
accepted the long-desired overtures from Washing-
ton. Resolutions preliminary to a bill to make
effective the reciprocity agreement were intro-
duced in the house of commons. The Con-
servatives went into caucus on the resolutions.
There, at the instance of the protected manu-
facturers and the railway and transport companies,
it was decided that the resolutions must be
opposed; that the Liberal government must
either withdraw them, or be compelled by ob-
struction in the house of commons to dissolve
parliament.

Within a week after the caucus at Ottawa
every Conservative newspaper organ in the
Dominion was vehemently declaring that reci-
procity with the United States would ruin the
Dominion and endanger the connection of Canada
with the British Empire.

These close and long-standing relations of
political parties with the newspapers — relations
as old as Confederation — explain the change

C396]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

in the press gallery after a general election that Organs
has resulted in a change of government at Ottawa. ^ ^
The custom is based on the presumption that of
reporters of newspapers that are organs of the ^®^*®*
government will, as a matter of course, give most
attention to the supporters of the government in
the house of commons, and that reporters for
organs of the opposition will give most attention
to the speeches of the members who sit to the
speaker's left.

Much more than at either Westminster or joumai-
Washington, the press gallery at Ottawa is a *^°^
stepping-stone to a career in Dominion politics stepping-
or in the civil service. But a journalist whose s*°^®*°

political

seat in the press gallery is to the speaker's left career
expects nothing so long as the political party
to which he is attached is in opposition.

Parliamentary debates are not as fully reported News-
in the newspapers as are debates at Westminster p^p®*"
in the newspapers of the United Kingdom. For of
fifteen or sixteen years before the war they were debates
not as fully reported as they were in the first
thirty-five years of Confederation. As the
Dominion developed, and the material prosperity
of a part of its population greatly increased, new
interests — industrial, financial, and social —
pressed on the attention of the newspapers.

Popular interest in the debates, and in the
contention of political parties at Ottawa, more-
over, obviously slackened after the only well-
marked dividing line between Conservatives and

[397]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Dte-

appear-

ance

of old

dividing

line

between

political

parties

Absence
of

political

Easing
down of
political
propa-
ganda

Liberals disappeared in 1897. This line was
obliterated by a Liberal government. Protec-
tionist tariffs — the Cayley and Gait tariffs of
1858 and 1859 — constituted a dividing line
between Conservatives and Liberals in the era
of the United Provinces. After Confederation
protection was again a dividing line — the most
obvious dividing line — from 1870 to 1897.
The line disappeared completely after official
Liberalism at Ottawa, as distinct from Liberalism
in the constituencies, was suddenly converted
to the Conservative policies of high tariffs and
generous bounties to some Canadian industries.

No outstanding poHtical principle thereafter
divided Conservatives from Liberals. No new
issues based on principles arose in Dominion
politics until 1910, when there was some contro-
versy over the form in which Canada should
contribute to the strengthening of the British
navy, and 191 1, when the question of reciprocity
with the United States was revived.

A great slackening of political propaganda
in the constituencies followed the volte face of
the Liberals on protection in 1897; for there was
no longer a question to be discussed which aroused
popular interest all over the Dominion. With
the slowing down of political activities there was
a decline in popular interest in the debates in
the house of commons, which soon manifested
itself in a curtailment of the space appropriated
in the newspapers to parliamentary reports.

[398]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
Even under these newer conditions — the Reports

of
debates

wider range of public interests other than poHtical °

demanding continuous attention from the news-
papers, and the absence in the years from 1897
to 1914 of any well-marked and long-continuing
dividing line between Conservatives and Liberals
— debates in the house of commons are much
more fully reported in Canadian newspapers
than are debates in Congress in newspapers in
the United States.

Proceedings in parliament are also accorded More
more continuous attention in the editorial columns ^^' ,

cussion

of the Canadian newspapers than is given in of

American newspapers to proceedings in Congress. ^^^^^

Dominion politics, moreover, are much more Canada

discussed in the home, on the street, in hotel !?^^

. United

corridors and clubs, and in the street cars and the states
railway trains, in Canada than federal politics
are so discussed in the United States.

In some aspects of industrial and social life — • Kinship

particularly of social life — Canadians are more °*

akin to their American neighbors than to the ufein

people of England or Scotland. But Canadian Canada

political life in most of its aspects is much more pouticai

akin to political life in England than to political "^®*^

IT • U TT • J c England

lire m the United States.

Especially is this true as regards popular
interest in the proceedings of parliament. It is
due partly to the love of Canadians for political
affairs and political discussions; partly to the
stimulus given to popular poHtical education

C399]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Con- and discussion by the fact that at Ottawa there

^1°^^ are men whose names and figures are familiar

sustain all Over the Dominion, confronting each other

interest Jecade after decade in political rivalry; and partly

Dominion to the fact that at Ottawa there is no fixed period

poutics ^Qj. ^^ administration, and that any day a political

crisis may develop there that may involve the

fate of a government and confront the Dominion

with a general election.

Lawot
parlia-
ment

Rules of
British
parlia-
ment
adopted
at

Confed-
eration

VII. Procedure of the House — Debate on the
Address to the Governor-General

Procedure of the house of commons is deter-
mined by rules which are continuing — rules
which are not adopted by each new house in the
first days of a new parliament, but which are
part of what may be described as the law of
parliament.

The legislatures of the old British North Ameri-
can provinces east of the Great Lakes, when they
were organized in the years between 1758 and
1792, each adopted, as far as was practicable
amid their primitive surroundings, the rules of
procedure of the parliament at Westminster.
From 1 841 to 1866 the legislature of the United
Provinces was governed by the rules of the
British parliament; and in the first session of
the parliament of the Dominion the rules of the
house of commons were closely modeled on the
rules of the house of commons at Westminster.

[ 400 ]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

A general rule — Rule No. i — was then Rule
adopted, a rule still in force at Ottawa, which
declares that in all cases not provided for in the
rules, "the rules, usages, and forms of proceedings
of the house of commons of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Ireland, in force on the first
day of July, 1867, shall be followed." ^

Not all the rules and usages of Westminster No
are practicable at Ottawa. At Westminster, ^^^^^^^
because there is in England an established church, Ottawa
prayers in the house of commons are read by a
chaplain, who is of the Church of England.
In Canada there is no national church. There
is no chaplain of the house of commons. Prayers
are read by the speaker.

At Westminster forty members of the house Quorum
have, since 1640, constituted a quorum. At
Ottawa, where the number of members is less
than one third of those at Westminster, twenty
members constitute a quorum.

Every member is bound to attend the house, NoroU-
unless leave of absence has been given. There is ^ty~j
no call of the roll and no reading of the journals, whips
as there is in the senate and house at Washington.
Each political party has its whips — members
of the party to whom is delegated the duty of
keeping members in attendance. The organ-
ization and activities of the whips' offices are
such that the whereabouts of every member of
the house is known.

1 Rules of H. C. of Canada, 1909, i.

[401 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Keeping Pairs for divisions are arranged by the whips;
house ^"^ ^" *^^ government whips is thrown the
responsibiHty of keeping a quorum, especially at
those sittings at which government business is
before the house.
Speech Procedure in regard to the speech from the

^one ^ throne at the opening of a session at Ottawa is
identical with that at Westminster. Even the
form of the speech is the same. The opening
paragraphs foreshadowing the legislation that is
to be introduced during the session, and describ-
ing material conditions in the Dominion, are
addressed to members of the senate and the house;
while the paragraph intimating that the govern-
ment will need votes of money is addressed to the
house of commons alone.

The final paragraph commending the measures
to be submitted to the attention of parliament,
and invoking the blessing of the Almighty on
the deliberations, is, like the opening paragraphs,
addressed to "honorable gentlemen of the sen-
ate; gentlemen of the house of commons." ^
Debate The speech comes before the house of commons

address ^^ ^ motion made from the government benches
in reply — a motion for which the government is respon-
sible— that "an address be presented to his
excellency, the governor-general, offering the
thanks of this house to his excellency for the
gracious speech which he has been pleased to
make to both houses of parliament."

^ Cf. H. C. Debates, January 19, 1917.
[402]

to
speech

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
To two of the younger members, members Motion

for
address

who are recognized as men of promise, is assigned °^

the duty of proposing and seconding the motion
for the address of thanks. It is a much-prized
distinction to be invited by the leader of the house
to render this service. Only supporters of the
government are asked to undertake it.

In accordance with a usage which had its Dual
origin in the legislature of the United Provinces, ^^^uage
the motion is proposed by an English-speaking
member, and seconded by a member from Quebec,
who addresses the house in French. Thus, at
the beginning of a new session — usually at the
second sitting — the house and the Dominion
are formally reminded of the compact at Con-
federation that the two languages should be on an
equality in parliament.

Except for the introduction of bills, the debate Prece-
on the address in reply to the speech from the ^®^*^®
throne takes precedence of all other business, debate
Any question within the realm of Dominion
politics, or of Empire politics, can be discussed
when the address is before the house.

There is no time limit for speeches. It was no time
1913 before the house had any rule under which i^™** ^o*"
a debate on any subject could be closured. So
far in the history of the new rule it has never
been applied in the debate on the address, and
usually from eight to ten sittings are devoted
to it.

The first member to address the house after

[403]

on
motion

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Leader
of

oppo-
sition
and the
address

Criticism

govern-
ment

Expert
criticism

the motion has been proposed and seconded is
the leader of the opposition, who avails himself
of this opportunity to make a general criticism
of the policies of the government. The premier
and leader of the house replies to the speech
from the front opposition bench; and thereafter
the debate on the address becomes general.

All the leaders on the two front benches take
part. It is a custom also that ex-ministers in
opposition criticize the policies and measures of
their successors in office. Thus, if the minister
of finance in the late government is of the house,
he directs his criticism to the policies that originate
in the department of finance; and the minister
of finance, when he intervenes in the debate,
replies at length, and in detail, to the criticisms
offered by his predecessor in office. In the same
way it often happens that the minister of the
interior replies to an ex-minister of the interior,
and the postmaster-general to the member of the
opposition who held this office in the preceding
administration.

The custom so described gives a zest and inter-
est to the debate, an interest that extends far
beyond the house and the galleries. It results
in a discussion of the policies and administration
of the principal departments of state by men
who from their experience are regarded as experts.

Back-bench members on both sides of the
house, in the debate on the address, have the
best opportunity of the session of expressing

[404]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

their opinions and convictions; and, through
the official verbatim reports of the debates and
the newspapers, of presenting their opinions and
convictions to their constituents.

VIII. The Constitutional Value of the Debate

on the Address
The debate has much more than a formal or More
ceremonial value. It has a larger value than of *^^^*

.. . (..... cere-

afrordmg ex-mmisters an opportunity of criticizing moniai
their successors in office, and back-bench members ^^"®
of addressing their constituents from the floor of
the house of commons.

It offers the house, and through the house, the Discus-
Dominion, two opportunities that at times are of ^^°^ °'
much constitutional value. It can be, and often Dominion
has been, a debate on the state of the Dominion,
an opportunity of calling the attention of gov-
ernment to unfavorable conditions in the body
politic, for which it is urgent that some remedy
shall be devised.

It also affords an opportunity to the opposition ChaUen-
of challenging the policy of the government, ^^j^g
of testing, by a division, the feeling of the house, of
and of informing the constituencies of the grounds *^°^®™'
and expediency of the challenge.

If the opposition in caucus has decided on Amend-
challenging any policy of the government — ^Son*"
on a challenge that is to be pressed to a division
— the mode of procedure is quite simple. No
objection is raised by the opposition to the address

C405]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of thanks to the governor-general. To object
to the motion would be discourteous, if not dis-
loyal, despite the fact that the speech from the
throne is framed by the cabinet. An amendment
is offered of which the purpose is threefold.
It expresses concurrence with the proposed address
of thanks; condemns the policy which is assailed;
and expresses regret that in the speech from the
throne there is no announcement that the policy
challenged is to be amended or abandoned.
Motion An amendment framed on these lines is equiv-

of want alent to a motion of want of confidence in the

of con-
fidence government. It is so regarded on both sides of

^ the house; and for a division on such an amend-

govem- ' ....

ment ment the government and opposition whips
beat up all the strength that each party can com-
mand. No government that was defeated on an
amendment to the address could hope to carry
on through the session. The premier would have
no alternative but to tender his resignation to
the governor-general.
Presen- After the motion for the address of thanks has

tation heen adopted by the house, it is followed by
address another motion, proposed and seconded from the
*° treasury bench, that "the said address be en-

generai grossed, and presented to his excellency the
governor-general, by such members of this house
as are of the honorable the privy council." ^
This is a formal motion on which there is no
debate.

1 Cf. H. C. Debates, January 30, 1917.
[406]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

IX. The Select Standing Committees of
the House

While the house is occupied with the debate Nomina-
on the address, a special committee, on which ^^^
are supporters of the government and members com-
of the opposition, has prepared lists of members °^**®®^
to compose the select standing committees of
the house — committees which continue only
during the session in which they are appointed.

There are eleven of these committees, in addi-
tion to a committee that has charge of the official
reports of the debates, and a committee that,
in association with a committee of the senate,
has charge of the library of parHament.

Supporters of the government are in a majority Member-
on each committee. Membership of the com- ^^p °^
mittees varies irom 25 to 119. Ihe importance mittees
of a committee, and the volume of work that is
referred to it, are indicated by the number of its
members.

The committees are: Descrip-

Members of

1. Privileges and elections ; 34 *^°™"

2. Railways, canals, and telegraph lines 119

3. Miscellaneous private bills 64

4. Standing orders 31

5. Printing 25

6. Public accounts 63

7. Banking and commerce 95

8. Agriculture and colonization 94

C 407 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

9. Marine and fisheries 36

10. Mines and minerals 30

1 1 . Forests, waterways, and water powers 3 1

Election The Special committee which has prepared the
mitteTs ^^^^^ °^ members to compose these committees
makes its report as soon as the address to the
governor-general has been adopted. The govern-
ment, in practice, is responsible for the organ-
ization of the house for this committee work —
work that is quite distinct from the work of com-
mittees of the whole house, such as the committee
of ways and means and the committee of supply.
Powers The acceptance of the report of the special

of com- committee is moved by the leader of the house.

mittees r» i • • i

By this motion, when agreed to, the committees
are established and empowered to examine and
inquire into all such matters and things as may
be referred to them by the house; called upon to
report from time to time their observations and
opinions thereon; and empowered to send for
persons, papers, and records.^
Watch- From time to time the committees avail them-

^^^ selves of the power to send for persons, papers,

treasury and records. Most use of this power is made by
the committee on public accounts. It investi-
gates the expenditure of public money, and may
be described as the parliamentary watchdog of
the treasury.

1 Cf. H. C. Debates, January 31, 1917.

[408]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

X. Procedure on Bills

Procedure in the house of commons on bills is,
in its main lines, almost identical with that in the
senate. But there is a range of bills which cannot
originate elsewhere than in the house of commons.
In the senate there is neither committee of ways
and means nor committee of supply; for bills
imposing any charge on the people of the Dominion
or making any grant for the services of the crown
cannot originate in the upper house.

"All aids and supplies granted to his majesty
by the parliament of Canada,'' reads house rule
No. 78, "are the sole gift of the house of commons;
and all bills for granting such aids and supplies
ought to begin with the house, as it is the un-
doubted right of the house to direct, limit, and
appoint in all such bills, the ends, purposes, con-
siderations, conditions, limitations, and qualifica-
tions of such grants, which are not alterable by
the senate."

All money bills — all bills imposing a charge
on the people of Canada — must be based on
resolutions of the house of commons; and the
usage is that private members — members not
of the cabinet — cannot introduce bills of this
description. The bills must originate with the
government, and the house can act on them only
with the leave of the crown. ^

Bills

that must
originate
in house
of com-
mons

Aids and
supplies

Bills that

cannot

originate

with

private

members

^ "The provision which prevents the house passing any
such bill unless it shall first have been recommended by message

[409]

bUls

duction
of bUls

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Reso- No bill, moreover, relating to trade, or the

lutions alteration of laws concerning trade, can be intro-

nary to duced Until "the proposition shall have been first

considered in a committee of the whole house, and

agreed unto by the house." ^ This means that

there must be resolutions preliminary to the bill,

resolutions which add an additional stage to the

stages of an ordinary bill.

Intro- Two days' notice must be given of a motion

for leave to introduce a bill, resolution, or address

for the appointment of any committee. On the

day designated leave to introduce a bill is given,

the bill is introduced, and it is read a first time.

Except in the case of important bills, introduced

by the government, there is seldom any debate

at first reading. A brief explanation of the general

aim or purpose of the bill is all that is offered by

the member who introduces it.

Second At second reading the case for the bill is fully

reading presented. It is at second reading that the house

decides for or against the principle of the bill.

But if there is opposition, and it is desired that

the house shall not commit itself on the principle,

a second course is open.

Six It can be moved that the bill be given "six

months' hoist." This motion is equivalent to

the motion at Westminster that "the bill be

from the governor-general, emphasizes the responsibility
of the ministry for the expenditure of every dollar of public
money." — Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 95-96.
^ Rules of the House of Commons, 1909, Rule 48.

[410]

months'
hoist "

com-
mittees

com-
mittee

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

read a second time this day six months.*' If
the motion is carried, it is as fatal for the bill
as a direct rejection, for nothing more is heard
during a session of a bill that has been given the
six months' hoist.

If the house accepts the principle of a bill at standing
second reading, the bill goes either to one of the
standing committees, or it is considered in com- and
mittee of the whole house. If it goes to a stand-
ing committee, committee stage in the house is not of the
omitted. The purpose of sending it to a stand- ^ °'
ing committee is to perfect its details, and thereby
lessen the work on the bill in committee of the
whole house.

At second-reading stage, and also at the third Com-
reading of a bill, a member can speak only once. ^"^®
In committee of the whole the bill is considered in the
clause by clause. At this stage, unless the closure ^°"^®
has been moved and a time limit fixed for com-
mittee stage, there is no restriction on the number
of times a member can speak, or on the number
of amendments he can offer, provided that the
amendments are germane to the bill.

From committee the bill is reported to the Report
house. This is a distinct stage — a stage at ^^^^
which, when amendments have been made in
committee, debate and amendments are in order.
In the event of a bill being reported from commit-
tee without amendments, report stage is formal.

Third reading is the last stage of a bill. It Third
then goes to the senate. If the senate amends a '®*"^

[411 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Royal
assent

BiUs

formerly

reserved

Instruc-
tions
to

governor-
general

Revision
of

Instruc-
tions
in 1878

bill and the house disagrees, the question is settled
by messages or by conference, usually by message.

The royal assent must be given before a bill
becomes law. The British North America act
provides that when a bill is presented to the
governor-general for the king's assent, "he shall
declare, according to his discretion, but subject
to the provisions of this act, and to his majesty's
instructions, either that he assents thereto in
the king's name, or that he withholds the king's
assent, or that he reserves the bill for the signifi-
cation of the king's pleasure."

For a few years after Confederation certain
bills, including all divorce bills, were reserved,
and did not become law until the signification
from the crown had been received at Ottawa from
London, a fact which was announced by procla-
mation issued by the governor-general.

This procedure, a procedure established in
connection with certain classes of bills in the
days of the legislature of the United Provinces,
was in accordance with the instructions received
by the governor-general on his appointment.
But in 1876, Blake, minister of justice in the
Mackenzie cabinet of 1 873-1 878, for the govern-
ment, objected to this and other provisions in
the royal instructions to the governor-general.

Blake's case was that the instructions to which
the Mackenzie government objected were incon-
sistent with the advanced stage of responsible
government existing in the Dominion.

[412]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

"Canada," the colonial office was reminded in this Blake
memorandum of July, 1876, "is not merely a colony or a
province; she is a dominion composed of an aggregate of
seven large provinces federally united under an imperial
charter, which expressly recites that her constitution is to
be similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom. Nay,
more, besides the powers with which she is invested over a
large part of the affairs of the inhabitants of the several
provinces, she enjoys absolute powers of legislation and
administration over the people and territories of the north-
west, out of which she has already created one province,
and is empowered to create others, with representative insti-
tutions.

"These circumstances, together with the vastness of her
area, the numbers of her free population, the character of
the representative institutions and of the responsible govern-
ment which as citizens of the various provinces and of Canada
her people have so long enjoyed, all point to the propriety
of dealing with the question in hand in a manner very dif-
ferent from that which might be fitly adopted with reference
to a single and comparatively small and young colony.

" Besides the general spread of the principles of constitu-
tional freedom there has been, in reference to the colonies,
a recognized difference between their circumstances resulting
in the application to those in a less advanced condition of a
lesser measure of self-government, while others are said to
be invested with the fullest freedom of political government;
and it may be fairly stated that there is no dependency of
the British crown which is entitled to so full an application
of the principlies of constitutional freedom as the Dominion
of Canada."

The erection of another landmark In the consti-
tutional development of Canada, in the progress
of the Dominion to the status of a nation, re-
sulted from the interchanges of 1876 between
Ottawa and the colonial office. The commission

C413]

The case
for

larger
powers

Canada's
claim for
constitu-
tional
freedom

All

claims

conceded

power
dormant

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

and instructions given to the governor-general of
the Dominion were recast when Lome succeeded
DufFerin in 1878. The principles that Blake
and the Mackenzie administration had insisted
upon were conceded by the colonial office; "and
since then there has been no dispute with ref-
erence to ministerial responsibility, either with
regard to the assent to bills, the granting of par-
dons, or anything else." ^
Veto As a result of this revision in 1878, and of the

greatly increased power which the government
at Ottawa gradually drew to itself under the
unwritten, as well as the written, constitution
of the Dominion, the power to veto or reserve
a bill is dormant. It has so long been out of use
as to be almost forgotten in Canada; ^ and parlia-
ment at Ottawa passes bills with as little appre-
hension of a veto as parliament at Westminster,
where the veto power of the crown, though the
exercise of it was threatened by George III in
1774 and again by George IV in 1829,^ has not
been used since the reign of Queen Anne.

^ Lash, " The Working of Federal Institutions in Canada,"
83-85; Keith, " Responsible Government in the Dominions,"
240.

2 Cf. Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," 97, and Note
XIX, III.

3 Cf. James Anson Farrer, "The Monarchy in PoUtics,"
82, 128.

[414]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

XI. Government Business: Private Members*
Bills and Private Bill Legislation

Bills introduced in the house of commons are of Three
three classes: government bills, private members' oj^^^uis
bills, and private bill legislation.

All bills for which the government is respon- Govem-
sible are in the first of these classes. In normal ^*
times government business monopolizes two
thirds of the time of the house. The two impor-
tant government bills — bills which occupy much
of the time of the house each session — are (i)
the finance bill or the budget, and (2) the bill
voting supplies for all the services of the Dominion.

The finance bill is framed by the minister of Budget
finance. Before it is introduced, any increases
or decreases in taxation that are embodied in it
have been discussed and approved by the cabinet.
The minister of finance makes his budget state-
ment on a motion that the house go into commit-
tee of ways and means; and it is on resolutions,
considered in committee of ways and means,
that the finance bill is founded.

The statement of the minister is long and de- Speech
tailed. Two, and sometimes three, hours are ^^ii^ster
occupied in its submission to the house. It covers of
the receipts and expenditures of the government
for the fiscal year, and includes a detailed sta-
tistical survey of the material progress of the Do-
minion. Finally, the changes in taxation are
announced. Increases or decreases in customs or

C415]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Indirect
taxation

Sources

of

revenue

Private
members
and

amend-
ments to
finance
bUl

inland revenue duties go into effect immediately
on their announcement in the house of commons
by the minister of finance.

People in Canada, in normal times, do not
come face to face with the tax gatherers of the
Dominion government. Except for stamps on
tobacco, cigars, and patent medicines, they are
never reminded, unless they are importers, that
the government at Ottawa is exercising its powers
of taxation.^

All the revenue is derived from three sources.
By far the larger part of it comes from indirect
taxation — from (i) customs duties on imports
and (2) inland or internal revenue duties on wines,
spirits, and beer, and on tobacco and patent
medicines. The third source is mining royalties,
payments for leases of lands and of water privi-
leges, and for services rendered by the govern-
ment as a carrier of mails, and also as the owner of
railways, grain elevators, and coastwise steamship
lines.

After the resolutions have been adopted in
committee and embodied in a bill, procedure on
the bill is much the same as on a non-financial
measure. But at no stage of the finance bill is it

^ A tax on excess profits of manufacturing, transport,
insurance, banking, and other business companies was im-
posed as a war-time finance measure in 1916. Except for
this, and some other direct imposts of the war period, no
direct taxation has ever been imposed by the Dominion
parliament.

C4>6]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

in order for a private member to move to increase
any charge imposed by the bill. A motion to
increase a tax can be made only from the treasury
bench. A motion to decrease a tax, made by
any member of the house of commons, is in order;
and it is on such motions that discussions occur
when the house is in committee on the schedules
of a tariff bill.

Debates on the budget extend over an even Wide
larger number of sittings than the debate on the ^^^^j'
address to the governor-general; for almost any sionon
aspect of Dominion politics can be discussed when ^^^^^^
the budget is before the house.

In the period from 1878 to 1896, when the Budget
Liberal opposition was conducting in the constit- ^f^g*i!f
uencies, as well as in the house and the senate, i896
a vigorous and continuous propaganda for a tariff
for revenue only, debates on the finance bill ran
on for weeks, and the people of the Dominion
looked on with keen interest.

After the Liberals in 1897 became as protection- Less
ist as the Conservatives, and were responsible ^t^rest-

tag after

for the highest protective tariffs ever enacted at Liberals
Ottawa from 1867 to the war, there was not a become

protec-

member left in the house of commons to advocate tionists
tariffs for revenue only, or even to oppose in-
creases in the tariff made by the Liberal govern-
ment. Debates on the finance bill were greatly
curtailed, because as the Conservatives were all
protectionists there was no longer any opposition
in the house to a high protective tariff; and there

[417]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Finance
bUl In
senate

Com-
mittee
of
supply

Esti-
mates
for
state
depart-
ments

Value of
work in
com-
mittee
of
supply

was a corresponding decline in popular interest
in the budget debate.

From the house the finance bill goes to the
senate. There the stages of the bill are merely
formal, and the debates of only academic interest.
The senate can reject a finance bill, but only at
the cost of bringing the various governmental
services of the Dominion to a standstill. It is
denied all power of amendment. In this respect
the senate stands in the same subordinate position
towards the house of commons that the house of
lords has held since 1678 towards the house of
commons at Westminster.

In committee of supply the estimates are taken
department by department. Each minister is
in charge of the estimates for his department.
It is his business, at this time, to answer criti-
cisms, and to defend any items in the estimates
that are challenged by the opposition.

Carrying the estimates through committee is
a long process. It involves much close work on
the floor of the house for ministers, especially
for ministers in charge of spending departments,
such as the departments of public works, rail-
ways and canals, the interior, and marine and
fisheries.

A large part of the session is occupied with these
votes of money. But some of the most effective
work of the house is done at the numerous sit-
tings in committee; for in committee of supply
the house can exercise close supervision of the

[418]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

expenditures, administration, and general policies
of all the state departments.

No matter how large a majority a government Check
may have, or how mechanically obedient its ^JJ ^^^^
majority may be to the summons and instructions methods
of the government whips, the fact that there
will be detailed and searching discussion by the
opposition of the estimates is, in itself, a check
on slipshod methods, and on plans and policies
that will not admit of full discussion in committee
of supply.

The house is not continuously in committee of Appro-
supply. The vote for one department is carried. ?^f*^°°
Then some other business is taken up, and when
this is finished the house again goes into com-
mittee. After all the votes have been passed,
they are embodied in what is known as the
" appropriation bill." The final stages of this
bill are taken in the closing days of the session,
in order to get the supplies of the whole year into
one bill.

The appropriation bill, after it has been passed Appro-
by the senate, is returned to the commons; and ^/^^^°^
when the royal assent is about to be given to bar of
this and other bills, and the commons are sum- ^®°^*®
moned to the senate chamber for the purpose,
the bill which grants money for the service of
the crown is carried by the speaker to the bar
of the senate, and handed by him to the clerk
of the parliament to receive the royal assent.
The final stage of the appropriation bill is in

C419]

than
financial

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Final an ordinary session the only occasion on which

am)ro-° ^^^ Speaker is the representative of the house in

priation communications with the governor-general; for it

will be recalled that when the house has adopted

an address of thanks to the governor-general

for the speech from the throne, at the opening

of the session, it delegates by resolution, to

members of the privy council — to members

of the cabinet — the duty of presenting the

address to the governor-general.

Govern- Government bills are those which come to the

™®g* house from the cabinet. All these bills originate

other in one or other of the state departments; for

every government bill alters or varies the functions

and responsibilities, or throws new functions and

responsibilities on some executive department.

A government bill intended to effect momentous
or far-reaching changes, or embodying an impor-
tant policy of the government, is sometimes intro-
duced by the premier, who nowadays is always
free of the responsibilities of a heavily burdened
state department. Otherwise, it is the rule that
a government bill is introduced by the minister
who is at the head of the department in which the
bill originated.
Caucus Members on the government side of the house

°^ know beforehand the principles and main lines

govern- .

ment of a government bill. These they learn in caucus
^^^^ in the early days of the session; and in this way

the caucus serves as a link between the govern-
ment forces in the house and the cabinet.
[420]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

In the case of a government bill of first-class
importance, there is usually a caucus on the bill
sometime between its introduction and second-
reading stage; and from the rank and file on the
government benches loyal support is expected.

A government suflPers a loss of prestige in
parliament and in the constituencies if it is com-
pelled by division within its ranks, or by the tac-
tics of the opposition, to abandon a bill that has
been announced in the speech from the throne
at the opening of the session.

Loss of
prestige
when a
biUis
aban-
doned

XII. The Closure

A government must in each regular session
carry through parliament the finance bill and the
appropriation bill. Each session, also, there are
two or three important bills, embodying its
policies, that it is essential to its success as a
government should be enacted.

Despite these conditions it was 1913 before
any government had, by the rules, sufficient
command over the time of the house of commons
to prevent its legislative plans from being thwarted
by obstruction and filibustering by the opposition.
The house of commons at Ottawa was late among
legislative bodies in the English-speaking world
in adopting a closure rule.

By filibustering the Conservative opposition in
191 1 made it impossible for the Laurier govern-
ment to carry a reciprocity bill through the house

[421]

Parlia-
mentary
program
of

govern-
ment

Obstruc-
tion and
fili-
bustering

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Affli-
buster
that
ended
fili-
bustering

Clostire
rule
of 1913

Old

rules
that
per-
mitted
minority
to
control

of commons. Obstruction to the bill forced the
Liberal government to advise the governor-
general to dissolve a parliament which, in the
normal course, had still nearly two and a half
years to run.

Two sessions later — in 1913 — the Liberals,
then in opposition, attempted similar tactics on
the bill of the Borden government for a grant
of thirty-five million dollars to be expended in
adding three battleships to the British navy.

Realizing after parliament had been in session
for five months that no progress was being made,
and that the opposition was intent on forcing the
abandonment of the navy bill by obstruction,
the Borden government proposed the adoption
of a new rule. The rule, which is now in force,
prohibits debate at certain technical stages of
a bill preliminary to those that have been here
described, and also empowers a member of the
cabinet to move that there be a time limit to a
debate, either in the house or in committee of
the whole. With the closure rule thus brought
into operation no speaker can hold the floor for
longer than twenty minutes.

In explaining the need and purpose of the new
rule, Borden reminded the house that under the
then existing rules there were nineteen stages, in-
cluding committee, at which it was possible for
members to discuss a measure. He stated also
that it had been affirmed by some members of the
house that it was absolutely impossible for the

[422]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

majority to pass any measure without the consent
of the minority.^

Long before 1913 there had been a widespread
conviction in the Dominion that an amendment
of the rules of the house was necessary. " Liberty
of speech in the commons," the Globe, of Toronto,
a Liberal journal, had declared during the parha-
mentary crisis of 1911,^ "has degenerated into
license, and half a dozen inveterate talkers bore
a weary house with talks that were old two
thousand years ago, until the wonder is that
enough members can be induced to remain in the
chamber to make a quorum."

Members of the Liberal administration in the
general election of 191 1 had also given pledges
that if the Liberals were again returned to power
the rules of the house should be promptly amended
so as to make impossible filibustering like that
which compelled the Laurier government to
abandon the reciprocity bill.

The new rule was, however, treated by the
Liberal opposition as a party measure. There
were nine days of debate on it, and the rule was
carried only by a parliamentary manoeuver by
which the opposition was foiled in its intention
of obstructing its adoption.^

The objections made by the Liberals were that
the new rule endangered freedom of speech;
that it would tend to Americanize the Canadian

1 Cf. H. C. Debates, April 9, 1913. * April 22, 191 1.

* Cf. "Canadian Annual Review," 1913, 164-167.

[423]

AUberty
of speech
that was
long
abused

Liberals
promise
to end
filibus-
tering

They
oppose
the new
rule

"Ameri-
canizing
Canadian
parlia-
ment"

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Oppo-
sition
from
French
Canada

French-
Cana-
dians
fear
a star
chamber

Less
drastic
than
closure
rules at
West-
minster
and

Washing-
ton

parliament and establish the tyranny of the
political boss.

From Quebec there was a specific and remark-
able objection. "My province at the time of
Confederation/' said Lemieux, who had been
postmaster-general in the Laurier administration,
"accepted the compact of Cartier and Mac-
donald that the rules, usages, and customs of the
British house of commons up to 1867 should be
binding on the parliament of Canada in the
future. Therefore, you have no right to impose
on the minority in this house rules which have
been created since 1867 — rules which tend to
abridge the rights of the minority."

Lemieux was apprehensive that the new rule
would jeopardize the rights of French-Canadians.
"Has any one the right," he asked, "to alter a
compact — to change the constitution; for the
rules adopted in 1867 are embodied in that com-
pact, in that constitution; and you cannot deface
them. Canada, with such drastic rules, is no
longer government by parliament but by the
cabinet. It is a revival of the star chamber." ^

The rules as they stood after the amendment
of 1913 — an amendment adopted by a vote of
108 to 73 — as regards closure of debate and the
shutting off of amendments in committee — are
not nearly so comprehensive or so drastic as the
closure rules at Westminster or at Washington.
There is no debate under a five or a ten minute

1 H. C. Debates, April 14-15, 1913.

[424]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

rule, as there is in the house of representatives;
and no closure by compartments, as there is in
the British house of commons.

All substantial or obviously bona-fide motions Bona-
which bring into question the propriety of passing
any bill or vote are as debatable today as they were stui
before 1913; and at least one day's notice must
be given from the treasury bench of the intention
of the government to move that a continued
debate shall not be further adjourned.

The rules as they stood before 191 3 were Old rules
adapted to conditions which ceased to exist at the ""^* °*
turn of the twentieth century, when the great vinciai

fide
debate

safe-
guarded

material expansion of Canada began and the
Dominion took rank among nations.

era of
Canada

members

XIII. Private Members' Bills and Private
Bill Legislation

A private or unofficial member of the house of Oppor-
commons has at least four opportunities of *^****
exercising his parliamentary abilities, and con- private
vincing his constituency that he can be of service
at Ottawa. They are opportunities, moreover,
that are distinct from the service he renders as a
supporter of the government or a member of the
opposition, or as a member of a standing com-
mittee; and distinct also from the local service
which every member is expected to render to his
constituency.

Under the rules it is possible for a private

C425]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Ques-
tions to
ministers

Rules

as to
ques-
tions

Oral and

written

answers

Value of
ques-
tions

Attention

directed

to

matters

of urgent

public

impor-

member to address to ministers questions of
which written notice has been given, and also
questions of which written notice has not been
given, which are addressed to ministers when the
orders of the day are moved, or at the adjourn-
ment of the house.

Questions may be put to ministers relating to
public affairs; and to other members relating to
any bill, motion, or other public matter con-
nected with the business of the house. In putting
a question no argument or opinion can be offered;
and a minister in replying to a question must not
argue or put forward any opinion.

Answers to some questions are given orally.
To others the answers are in writing. In either
case the answers are embodied in the official
report of the debate.

Much information of Dominion-wide value is
thus at times elicited from ministers; and infor-
mation of value to a province, or to particular
interests in a province, is forthcoming at almost
every sitting of the house through these formal
and informal questions.

A member may at any sitting of the house
initiate a discussion on a definite matter of urgent
public importance, provided twenty members
rise in their places to support his motion for leave
to move the adjournment of the house.

The discussion takes place on the motion so
made for adjournment. The rules carefully
safeguard this valuable privilege. A motion to

[426]

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

discuss a matter of urgent public importance Rules
cannot be made to revive a discussion of a ^^^°^
matter previously discussed in the same session of motions
parliament. The motion must not anticipate a ^^'journ-
matter — bill, motion, or vote — which has been ment
previously appointed for consideration by the
house, and it must not raise a question of privilege.

In a country of immense area like Canada, and Peculiar
of varying climatic conditions, the privilege of ^g"***
every private member of thus calling the atten- motions
tion of the house and the government to a matter
of urgent public importance is of peculiar value.
Members avail themselves of it to call attention
to an unexpected failure of a crop; to a disaster
to a fishing fleet; or to a labor dispute of a far-
reaching character. The privilege may also be
exercised to call attention to international com-
plications, such as may arise in connection with
Asiatics on the Pacific Coast, or some incident on
the American border line.

A statement for the government follows a Times
motion on an urgent matter of public importance; f^^^^
and in times of stress or crisis such statements or
have a quieting influence, particularly in cases *^^*®
of great disasters; for in such cases the debate
on the motion elicits from the government a
statement of the steps it is taking to aflPord
relief.

A third opportunity afforded to private members Motions
is that of submitting motions to the house in favor ^ '*^°'
of reforms or amendments of the law. The reforma

[427]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Private

members'

bills

Private-

blU

legls-

Propa-
ganda
for
reform

Govern-
ment
accept-
ance of
private
members'
UUs

fourth is the opportunity open to members of
submitting bills to the house.

Private members' bills are distinguished from
(i) bills originating with the government and
(2) private-bill legislation — a description which
comprises divorce bills and bills for the incor-
poration of transport, industrial, and financial
undertakings and of ecclesiastical, educational,
and philanthropic institutions.

The stages of all bills coming within the term
"private-bill legislation" are the same as those of
bills which originate with the government, or with
private members, with one important exception.
The detailed examination and perfecting of bills
incorporating undertakings or institutions, and
the exercise of vigilance in safe-guarding the pub-
lic interests, are largely the work of the standing
committees, to which the bills are referred after
they have been read a second time in the house.

Much effective propaganda work for amend-
ments or extensions of laws is accomplished by
motions by private members and by private
members' bills. The case for amendment or ex-
tension is impressed on the government; and by
discussion of these motions or bills in the house,
newspaper and other popular support is secured.

It not infrequently happens that as an outcome
of these discussions, and the sympathetic interest
they arouse in the house of commons and in the
constituencies, the government undertakes to
introduce a bill for the reform suggested by the

C428]

meats
effected

bills

PrivUege

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

private member or gives its support to the bill

which the private member has introduced.

Apart from the effect on the government of the Amend

discussion of private members' bills and motions,

at each session of parliament quite a number of by

beneficent amendments to the law are made by p^^**®

-' mem-
private members' bills. There is no chance for bers'

a private member's bill if the government is hos-
tile to it. In that event supporters of the govern-
ment act on the instructions of the whip, and the
bill fails of second reading.

Questions of privilege cannot be raised as
questions of urgent public importance. But they
may be raised at any sitting at the time the
orders of the day are moved. Scores of questions
of privilege are raised at every session.

Occasionally they arise out of revelations in sensi-

special committees or in investigations before **^®^«**

royal commissions. Much more frequently privi- news-

lege is invoked in order that members may correct ^^^\
. . r 1 • criticism

maccurate reports m the newspapers of their

speeches in the house, or repudiate interpretations

of their speeches which have been published on

the editorial pages of the newspapers. Among

members of legislative bodies in English-speaking

countries, members of the house of commons of

Canada are most sensitive to newspaper criticism.

C429]

CHAPTER XV

THE NATIONAL POLICY OF THE
DOMINION

Scope of TN the thirty-five years from 1879 to 19 14,
p*y°y^'^ A and in particular from 1879 to 1897, there
was no phrase in poHtical discussion in Canada
in more frequent use than the one, "the National
PoHcy of the Dominion." In the earHer part of
the period the term was used to describe (i)
the imposition of duties in the Dominion tariff
to protect home industries against all outside
competition; (2) the paying of bounties from the
Dominion treasury to aid the upbuilding of indus-
try; and (3) the attempt to secure reciprocity
agreements with the United States and other non-
British countries, with a view to extending the
export trade of the Dominion.
Exten- In the decade before the war the phrase had

of°us come to have a meaning much more comprehen-
scope sive. It included, as of old, protectionist duties
in the interest of Canadian industries. It in-
cluded, until 191 1, lavish bounties to iron and steel
companies in Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Ontario.
But it also included (i) the continuous and wide
immigration propaganda for the peopling of the
provinces west of the Great Lakes, and (2) the
development of the national grain route, by rail,
[430]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

lake, and canal, from all the grain-growing
provinces to tidewater ports on the Atlantic.

I. The Development of the hiational Policy

There were protective tariffs in Canada twenty
years before the phrase "National Policy" was
brought into general use by the Macdonald
government in 1879. The United Provinces of
Upper and Lower Canada had been under a
protectionist tariff for eight years before Con-
federation. In British Columbia a protective
tariff was in operation from 1867 until the province
came into Confederation in 1871.

The Pacific Coast province, like the United
Provinces and the Maritime Provinces, had also
agitated for reciprocity with the United States;
and while it was still an independent and isolated
colony, British Columbia had offered bounties
for the encouragement of the iron and woolen
industries, thus anticipating a part of the National
Policy that was not adopted by the Dominion
government until 1883, when bounties to encour-
age the production of pig iron were first paid from
the treasury at Ottawa.

The first attempt to establish a National Policy
for the Dominion was made in 1870, by the Mac-
donald government of 1 867-1 871. As it was
developed at that time the National Policy
included protective duties on only some Canadian
products; and an offer, embodied in the tariff,

[431]

Origin of
National
PoUcy

Antici-
pations
of

National
Policy by
British
Coltimbla

First

attempt

to

establish

Dominion

National

Policy

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of reciprocity with the United States. In this
tariff of 1870 there were no increases in the duties
on manufactured goods. These duties then stood
at fifteen per cent, as imposed by the tariff of the
United Provinces enacted in 1866.
Low Confederation was in sight in 1866; and duties

^^ in the tariff enacted in that year were made less
Confed- protective than in the tariffs of the United Prov-
eration Jnces from 1858 to 1866, in order to ease the way
into Confederation for Nova Scotia, New Bruns-
wick, and Prince Edward Island, provinces in
which there had never been any protective duties.
Mac- ^ y^ie protective duties in the first National

theory of PoHcy tariff were on coal, salt, wheat, flour,
how and hops. In the tariff of 1866 all these articles

ity were on the free list. They were made dutiable

coiud be in the tariff of 1870 in accordance with a theory of
Macdonald's that if Canada was ever to succeed
in negotiating a second treaty of reciprocity —
if it was ever to have another era of valuable
trade relations with the United States, like that
which was enjoyed under the Elgin-Marcy treaty
of 1 854-1 866 — the government at Washington
must be made to feel that it was in the power of
the government at Ottawa to restrict trade of
the United States with Canada.
Washing- The tariff of 1870 produced no results at Wash-
i^ores ingtou. There were no overtures from the govern-
offer ment of the United States for a renewal of the

°^^^''° trade relations of 1 854-1 866. The duty of fifty
cents a ton on anthracite and bituminous coal,
C432]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

imposed in the interest of the bituminous coal
mines of Nova Scotia, worked, moreover, great
hardship on the people of Montreal and of the
province of Ontario.

Ontario in 1870 was the only wheat-growing Aim of
province, and the only province in which com- ^J^^q
mercial milling was estabHshed. It had long
been exporting wheat and flour to the United
Kingdom, and also to Newfoundland. The new
duties were intended to encourage grain growing
and mining, by compelling the Maritime Provinces
to draw their supplies from Ontario. Ontario
was to be forced to use the coal of a province
that was over a thousand miles from its western
border; and in return for the favors to the coal
owners at Sydney, Island of Cape Breton, the
people of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, were
to be forced to buy their wheat and flour from
Ontario.

Both in Ontario and in the Maritime Provinces Popular
the new duties provoked much popular dis- J^°^^*y
satisfaction, especially in the Maritime Provinces, tariff
where a protectionist tariff was regarded as a
breach of the compact at Confederation. At
this time Ontario was the only province, east of
the Rocky Mountains, in which the protectionist
movement, begun in 1857-1858, had made any
appreciable headway. Even in Ontario it was
a movement that in 1 870-1 871 had secured sup-
port only in a few manufacturing centers.

There was so much agitation in Ontario against

[433]

Policy
of 1870

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Abandon- the coal duty, and so much agitation in Nova
^®^* Scotia and New Brunswick against the duties
National on wheat and flour, that in 1871 Macdonald was
forced to abandon the National PoHcy of 1870;
and it was 1879 before the Dominion was com-
mitted to a high protectionist tariff; and 1883
before a bounty system for the encouragement
of the iron and steel industry was adopted.
Re- A Conservative government was responsible

m^t"^^' ^^^ ^^^ unsuccessful attempt of 1 870-1 871 to
of establish the National Policy. The Conservatives

National y^QYe also responsible for the system finally
In 1879 established in 1879. From 1878 to 1896 the
Liberals were in opposition at Ottawa. During
these eighteen years they continuously denounced
the tariff policy of the Conservatives, and from
1883 to 1896 they were equally vigorous and
persistent in their denunciation of the payment of
bounties for the encouragement of the iron and
steel industries.^
Liberals In 1 897 the Liberals, who were in power at
accept Ottawa from 1896 to 191 1, adopted both the

National .„ , , i- . r i V-,

PoUcy tariff and bounty pohcies of the Conservatives.

They greatly extended the bounty system.

They increased many of the protective duties;

and in tariff policy they made one innovation
entiai of far-reaching political importance. They estab-
**^ lished a preferential tariff for imports from the

United Kingdom; forged another link of empire;

1 Cf. Edward Porritt, " Iron and Steel Bounties in Canada,"
Political Science ^uarUrly, Vol. xxii, No. 2 (i907)> I94-I9S-

[434]

and

establish

a

British

prefer-

THE NATIONAL POLICY

impelled Great Britain in 1897 to change a long-
existing policy in regard to commercial treaties;
and incidentally provoked a tariff war between
the Dominion and the German Empire that lasted
from 1903 to 1 9 10.

II. The British Preferential Tariffs of 1897
and igoy

The reductions in the tariff in favor of imports
from the United Kingdom were made gradually
in the three years from 1897 to 1900. The original
plan was that from July, 1900, these imports
should be chargeable only with two-thirds of the
duties imposed on imports from the United States
and other non-British countries.

From July, 1900, to June, 1904, all imports
from the United Kingdom were admitted on these
favorable terms. But Canadian manufacturers,
through their national association, loudly pro-
tested against this new competition from British
manufacturers; and in 1904 and 1907 — particu-
larly in 1907, when there was a general revision
of the tariff, and many increases in duties — the
preference was curtailed, and the tariff made
more protective against British imports.

At the revision in 1907 the principle of a uniform
reduction of one third in favor of British imports
was abandoned. The government then adopted
the plan of a tariff in three divisions — a plan
that will be easily understood from the accom-

C435]

Reduc-
tions in
duties
on

imports
from
United
Kinsdon

Hostility
of

Canadian
manu-
facturers
— pref-
erence
curtailed

Tariff
in three
divi-
sions

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA
SCHEDULE A

Tariff
Items.

403
403a

British

Inter-

referential

mediate

GeiMml

Tariff,

Tariff.

Tariff.

Wire, crucible cast steel, valued at not less

than six cents per pound Free. 6 px. 5 p.c.

Steel wire valued at not less than two and

three-quarter cents per pound when

imported by manufacturers of rope for

use exclusively in the manufacture of

rope; and also wire rope for use exclu-
sively for rigging of ships and vessels —

under regulations by the Minister of

Customs Free. Free. Free^

404 See Tariff Amendment, June 12, 1914.

405 Buckthorn strip fencing, woven wire fenc-

ing, a,nd wire fencing of iron or steel,
n.o.p., not to include woven wire or
netting made from wire smaller than
number fourteen gauge nor to include
fencing of wire larger than number nine
gauge. , 10 p.c- 12i p.c. 15 p.c.

406 Wire of all metals and kinds, n.o.p 15 p.c. 17 j p.c. 20 p.c.

407 Wire, single or several, covered with-

cotton, linen, silk, rubber or other

material, including cable so covered 20 p.c. 27^ p.c. 30 p.c.

408 Wire rope, stranded or twisted wire,

clothes lines, picture and other twisted

wire and wire cable, n.o.p 17^ p.c. 22J p.c 25 p.c.

409 Wire cloth or woven wire, and wire netting,

of iron or steel 20 p.c. 27^ p.c. 30 p.c.

410 See Tariff Amendment, June 12, 1914.

411 See Tariff Amendment, June 12, 1914.

412 Iron or steel nuts, washers, rivets, and

bolts, with or without threads; nut, bolt
and hinge blanks; and T and strap hinges

of all kinds, n.o.p per

one hundred pounds 75 cents. 75 cents. 75 cents,
and 10 p.c. 20 p.c. 25 p.c.

413 Screws, commonly called "wood screws,"

of iron or sted, brass or other metal,
including lag or coach screws, plated or
not, and machine or other screws, n.o.p. 22i p.c. 30 p.c. 35'p.c.

414 Iron or steel cut nails and spikes (ordinary

builders') ; and railroad spikes per

one hundred pounds. 30 cents. 45 cents. 60 cents.

415 Composition nails and spikes and sheathing

nails 10 p.c. 12^ p.c. 15 p.c.

416 Wire nails of all kinds, n.o.p per

one hundred pounds . 40 cents. 55 cents. 60 cents.

417 Nails, brads, spikes and tacks of all kinds,

n.o.p 20 p.c. 30 p.c. 35 p.c.

418 Wire cloth, or woven wire of brass or

copper .-.....'...... 17tp.c. 22^ p.c. 25 p.c.

[436]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

panying facsimile of a page from the Dominion
tariff as it stood before the war.^

Under the tariff as enacted in 1907 there are
(i) the British preferential tariff; (2) an inter-
mediate tariff for countries that make concessions
in their tariffs for imports from the Dominion; and
(3) a general tariff, applicable to all countries that
in their tariffs make no concessions to Canada.

No general principle was followed in 1907 in
determining rates in the British preferential
tariff. Consideration was given to the opposi-
tion of Canadian manufacturers of competing
goods, who demanded adequate protection against
all comers, British or non-British. While the
tariff on British imports was usually fixed at
rates below the rates in the intermediate tariff,
much care was exercised to make it certain that
in the British preferential tariff there should be
adequate protection for all Canadian manufac-
turing interests — a procedure that necessitated
many curtailments of the preference of 1897-1907.

From 1897 to 1907 the preferential tariff
stimulated trade between the United Kingdom
and Canada. Particularly was this the case as
regards woolens and other textiles, some products

Protec-
tion
inaU
three
tariffs
for

Canadian
manu-
facturers

Stimu-
lation of
British
trade

* The tariff act of 1915 added seven and a half per cent to
the duties of the intermediate and general tariffs; five per cent
to the duties of the preference division; and imposed a duty
of seven and a half per cent on many imports, mostly raw
materials or partly finished materials, that were formerly
on the free list.

C437]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

of the secondary stages of the iron and steel and
metal industries, and glass, earthenware, and
furniture.
Propa- It was this increase in trade between the

a^^st United Kingdom and Canada, and the efforts of
con- manufacturers in England and Scotland to avail

cessions themselves of the lower duties, that impelled
British Canadian manufacturers to protest. They waged
imports ^ continuous propaganda against the British
preference at the meetings of their association
and in their newspaper organs. They protested
to parliament in 1904 and 1905; and in the
winter of 1905-1906 scores of individual manu-
facturers appeared before the tariff commission
to demand more protection against competition
from Great Britain than was afforded under the
tariff of 1897.

Several of them characterized British competi-
tion as foreign competition, and they all declared
that protection against British manufacturers
was as essential to the success and prosperity of
Canadian industries as protection against the
manufacturers of the United States.
Curtaiie The effect of the revised and much curtailed
^ti^'" preferential tariff in encouraging exports to
tariff in Canada from the United Kingdom in the years
rS!l' ^^^"^ ^9°7 ^° ^9^4 was less obvious than the
effect of the tariff of 1897. There was some
increase in the seven years before the war. But
it was an increase which, when measured in
customs-house valuations, afforded little ground

[438]

ation

THE NATIONAL POLICY

for jubilation in manufacturing communities in
the United Kingdom, especially in view of the
widespread enthusiasm with which the original
preferential tariff was received in Great Britain/
the enormous increase in emigration from Great
Britain to Canada in the twelve years that
preceded the war, the widespread prosperity in
the Dominion from 1904 to 191 2, and the great
increase in the price of manufactured goods in
the period from 1900 to 1914.

III. The Political Effect in Canada of the
Preferential Tariff

In the seventeen years from 1897 to the be- Attitude
ginning of the war, the political effect of the ^onser-
preferential tariff, as framed in 1897, and revised vative
in 1907, was much more important than the J^^^jg
economic effect. In Canada two political de- prefer-
velopments followed the enactment of the
preference.

From 1897 to 191 1 the preference was de-
nounced by the Conservatives, who in these
years were in opposition at Ottawa. The objec-
tions of the Conservatives were (i) that Canadian
manufacturers must have protection against all
comers; and (2) that Great Britain had given
Canada no tariff concessions in return for the
concessions in the Dominion tariff.

^ Cf. Beckles Willson, "Life of Lord Strathcona and Mount
Royal," II, 336.

C439]

ence

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Demand As the United Kingdom was on a free-trade
*^d basis from 1846 to the beginning of the war, it

pro quo was not possible for any government at Whitehall
to offer Canada an equivalent for the preference,
without effecting a revolution in the British
fiscal system. Many increases in the tariff were
made at Ottawa after the Conservatives were
returned to power at the general election in 191 1.
These increases, made in the years from 191 2 to
1914, were intended to afford more protection to
Canadian manufacturers, or to add to the pro-
tection of fruit growers in British Columbia,
against competition from the United States.
Conserv- As soon as the Conservatives were in office, how-
ative ever, they ceased to condemn the British prefer-
ment ence; and from 191 1 to the outbreak of the war
accepts ^j^gy made no effort to secure from the govern-
prefer- ment at Whitehall any quid pro quo for the
ence lower duties first established for imports from

the United Kingdom by the preferential tariff of
1897. They accepted the policy of the Liberals
as regards the preference, just as the Liberals in
1897 had accepted the National Policy of the
Conservatives of the preceding eight years.
Attitude Advocates of free trade in Canada welcomed
*>' the preferential tariff of 1897, and protested

Interests against the curtailments made in it in 1904 and
1907. The only consumers in Canada who are
organized and articulate as such are the grain
growers of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta
and the farmers of Ontario. From 1905 onwards
[440]

towards
Iirefer«

growers
organize

THE NATIONAL POLICY

these organizations continuously agitated for
lower duties in the British preferential tariff.
As the leaders of both the Liberal and Conserva-
tive parties at Ottawa as continuously ignored
the agitation, the grain growers and farmers in
the winter of 1915-1916 launched an independent
movement in Dominion politics.

The purpose of the movement — the most Grain
considerable of all attempts in Canada from 1867
to 1918 to create a party independent of the inde
Conservative and Liberal parties — was to secure ^^y^^
direct representation of grain growers and farmers ment
in the house of commons. In the national dominion
political platform adopted by the grain growers' poutics
associations, at their provincial conventions in
the winter of 1916-1917, there was a demand for
an extension of the British preference as a means
of strengthening the bonds between Canada and
Great Britain, and also of bringing about a
reduction in the cost of living in Canada.^

The innovation in tariff legislation at Ottawa Division
in 1897 — an innovation in which Canada once
more led the oversea dominions — thus resulted and
in raising a new issue in Dominion politics; and
the persistence with which the grain growers interests
agitated for an extension of the preferential
tariff widened the political gulf between the
manufacturing interests of Ontario, Quebec,
Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, and the

1 Cf. "A National Political Platform," Grain Growers*
Guide, December 13, 1916.

[441]

between
agrarian

manu-
factiirlng

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

agrarian interests of Ontario, and of the thousand-
mile stretch of country that lies between the
Lake of the Woods and the Rocky Mountains.

IV. The Tariff War of JQ03-IQIO with
Germany

Ger- For the Empire at large the preferential tariff

^^'^ of 1897 had quite far-reaching consequences,
1897 some of which developed out of the aggressive
attitude of Germany towards the new trade
relations of Canada with Great Britain. Ger-
many claimed that as an empire with a treaty of
commerce with Great Britain, according it favored-
nation treatment, it was entitled to send its
exports to Canada on the same terms as were
conceded under the preferential tariff to imports
from Great Britain.
Great In Order to leave Canada, and other oversea

Britain possessions with responsible government, free to
nounces make their own commercial arrangements with
*^°"^" , one another, and with non-British countries,

mercial

treaties Great Britain in July, 1897, — only three months
after the new tariff" had been enacted at Ottawa
— denounced her commercial treaties with Ger-
many, Belgium, Italy, and nearly a dozen other
powers in Europe, Asia, and South America.
Rounding The action of Great Britain in regard to these
com- treaties, all of them, like that with Germany, of
mercial long Standing, and of much value to manufacturers
^ree om ^^j exporters in the United Kingdom, completed
dominions the fiscal and commercial freedom of Canada.
[ 442 ]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

It also completed the fiscal and commercial
freedom of the Commonwealth of Australia, the
Dominion of New Zealand, the Union of South
Africa, and the Dominion of Newfoundland; for
heretofore, while these oversea dominions had no
part in the negotiation of commercial treaties
made by Great Britain, they had all, like Canada,
been bound by British commercial treaties made
before 1872. This was the year when Great
Britain conceded to the colonies with responsible
government the option of inclusion in new treaties.

Until July, 1898, imports from Germany into imports
Canada were admitted under the preferential Qg^^n
tariff. Thereafter imports from Germany paid pay
the duties imposed by the general tariff of 1897 ^^^^^J^^
— the same duties as were paid on imports tariff
from the United States. Germany resented this
treatment.

Belgium agreed to a new treaty which left Germany
Canada and the other dominions freedom of f"^™P*s

to

action. Germany flatly refused a new treaty domineer
with Great Britain to replace the treaty of 1865-
1898. Her position was that what the oversea
dominions conceded to Great Britain must also
be conceded to the German Empire.

What Lansdowne, who was secretary for Reprisals
foreign affairs in the Salisbury and Balfour ^e^^by
governments of 1 895-1 906, described as a serious Germany
position, developed out of Germany's opposition
to the new commercial relations between Great
Britain and the dominions.

C443]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Lans- "It is not merely that we find Canada liable

statT-* ^ ^^ ^^ made to suffer in consequence of the differen-
ment tial treatment which the Canadian government
house of ^^^ afforded to us/* Lansdowne told the house
lords of lords, on June 29, 1903, **but it was actually
adumbrated in an official document, that, if
other colonies acted in the same manner as Can-
ada, the result might be that we, the mother
country, would find ourselves deprived of most-
favored-nation treatment."
Germany "Thus," wtote English commentators on the
Great action of Germany, after the government at
Britain's Whitehall, at the instance of Canada, had ended
uttie^ *^ ^^^ British-German treaty of commerce of 1865,
colonies" "Germany first demanded to share in the Ca-
nadian preference. And when that attempted
intrusion into the domestic life of the British
Empire was forbidden, we had the threat that
England would be punished in her trade with
Germany, if she did not put these naughty Httle
colonies in their place." ^
Tariff The upshot of Germany's procedure was that

woa^ for the first time since Great Britain had adopted
1910 free trade in 1846, one dominion of the British

Empire was engaged from 1903 to 19 10 in a
tariff war. Germany was the aggressor. Until
July, 1898, Canadian exports to Germany were
admitted under the German minimum tariff. As
soon as the treaty of 1865 had expired, and ex-
ports from Germany to Canada were consequently
1 P. and A. Hurd, "The New Empire Partnership," 228.
[444]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

no longer admitted on the same favorable terms as
exports from the United Kingdom, Germany put
her maximum tariff into force against Canada.

"We did not," said Fielding, minister of Canada's
finance at Ottawa, "deny to Germany favored- Qgrnj^y
nation treatment. We were willing to give her
every consideration that we gave to any foreign
government. But she took offense because we
would not treat her as we did the United
Kingdom." ^

The Dominion was slow to retaliate. The Efforts
government at Ottawa conceived that there was Ottawa
some misunderstanding on the part of Germany, to avoid
By diplomatic correspondence, and also through ^^
the German consulate at Montreal, efforts were
made to assure Berlin that Canada was giving to
Germany everything that it gave to any foreign
country; that it was conceding to Germany what
it conceded to France, although France, with
which Canada had a treaty of commerce since
1893, gave valuable concessions in return, and
Germany conceded nothing.

All that Canada asked was that her exports to Surtax
Germany should again come under the minimum German
tariff. This Germany refused. Her maximum imports
tariff was put into force against Canada in the
autumn of 1898; but it was October, 1903, before
Canada retaliated. Then, by act of parliament,
a surtax of one third of the duties of the general
tariff was imposed on imports from Germany.

* H. C. Debates, December 14, 1907. ->

[445]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Peace
without
victory —
for
Germany

The result of the surtax was that on many of
the imports from Germany duties in the years
from 1903 to 19 10 ranged as high as forty per
cent, the highest tariff duties ever in force in
Canada, until the war tariff of 191 5 was enacted.
There was at once a great reduction in Germany's
export trade to Canada.

Germany slowly realized that only loss of
trade was resulting from persistence in the tariff
war; and in February, 19 10, on overtures from
Berlin, the tariff war was ended in a peace without
victory for Germany.^

Germany
no

tariff
advan-
tages
over
United
States

V. The United States and the British
Preferential Tariffs

Notwithstanding the treaty of commerce be-
tween Great Britain and Germany of 1 865-1 898
— a treaty in which there was a clause ^ which
provided that goods exported from Germany
to Canada should not be chargeable with higher
duties than were imposed on goods exported
from the United Kingdom to Canada — only
from April, 1897, to July, 1898, in the thirty-
three years from 1865 to 1897 had Germany any
advantage over the United States in the export
trade to Canada.

* Cf. Fielding's Speech, "House of Commons Debates,"
February 16, 1910.

2 "A clause very obnoxious to the people, not only of
Canada, but of the colonies generally." — Fielding, H. C.
Debates, April 16, 1903.

C 446 ]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

The United States enjoyed special advantages
from 1854 to 1866, the years of the Elgin-Marcy
treaty; and since 1883 France has continuously en-
joyed a measure of special treatment in Canadian
tariffs, owing to the existence of commercial treaties
between the Dominion and the French Republic.

With these exceptions, until 1897 all countries,
British and non-British, exported goods to
Canada on the same terms. There were no
tariff concessions in Canada to countries with
favored-nation treaties with Great Britain, be-
cause it was not until tariffs for the protection of
Canadian industries had been in operation in the
United Provinces from 1858 to 1867, and in the
Dominion from 1867 to 1897, that any concession
was made in Canadian tariffs to imports from the
United Kingdom.^

No concession was asked by Canada from the
United Kingdom when the original preferential
tariff was framed. "England," said Fielding,
when he announced the innovation of 1897 to
the house of commons, "has dealt generously
with us in the past. She has given us liberty to
tax her wares, even when she admits ours free;
and we have taxed them to an enormous degree." ^

Canada also asked nothing in return for the
preference for British crown colonies in which
there were tariffs for revenue only; and by 191 3

* Salt imported from the United Kingdom for the sea
fisheries of Canada has always been on the free list.
2 H. C. Debates, April 22, 1897.

[447]

Countries
that had
advan-
tages

Other-
wise all
countries
on same
footing

No

conces-
sion
in

return
for

British
prefer-
ence

Canada
and
crown
colonies

West
Indies

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

twenty-five crown colonies were participating
in the concessions of the British preference of
1907.^ The dominions with protective tariffs
had to make reciprocal concessions before they
could share in the preferential rates conceded to
the United Kingdom. New Zealand, Australia,
and the Union of South Africa, all made terms
with Canada.
Recipro- With the nine West Indian colonies ^ Canada,
toade ^^ 191 3 > entered into an elaborate and liberal
with agreement for reciprocal trade. The result of

all these various arrangements was that in the
year preceding the war, the United Kingdom,
four dominions, and thirty-four crown colonies
were all linked together by the far-reaching
innovation in tariff making at Ottawa in 1897,
which originated with the Liberal government of
I 896-191 I.
Canada There is no country in the world that advertises

ad^- more systematically or on a more lavish scale
tiser than Canada. It expended nearly fifteen million

dollars in the years from 1897 to 19 14, in ad-
vertising itself in the United Kingdom, the
United States, and the countries of continental
Europe — in making known the opportunities that
were awaiting immigrants into the Dominion.
The preferential tariff of 1897 advertised

1 Cf. Customs Tariff, 1907, Ottawa, 1914, Appendix 18,
212.

2 Trinidad, British Guiana, Barbados, St. Lucia, St.
Vincent, Antigua, St. Kitts, Dominica, and Montserrat.

[448]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

Canada all over the English-speaking world its
better than all its immigration propaganda. It ^^g*t^*
enormously supplemented the lavish outlay on tisement
printer's ink of the Dominion government. J^^^^^j,
Magna Charta, for seven centuries England's
great standing advertisement, was not promul-
gated in an act of parliament. With Magna
Charta outside of the category of acts of parlia-
ment, it can be said of the preferential tariff act
of 1897 that it obtained for Canada more free
and appreciative advertising — oral as well as
printed — than any other country ever obtained
by means of any act ever passed by its legislature,
parliament, or congress.

Austria and Italy demurred to Great Britain's Austria
policy of 1 897- 1 898 of freeing the Dominions from ^
obligations under the old treaties of commerce, demur
But Germany, with whom both Austria and ^^^^^
Italy were then in alliance, was the only country Britain's
that persistently and strenuously objected to the *^^^^
restriction by the government at Ottawa of of 1898
the preferential tariff to the United Kingdom and
the colonies of the British Empire.

The United States, France, Belgium, Sweden, issues
Norway, Denmark, Colombia, Mexico, and Costa ^*^*^«

11 11 r 1 r» • • 1 countries

Rica all accepted the new status or the British unsettled
dominions. Italy and Austria created diplomatic ^^®^
obstacles to the new fiscal and commercial free- began
dom of Canada and the other dominions, obstacles
which had not been removed up to the time war
began in August, 19 14.

[449]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Talked
German
and

talked it
loudly

No

objection
to prefer-
ential
tariff by
United
States

"An
arrange-
ment
within
the
family"

No
sug-
gestion
of

retali-
ation

But Germany was the only country that
embarked on a tariff war with Canada, or threat-
ened commercial reprisals against the United
Kingdom. Germany talked German, and talked
it loudly. It was of no avail. The tariff war
with Canada would have gone on indefinitely if
Germany had not capitulated in 1910.

Great Britain, when she denounced her com-
mercial treaties in 1897, had no commercial
treaty with the United States — at any rate no
commercial treaty quite comparable with the
British-German treaty of 1 865-1 898.

At Washington, however, there were no objec-
tions to the preferential tariff. From the time
of its enactment it was regarded as a purely
domestic concern of the British Empire. Sereno
E. Payne, chairman of the committee of ways
and means of the house of representatives,
described it, in 1909, as "an arrangement within
the family, to which no exception could be
taken." Payne was quite as protectionist as
McKinley or Dingley, or any other of his Re-
publican predecessors in the chairmanship of
the committee at Washington in which all tariff
bills originate.

The Dingley bill of 1897 was before congress
when parliament at Ottawa enacted the first
preferential tariff. No retaliation was suggested
at that revision of the United States tariff; and
there was no suggestion of retaliation at the
tariff revisions at Washington in 1909 or 1913.

C 450 ]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

For the United Kingdom the preferential tariff Far-

of 1897 had four or five obvious results. It did ^^^^^^

more than forge a new link of empire. It ended of

the apprehensions, born of the successful revolt ^^|*["

of the American colonies of 1 776-1 783, that the tariff

British dominions with responsible government ° ^^^^
would sooner or later assert their independence.

It impelled the British government to create a New

new diplomatic status — a world-standing of ^^

importance — for Canada, New Zealand, Aus- status

tralia, South Africa, and Newfoundland. It ^^^j^j^.

stimulated trade between the United Kingdom ions
and Canada, and created a new, widespread, and
continuous popular interest in the Dominion, an
interest that by 1905 had helped to turn the tide
of immigration from England and Scotland from
the United States to Canada.^

Another of these results of the original prefer- other

ential tariff was easier trade relations between ^°°^~

ions

the United Kingdom and the other dominions, follow
New Zealand followed the example of Canada in «^™p^®
1903; the Union of South Africa in 1906; and Canada
the Commonwealth of Australia in 1907. New-
foundland is the only dominion which has made
no tariff concession to the United Kingdom. Its
isolated position in regard to the preference is due
to the fact that its tariff is exclusively for revenue.
From 1903 to the beginning of the war, and in
particular from 1903 to 1907, the preferential

^ Cf. Johnson, "A History of Emigration from the United
Kingdom to North America," 1763-1912, 347.

[451 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Prefer- tariff was a factor in the domestic politics of the
^^ United Kingdom. In 1903 Chamberlain, who had
factor in been secretary of state for the colonies since 1895,
domestic resigned that office to devote himself to a propa-
poutics ganda for tariff protection to agriculture and to the
industries of the United Kingdom, with preferences
for imports from the dominions and crown colonies.^
An In the earlier stages of the propaganda in

ticm toat England and Scotland it was assumed that the
had no manufacturers of Canada, and of the other
dominions, would agree to a reduction of the
protection afforded them in the tariffs of the
dominions in order to secure for Canadian grain
growers and farmers and for farmers and wool
growers in the other dominions, a preference in
the markets of Great Britain. It was a mistaken
assumption; and there was a prompt and general
shattering of it in 1904, when Canadian manu-
facturers of woolens forced the Dominion govern-
ment to put the duties on British woolens back
nearly to the level of 1 884-1 897.
Canada After the revision of the tariff at Ottawa in

J^^gj.g the winter of 1 906-1 907 — the revision at which
and the preferential tariff was so greatly curtailed — ■

tion?st" ^^^ assumption that Canadian manufacturers
move- would agree to anything less than an adequate
England protection against imports from the United
of 1903- Kingdom had to be abandoned by British pro-
tectionists of the Chamberlain school.

Canadian manufacturers never disguised their
^ Cf. A. Mackintosh, "Joseph Chamberlain," 264-269.
[452]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

hostility to the British preference. In season Making
and out of season from 1897 to the beginning of ^^^^
the war, the Canadian Manufacturers' Associa- delusion
tion — the most poHtically powerful protec-
tionist organization in the British Empire ^ — •
assailed the preference, and strove to rid people
of the United Kingdom of "the delusion that
access to the Canadian market is the natural
right of the British manufacturers, regardless of
the will of the country." ^

At the revision of 1907 it was made obvious Behests
that the government at Ottawa must obey the q^^^
behests of the Canadian Manufacturers' Associa- that
tion; and after the whittling down of the prefer- ^"^*e^*
ence in 1904 and 1907, the British preferential
tariff ceased to be a factor in the agitation in
Great Britain for a return to a protectionist sys-
tem. The agitation continued until the eve of
the war. But in the later years the protectionists
no longer advanced the claim of 1 903-1 907 that
a larger market could be secured in Canada for
British manufactures through a British protec-
tionist tariff in which there would be preferences
for the farm products and lumber of the Dominion.

^ "The Canadian Manufacturers' Association is like a
young giant ignorant of its own power. By the exercise of
its power, it could, if it chose, bring several millions of
people to the verge of starvation and paralyze the industry
of the whole Dominion." — Speech of G. M. Murray, secre-
tary of the association, Winnipeg, February 9, 1910.

* Industrial Canaddy the organ of the Canadian Manu-
facturers' Association, Toronto, October, 1908.

[453]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Abortive
reciproc-
ity

treaty
of 1874

Treaty
rejected
by

senate
at

Washing-
ton

American
objec-
tions
to

VI. The Movement for Reciprocity with
the United States

One of the objects of the National Policy, to
which Macdonald and the Conservatives com-
mitted the Dominion in 1879, was to secure
reciprocity with the United States. There was
an offer of reciprocity in the tariff of 1870; and
in 1874 the government at Ottawa made the
first open and direct overtures to Washington,
after Confederation, for another treaty.

Brown, of Ontario, was the Canadian com-
missioner. He was delegated by the Liberal
government of 1 873-1 878, appointed a joint
plenipotentiary by the government at Whitehall,
and worked in association with Thornton, the
British minister at Washington. After many
conferences between Thornton and Brown, and
Hamilton Fish, secretary of state in Grant's
second administration, a draft treaty was agreed
upon. It was approved at Whitehall. But the
senate at Washington refused to ratify it; and
today the chief interest attaching to it lies in the
free list. This shows how far the government
at Ottawa, with the approval of a Conservative
government at Whitehall, was prepared to go in
meeting one of the objections at Washington to
the old reciprocity treaty of 1 854-1 866.

After the Elgin-Marcy treaty had been in
operation for four or five years, one of several
objections raised against it at Washington was

[454]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

that its spirit had not been observed in Canada
— that the United Provinces in 1858-1859 had
adopted protective tariffs with a view to the
exclusion of manufactures from the United States.

Between 1866 and 1874 it was reaUzed at
Ottawa that there had been a basis for this
objection at Washington. It was also realized
by the Liberal administration of 1 873-1 878 that
Canada could not hope for another reciprocity-
treaty conceding the free admission of fish, coal,
lumber, and farm products into the United States
unless concessions were made in Canadian tariffs
for American manufactures.

Canada in 1874 was prepared to make generous
concessions, concessions of much value to Ameri-
can manufacturers; for if the treaty had been
ratified by the senate at Washington, Canada
would have admitted, duty free, seventy-seven
classes of American manufactures. Among these
were agricultural implements, cotton goods,
tweeds, and boots and shoes. It was the best
offer ever made by Canada to any country,
British or non-British.

It was an offer, which, if it had been accepted
by the senate, would have established conditions
of trade between Canada and the United States
of much more value to the manufacturers of the
United States than the preferential tariff of 1897-
1907 was to the manufacturers of the United
Kingdom. It was of much value to American
trade because it was for a certain definite period,

C455]

reciproc-
ity

treaty of
1854-
1866

Canadian
tariff
con-
cessions
to

American
manu-
facturers

Generous
con-
cessions
offered
in 1874

An offer
exclu-
sively
to the
United
States

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

and because the manufactures to be admitted
duty free under the proposed treaty were articles
in general use in the Dominion, and all similar to
those in common use in the United States. It
was, moreover, an offer exclusively to the United
States; for it was no part of the plan of the
Mackenzie government that similar tariff con-
cessions should be made in favor of British
manufacturers.
Over- At least seven overtures for reciprocity were

reciproc- "^^^^ ^Y Canada in the thirty-three years from
ity the denunciation of the Elgin-Marcy treaty to

1 898-1 899, when a high joint commission, ap-
pointed as a result of overtures made by the
Laurier government of 1 896-1 911, failed to reach
an agreement on reciprocity and other questions
which had been submitted to it. Five of the
overtures were made direct to Washington.
Two of them — those of 1870 and 1879 —
were embodied in tariff acts of the Dominion
parliament.
AU offers The offer made in the tariff of 1879 — an offer
of less ^j^^^ remained on the statute book of the Domin-

value

than ion until 1894^ — and all the other offers made

after 1879, were of much less value to the United
States than the offer embodied in the rejected
treaty of 1874. It was well known at Ottawa
that the government at Washington would
entertain no proposals for reciprocity that did
not include free trade in some manufactured
1 Cf. Canada Customs Tariff, 1894, sections 7 to 13.

[456]

offer
of 1874

THE NATIONAL POLICY

goods as well as in coal, lumber, fish, and farm
products. But it was not practicable, either
for the Conservative governments of 1 878-1 896
or the Liberal governments of 1896-1911, to renew
the offer of 1874, with its long list of American
manufactures to be admitted into the Dominion
duty free.

The Conservatives framed and enacted the impossi-
National Policy in 1879. The Liberals adopted Jj"*^
and greatly extended it in 1 897-1 907; and after con-
high tariffs and bounties from the Dominion H^
treasury had been established for the upbuilding as
of Canadian industries, Canadian manufacturers ^^°J'
were promptly on hand at Ottawa to oppose any as those
reciprocity agreement that would in any degree °^ "^*
lower the tariff barriers against competition
from the United States.

In the earlier years of the reciprocity move- interests
ment — 1846 to 1879 — the demand for freer Canada
trade relations with the United States was that
strongest with the coal operators of Nova Scotia reciproc-
and British Columbia, and with the lumbermen ity
and farmers of Ontario, Quebec, and the Mari-
time Provinces. There were no exports of grain
from what are now the prairie provinces until
after the Canadian Pacific Railway connected
Winnipeg with Montreal in 1883; and the
organized grain growers did not come into the
reciprocity movement until 1905.

The movement for reciprocity in Canada
easily survived the rebuff at Washington in

[457]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Attempts 1874; and it was to conciliate the interests that

Ottawa were behind it, and to attract support in the

to electorate for the National PoHcy, that Mac-

cuiate donald embodied the offer of reciprocity in fish,

these coal, lumber, and farm products in the tariff act

interests ^^ ^g^^ g^^ ^f^^^ ^^^ ^^^.j^ ^f ^g^^ j^^j ^^^^

in operation a few years, the coal operators of
Nova Scotia, long an influential factor in Domin-
ion politics, preferred the duties in the tariff
which protected them against American competi-
tion to the free entry of their coal into the United
States that they had enjoyed under the reciproc-
ity treaty of 1854-1866.^ Moreover, as manu-
facturing industries were developed and extended
in Canada, it became increasingly difficult for
governments at Ottawa to make proposals of
reciprocal trade that would be acceptable at
Washington.
PoUti- Farmers, fishermen, and lumbermen persisted

h^or ^^ their demand for reciprocity. These interests
farmers had to be humoted at election times. Pledges
hi^mber- ^^^ ^° ^^ made to them; and the last two over-
men tures from Ottawa to Washington — those of
1892 and 1898 — were not much more than
perfunctory fulfillments of pledges given at
the general elections of 1891 and 1896. Neither
the Conservative government in 1892, nor the
Liberal government in 1898, as the general elec-
tion of 191 1 subsequently demonstrated, was in

1 Cf. Saunders, "Life and Letters of Sir Charles Tupper,'*
11,97-
[458]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

a position to barter an iota of the tariff protection
of Canadian manufacturers to secure free entry
into the United States of coal, lumber and farm
products from Canada.

The seventh attempt since 1866 to secure a Faiiar©
reciprocity agreement broke down during the ° otia-
sessions of an international commission which tions
had convened first at Quebec and later on at igglf**"
Washington. The Liberal government, at whose
instance the commission had been appointed,
then proclaimed that henceforth there would
be no more pilgrimages to Washington, that the
next overtures for reciprocity must come from
the government of the United States.

In the sixty-four years from the peace of Ver- Com-
sailles to 1847, and particularly in the period from ™®"*^
the treaty of Ghent of 18 14, to 1847, the United cessions
States made many overtures to Great Britain — sought

. . . from

some of them partially successful — for admission Great
to the West India trade, and to the trade of the ®'****°
old British North American provinces. But in
the fifty years from 1848 to 1898 all overtures
for reciprocity in navigation and trade were
made, either by the British North American
provinces, or the Dominion of Canada, or by the
British government on behalf of Canada.

In this half century — 1848-1898 — no over- Washing-
tures were made from Washington. The United *°°

o ^ ceases

States ceased to ask for reciprocity after Great to ask for
Britain, without asking from any country any *^°°"
concessions for herself, or for any of her oversea

[459]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

possessions, had established herself on a free-
trade basis in 1846, and in 1847 had also aban-
doned her old navigation code.

After the navigation of the St. Lawrence was

conceded by Great Britain in 1854, the United

States — with the exception of the restoration of

the fishery privileges, enjoyed from 1783 to 181 2,

and again from 1854 to 1866, and of reciprocity in

wrecking on the Great Lakes — desired nothing

in trade or navigation from Great Britain or

Canada.

Reciproc- It followed, therefore, that when the negotia-

s^ei ed ^ioris of 1898-1899 broke down, there seemed as

at little likelihood that Washington would ever ask

Ottawa £qj. reciprocity as there was that congress would

repeal the duties on all imports from Canada,

without asking any tariff concessions from the

Dominion for the United States. This attitude

of Washington admirably suited the politicians

and manufacturers of the Dominion. It shelved,

and shelved indefinitely, an extremely awkward

issue for both political parties.

Develop- Reciprocity after 1899, so far as politicians at

ments Ottawa were concerned, might have gone into

revived the limbo of fotgotten questions, but for two

reciproc- developments that came in the years from 1905

Issue to 1910. The organized grain growers of the

prairie provinces, and the farmers of Ontario,

put new life into the old movement for reciprocity

when the tariff commission made its tour of the

Dominion in 1 905-1 906. In 1909 President

[460]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

Taft, disheartened by popular hostility to the
Payne-Aldrich tariff, conceived that the high
cost of living might be reduced if the United
States could draw more freely on the products
of Canada.

Reciprocity, with some slight advantages for American
American manufacturers, was the easiest wav ^^^'

r» 1 !• 1 • • • • tures a

for a Republican admmistration to achieve this surprise
end. To the surprise of the government at ^ .
Ottawa, and to the people of the Dominion, and
to the dismay of Canadian manufacturers, who
had concluded, after the Liberal government in
1897 adopted a protectionist policy, and reaffirmed
that policy in 1904, and again in 1907, that they
had heard the last of any lowering of the Canadian
tariff wall that faces the United States, there
were overtures from Washington for reciprocity,
to be based, not as in 1854 on a treaty, but on
concurrent legislation at Washington and Ottawa.

The Ottawa government was willing to nego- Proposed
tiate; and after conferences at Ottawa and *^®®"
Washington, extending from November 4, 1910, of 1910-
to January 21, 191 1, an agreement was reached. ""
It was more inclusive than the Elgin-Marcy
treaty, which did not cover any manufactured
goods. It was not nearly as inclusive as the
rejected treaty of 1874; ^^^ wood pulp, paper,
brass rods, wire rods, fencing wire, coke, type-
casting and type-setting machines, and cream
separators were about the only manufactured
goods that Ottawa would agree should be imported

[461]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

No

depar-
ture
from
policy
Washing-
ton

adopted
in 1866

Rejection
of

reciproc-
ity
at

general
election
of 1911

duty free from the United States. Duties on
farm equipment, on printers' equipment, and on
railway and builders' and plumbers' supplies
from the United States were, as a further con-
cession, slightly reduced.

The concessions made by Ottawa on manu-
factured goods were, however, sufficient to en-
able the government at Washington to proclaim
that there had been no departure from the
attitude adopted in 1866, when the government
took the position that no reciprocity agreement
would be considered which did not include
manufactured goods as well as fish, farm products,
lumber, and minerals.

Legislation was enacted at Washington to
bring the agreement into effect. At Ottawa,
when the reciprocity bill was introduced, it was
opposed by the manufacturers, the bankers, and
the railway and transport interests. The Con-
servatives, then in opposition, took their cue
from these interests. They promptly and com-
pletely abandoned their old arguments in favor
of reciprocity, and so successfully filibustered
against the bill in the house of commons that the
Laurier government was compelled to advise
the governor-general to dissolve parliament.
After the most exciting and bitter electoral cam-
paign in the history of the Dominion, the Laurier
government and the reciprocity bill were defeated.

The election of 191 1, which returned 133 Con-
servatives to the house of commons, as compared

[462]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

with 86 Liberals,^ demonstrated to the world Pouticai
what had been known at Ottawa since 1879. ^"^^^
No government that is committed to the National Canadian
PoHcy, and that becomes dependent on the J^^g„
electoral, newspaper, and financial support of
the manufacturers and the various interests
allied with the manufacturers, can enter on any
agreement for reciprocal trade with the United
States if the agreement involves even the slightest
scaling down of the duties that protect Canadian
manufacturers from competition from the United
States.

The Laurier government of 1 896-191 1 knew Grain
this fact as well as any Conservative government ^^'^^^^

from 1878 to I916. But from 1905 to I9IO the Dominion

organized grain growers were increasing rapidly ^^^^^
in numbers, and were exercising a growing
influence on politics in the prairie provinces.

This fact, and a fact of much portent to the a premier
government, was brought home to Laurier and °^*°^
the Liberal party in the summer of 1910. Laurier,
in July and August, made a political tour of the
prairie provinces. He was received by the grain
growers in a critical rather than an admiring
mood, with an absence of reserve towards leaders
in political life at Ottawa that was quite new in
the history of the Dominion. Representatives
of the grain growers* associations at half a score
of places between Winnipeg and Calgary re-

* The popular vote of the Conservatives was 669,000;
Liberals, 625,000.

[463]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Repudia-
tion of
pledges
recalled

A

Dominion

election

insight

called to the premier the pledges that the Liberal
party had given to the Dominion at the Ottawa
convention of 1893.

Laurier was reminded with much bluntness of
utterance that the tariff pledges had been re-
pudiated by the Liberal government in 1897
and 1907. He was told that the grain growers
were grieviously disappointed at this repudiation;
and told with much emphasis that the grain
growers' associations were intent on lower
duties in the Dominion tariff — that lower
duties were essential to the success of the grain
growing business in the prairie provinces — and
also informed that the grain growers were still
intent on reciprocity with the United States.^

The grain growers were thus insistent in their
demands for lower duties and for reciprocity;
and during Laurier's political tour in 1910 they
made it plain to the premier and to the Liberal
party, that they were in politics to stay. The
new political movement in the prairie provinces
was all the more important because in 1910
parliament at Ottawa was more than halfway
through its statutory term of five years.

The Laurier government accordingly took a

^ Cf. Grain Grower's Guidey July 27, August 3, 10, and 17,
1910; Globcy Toronto, July 23, 25, 28, and 30, and August 4 and
5; Farmers' Tribune^ Winnipeg, August 3; Weekly Phcenix,
Saskatoon, August 3 ; Standard, Regina, August 4; Free Press,
Winnipeg, September 7; and Sun, Toronto, August 10,
September 28, and October 19, 1910.

[464]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

chance in the interest of a movement that the The
Liberal party had championed for thirty years ^J*™'
before it went over to protection in 1 897. With takes a
the manufacturers and bankers and the trans- *^^^^'^®
port interests denouncing reciprocity — declaring
that it would end the connection with Great
Britain — the odds were against the govern-
ment; and it encountered defeat in a cause that
both Liberals and Conservatives had continu-
ously advocated from 1846 to 1896.

VIL Influence of the United States on the
National Policy

In no department of the political life of Canada increases
was American influence more potent than in the 1^^°"

. . tective

origin and development of the National Policy, duties
Canada was greatly influenced by the success ^^

. . . . . congress

of manufacturing industries in the United States,
by the refusal of the United States from 1866 to
1909 to negotiate another reciprocity treaty on
terms which Canada could meet, and by increases
in the protective duties of American tariffs from
1880 to 1897.

Of these influences the rejection by the senate Rejection
of the reciprocity treaty of 1874 was most power- °'
ful in the formative period of the National Policy, ity
Had the treaty been accepted it would have ^^^^
restored to the farmers and lumbermen of eastern
Canada much of the prosperity of 1 854-1 866.
With rural Canada enjoying prosperity in any

[465]

tarifiE
of 1890

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

degree comparable with that of the period of the
Elgin-Marcy treaty, it is inconceivable that
Macdonald, at the general election of 1878, could
have persuaded the electorate to sanction the
National Policy, framed by a convention of
manufacturers at Toronto in 1876, and endorsed
and advocated by the Conservatives, then in
opposition at Ottawa, in the parliamentary
sessions of 1876, 1877, and 1878.
Effect The critical years of the National Policy were

^^^ from the second revision of the tariff in 1884 to
Kiniey the third revision in 1894. This was the decade
of what is known in Canadian political history as
the disappointing census of 1891. There was a
general election in 1891, and it was a stroke of
rare good fortune for the Conservative govern-
ment that the McKinley tariff had been enacted
at Washington in 1890.

The McKinley tariff affected farmers and
lumbermen in Canada more adversely than any
development at Washington had done since the
denunciation of the Elgin-Marcy treaty in 1865.
It created an emotional atmosphere all over
eastern Canada favorable for the advocates of
the National Policy, who at that time, and until
1897, were exclusively of the Conservative party.
The Conservative government, in 1891, instead
of sustaining losses, as is usual with a government
that is becoming stale through long tenure of
office, slightly improved its position in the house
of commons, and continued in office until 1896.

[466]

THE NATIONAL POLICY

The Dingley tariff of 1897, with duties much The
higher than those of the McKinley tariff, greatly ^^g®^
helped the Liberal party, after it had abandoned ofi897
its fiscal policy of 1 874-1 896, and made peace ^^
with the protectionists. At the revision of the protec-
tarifF in 1 906-1 907, Canadian manufacturers Lib^J^j
asked for duties as high as those of the Dingley party
tariff.

Fielding, minister of finance, refused to con-
sider this request. If it were complied with it
would mean that the tariff would be framed not
at Ottawa, but at Washington. Concessions,
however, had to be made to the manufacturers,
who had long complained of the high duties of
the Dingley tariff. Increases were made in all
the protective duties; and at this revision of
1 906-1 907 the Dingley act was nearly as service-
able to the Liberals as the McKinley act had
been to the Conservatives at the general election
of 1891.

Manifestly from 1858 to 1917, the year in Canadian
which the Conservative government at Ottawa ^t®""®^**
accepted the offer of reciprocity in wheat and tariff-
flour — an offer made in the Underwood-Sim- °^*^^«
mons tariff of 1913 — the fiscal policy of Canada, washing-
first the policy of the United Provinces, and then *°°
for forty-five years the policy of the Dominion,
was much influenced by the fiscal policy of the
United States from 1840 to 1913. Tariff-making
at Washington, especially from 1880 to 1913,
was watched with keenest interest from all over

[467.1

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the Dominion; for Canada's nearest neighbor
has always been her biggest customer for a
large range of the products of her mines, forests,
and farms, and for an increasing quantity of
the catch of the Atlantic coast fisheries of the
Dominion.

[468]

CHAPTER XVI

THE NATIONAL POLICY AND THE
DEVELOPMENT OF CANADA

M

trial
centers

eastern
Canada

ATERIAL results of the National Policy indus-
on the industrial development of the
Dominion are visible, even to a casual observer, of
from the window of a railroad car on a journey
through the central provinces or the Maritime
Provinces. They can be seen in Toronto, Hamil-
ton, Sault Ste. Marie, and London; Montreal,
QueBec, Valleyfield, Three Rivers, and St.
Hyacinthe; Halifax, New Glasgow, and Sydney;
St. John, Fredericton, and Moncton. They are,
in fact, manifest in every city and factory town
of Canada east of the Great Lakes; and few of
these manifestations of industrial development
and prosperity date further back than Confedera-
tion. Most of this industrial activity has been
developed since 1879.

At Confederation there were four or five indus-
cotton mills in the British North American *^„

position

provinces. There were four furnaces — all quite at
small — where charcoal pig iron was made. ^°^«<*""
There were 2278 miles of railroad, and not a
cargo carrier on the Great Lakes on the Canadian
register that was built of iron or steel.

In 191 7 there were in the Dominion twenty-
nine cotton mills, with 21,400 looms and 106,800

[469]

ation

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Growth
of the
cotton
Industry

Capacity
of

modem
blast
fur-
naces

RaU
mills

MUllngof
flour

spindles. In 1867 Canada imported 1300 bales of
cotton. The mills of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia,
and New Brunswick in 191 6 called for 208,000 bales.

The output of iron at the charcoal furnaces in
New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Quebec in
the year of Confederation did not exceed 5000
tons. In the jubilee year there were seven blast
furnaces in Nova Scotia and eleven in Ontario,
with an aggregate daily capacity of 4600 tons.
They were all coke furnaces, equal in design and
equipment to any of the furnaces at Pittsburgh
or Cleveland.

At Confederation, and in fact until 1904,
Canada imported all her rails from Great Britain
or the United States. For ten years before the
war there were rail mills at Sault Ste. Marie and
Sydney, with a capacity equal, in normal times,
to the demand of Canadian railways; and in
some years, between 1907 and 1914, rails from
these mills were exported.

Commercial milling of flour was in its infancy
in 1867. There was an export trade in flour,
confined to Ontario. The flour went only to
the Maritime Provinces, the United Kingdom,
or Newfoundland. In no year before 1879 —
the year when the National Policy was adopted
— did the exports of flour reach half a million
barrels. In 1914 there were 600 flour mills in
the Dominion, of an aggregate daily capacity of
112,000 barrels. Of these mills 350 were in
Ontario and 120 in the prairie provinces.

[470]

NATIONAL POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT

Exports of flour increased with the extension Exports
of grain growing in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, ° °^
and Alberta, and with the estabhshment of flour
mills at Kenora, Winnipeg, Brandon, and other
cities west of the Great Lakes. From 1902 to
1914 there was a large development of the flour
trade with non-British countries, — with China,
Denmark, Holland, Japan, and Norway, — and
in 191 5 the total exports of flour reached nearly
five million barrels. Three quarters of a million
barrels went to non-British countries.

A special census of industries taken in 191 5 — indus-
U year in which war expenditures created an *^

. . . . census

industrial and commercial prosperity without of 1915
precedent — brought out the fact that there
were 21,291 manufacturing establishments in
the Dominion. Over 9000 were in Ontario.
Over 7000 were in Quebec. Nova Scotia had
nearly 1000.

The census further showed that there were a pay
511,000 men, women, and children on the pay ^°'
rolls of these establishments; that in 191 5 nearly muuon
$288,000,000 was disbursed in salaries and wages;
and that the aggregate value of the output was
$1,392,516,953.

An era of railway building began soon after Half
Confederation; for it was a condition with the * /^^^^^^^^^
Maritime Provinces that the Intercolonial Rail- raUway
way should be constructed. It was also a con- ^'^^^^
dition with British Columbia that it should
be connected by railway with eastern Canada.

[471]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Railway building, in fact, was continuous after
1873. It was going on up to the beginning of
the war. Even the war did not put a stop to it;
for while the mileage of Canadian lines in 1914
stood at 30,755, by the end of 1916 it had been
increased to 37,434 miles.
Govern- Towards the cost of these railways the
™dto Dominion government, between 1867 and 1916,
raUway contributed $184,719,000; the provincial govern-
ment°^ ments contributed $37,437,000; and the mu-
nicipalities nearly $17,000,000. The Dominion
government also granted the railway companies
31,864,000 acres of land in the prairie provinces;
and the provinces that retained their crown lands
at Confederation — British Columbia, Ontario,
Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia —
granted 13,120,000 acres of their domain to aid
in the construction of railways.
Poutics Canada in 1916 had a population of 185 for

raiiwa ^^^^ "^^^^ ^^ railway, as compared with 400 in
buUding the United States. Politics, rather than trans-
port needs,^ accounted for much of the railway
building between 1904 and the beginning of the
war, building largely due to the railway policy
of the Liberal government of 1 896-1 911.
Trans- Two new transcontinental lines were built

*^°'^tsd between 1905 and 1914. There was much
raUways double-tracking of the Canadian Pacific, west of
Fort William, to facilitate the movement of grain

1 Cf. A. W. Smithers, chairman of Grand Trunk Railway
Company. "The Answer," 2.

[472]

I-H O

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

to the head of the lakes. There was in these
years also much double-tracking of the Grand
Trunk, the pioneer line of eastern Canada, which
handles much of the western grain en route from
transfer ports in Ontario to tidewater at Mont-
real and Portland, and also serves many of the
industrial cities and towns of the central provinces.
New lines were also built that were not of any
of the three transcontinental systems.
RaUway The most important of these new lines was
Nelson, ^^^ government-owned railway from Le Pas, on
Hudson the Great Saskatchewan river, in the province
^^ of Manitoba, to Port Nelson, on Hudson Bay.

The Laurier government of 1 896-191 1, in direct
response to an agitation by the organized grain
growers of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta,
committeed the Dominion to this undertaking,
which, with the wharves and elevator at Port
Nelson, entailed a charge of $26,cxDO,ooo on the
Dominion treasury.

Key to Map on Page 475

I.

Lachine canal

10.

Scugog branch of Trent

2.

Soulanges canal

canal

3.

Beauharnais canal

II.

Welland canal

4-

Cornwall canal

12.

Grand River feeder

5-

Rapide Plat canal

13.

Ottawa-Georgia Bay canal

6.

Galops canal

(projected)

7-

Rideau canal

14.

Murray canal

8.

Perth branch of Rideau

IS-

Carillon canal

canal

16.

Greenville canal

9.

Trent canal

[474]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

A new The line is 420 miles long. It was pushed

°"^®*^°'" through a wild and altogether unsettled country,
grain solely to provide an additional route to Great
Britain for grain from the prairie provinces, and
thereby relieve the pressure in the months of Sep-
tember, October, and November each year on the
three transcontinental railways that connect the
grain growing provinces with the numerous trans-
fer elevators at Fort William and Port Arthur.^
Over The net result of this almost feverish activity

building j^ railway building from 1904 was that 10,000
railways miles Were added to the railway mileage; and in
1916 the Dominion woke up to the fact that, as
regards railways, it was seriously overbuilt.^
Water From 1884 to 1 91 6, and particularly from 1900

to 1914, when the grain trade of the west was
increasing with great rapidity, the development
of water transport and the building of grain
carriers for service on the national grain route
from Port Arthur and Fort William to Montreal
nearly kept pace with the building of railways.

A magnificent lock was built at Sault Ste.
Marie. The Welland and St. Lawrence canals —
seventy-four miles long — were deepened to

^ Cf. Report of Proceedings at Farmers' Delegation to
Members of the Government, December 16, 1910, Ottawa,
191 1, 29-31; "The Hudson Bay Railroad," ^eeris Quarterly,
Kingston, July, August, September, 1916, 38-45; H. of C.
Debates, May 3, 1916, and June 11, 1917.

2 Cf. Report of Royal Commission on Railways, 1915-
1916; "Canada's Future: A Symposium of Official Opinion,"
1916, 113.

[476]

trans-
port

NATIONAL POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT

fourteen feet. Canal tolls were abolished. The Canals
St. Lawrence ship channel, which extends for °^*^®

. grain

seventy miles below Montreal, was widened to route
450 feet, and dredged to a depth of thirty feet at
low water. Great improvements were also made
at all the lake and tidewater ports on the grain
route.

A large fleet of lake carriers — some for service ship-
on the upper lakes and some, of lesser tonnage, ^"^^^s
for both lake and canal service — went on the
Canadian register in the years from 1900 to 19 14.
Steel shipbuilding yards were established at Port
Arthur, Collingwood, Toronto, Kingston, Mont-
real, Levis, Sorel, and New Glasgow; and at all
these ports except New Glasgow dry docks were
built as part of the equipment of the grain route.

Liberal subsidies were granted to these docks Govem-
by the Dominion government. By this aid, and °^®^*
also by a tariff duty of twenty-five per cent on ship-
the cost of repairs, made to Canadian vessels in ^^<i^
American shipyards, the government extended
the National Policy to the steel shipbuilding
industry.

These are some of the more visible evidences of National
the success of the National Policy. It has not ^^^^^
achieved all that was expected of it in 1879, increase
especially as regards increase of population. The ^

, .... popu-

expectation was that protection to industries lation
would stop the exodus to the United States from
central Canada and the Maritime Provinces, and
also attract a large immigration from overseas.

C477]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

A dis- Immigration did not increase nearly so quickly

appoint- 2LS was cxpcctcd, nor was the exodus to the

census United States stopped. The official records for

1881-1891 showed that 886,000 immigrants came

to Canada. It was confidently expected that

the census of 1891 would show a population of

more than five millions. It gave 4,833,000 —

only 508,000 more than the population in 1881.

The increase was disappointing to ministers at

Ottawa who were responsible for the National

Policy. It was equally so for the protected

manufacturers, who feared that the Conservative

government might lose confidence in the National

Policy.

Period The stream of immigration continued small

^g until the end of the next decade — 1891-1901.

immi- Then it came in a flood. Immigrants poured in

gration fj-om Great Britain, from the United States, and

from nearly every country of continental Europe.

The immigration was so cosmopolitan that in

1 91 7 forty-eight translations of the Bible were

on sale in Winnipeg.

Three million immigrants arrived in the years
from 1900 to 191 5 — only half a million less than
the total population of the Dominion at Con-
federation. About half these newcomers arrived
in the decade from 1901 to 191 1; yet despite
this large inflow the census of 191 1 showed an
increase of only 1,835,000 over the returns of
1901.
The Dominion government began its propa-

C478]

NATIONAL POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT

ganda in 1878. In that year $36,000 was spent immi-
on it. In every subsequent year there were ^^^°^
larger expenditures, until in 1914-1915 the outlay ganda
reached $1,859,000. Between 1878 and 191 1, ^e^^*-
the year of the last census, the total expenditure
on immigration was $16,146,000.

Provincial governments in these years also slow
spent much money in advertising the special ^^^^^
attractions of their provinces. From 1883 the popu-
Dominion government had tens of millions of ^***°"
acres of accessible land in what are now the
prairie provinces, on which free homesteads for
immigrants were available. Despite an immi-
gration propaganda on a scale without precedent
in any English-speaking country, free homesteads
of 160 acres each for settlers, thirty-two years of
protection for all manufacturing industries, and
twenty-eight years of bounties for the iron and
steel industry, and also much valuable direct
and indirect aid to industries by hundreds of
municipalities in eastern Canada, population
from 1871 to the census of 191 1 was not quite
doubled.

One obvious result of the National Policy was Effect of
the building up of the cities of central Canada n**^°^^

* ^ . Policy

at the expense of the rural areas and of agriculture on rural
in Ontario. The census of 191 1 showed a decrease f°P"" •

lation

in population in forty-four out of the forty-five
rural electoral ridings. This decline in the
rural and farming population had gone on,
moreover, notwithstanding that in the decade

[479]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

covered by the census, 400,000 of the immigrants
arriving at Canadian ports had given Ontario as
their destination. While this decrease in rural
population was going on, the population of
Toronto increased from 208,000 to 376,000; that
of Hamilton from 52,000 to 82,000; and that of
London from 38,000 to 46,000.
Farm The National Policy made Canada a less de-

iaiK>r sirable place for farmers — especially for farmers
farm in an industrial province like Ontario — because

equip- j^ increased the cost of farm equipment, clothing,
and many domestic supplies,^ and also stripped
rural Canada of farm laborers. It is these con-
ditions that explain the agrarian movements
in Canadian politics since Confederation — the
agitation of the Patrons of Industry of 1890-
1896, and the more recent and much more widely
extended movement of the grain growers' associa-
tions of the western provinces and of the United
Farmers of Ontario.
Agrarian Canada has had singularly few independent
political movements in politics. The rigidity of the
ments two-party system, and the remarkable hold that
it has had on the people since 1867, are against
any independent movement in Dominion politics.
So is the extent to which the daily and weekly
newspapers of the Dominion are tightly bound
either to the Conservative or the Liberal party;
and the system of political patronage as it exists

1 "The Farmers' Platform," 17-19; "Homesteaders' Tariff
Burdens," Grain Growers' Guide, October 5, 1910.

[480]

NATIONAL POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT

at Ottawa and at the provincial capitals, the
scattering of seven and a half million people over
half a continent, and the stringing out of settle-
ment and population along a line 4000 miles in
length, also make the organization of an inde-
pendent movement in Dominion politics exceed-
ingly difficult.

There are Labor and Socialist movements in
some of the cities. Occasionally in the years
from 1900 to 191 7 a Labor or a Socialist candi-
date was elected to a provincial legislature. But
in the first half-century of Confederation only
farmers and grain growers, when independently
organized, and acting apart from the Conserv-
ative and Liberal parties, were able to influence
policies of the government at Ottawa or the
policies of the provincial governments of Ontario,
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. Both
these agrarian movements — the Patrons of In-
dustry and the grain growers' organizations —
had their origin in economic conditions developing
out of the National Policy.

At Confederation, and for ten or fifteen years The
after 1867, Canada was the least expensive of p^y°^
English-speaking countries to live in. More was and the
possible in one of the smaller cities of Ontario — n^!!'
a city of good amenities --- on an income of
twelve or fifteen hundred dollars than in any
other English-speaking community in any part
of the world. There was a time when English
military officers and civil servants on pension,

C481]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

and other annuitants, emigrated to Ontario,
because of the beauty and amenities of its smaller
cities and its towns and villages, and because in
these places a little money went a long way.
Its levy Immigration from Great Britain to Canada in

°^ those years was to Ontario. In the immigration

farmers -^ . . °

and propaganda emphasis was laid on the low cost

rr.^Ar» of living. The National Policy gradually changed
this condition. The cost of living constantly
moved upward in the twenty-five years before
the war; and on the eve of the war there was no
country in the English speaking-world where the
cost of living was higher, or where a protective
tariff was costing farmers and grain growers and
salary and wage earners a larger proportion of
their income.

earners

C482]

CHAPTER XVII

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES
AND GOVERNMENTS

IN the preceding chapters most attention has a survey
been devoted (i) to the evolution of the
Dominion of Canada; (2) to the evolution and
working of the political institutions of which
Ottawa is the center; and (3) to the economic
and fiscal policies, first of the old British North
American provinces, and afterwards of the
Dominion. It is the Dominion of Canada — its
central government and its politics — that most
interests the United States and the other English-
speaking countries, and also the world at large.

The legislatures and governments at the Provin-
provincial capitals have, accordingly, been left
for the concluding chapter. The powers, duties,
and functions, so definitely assigned by the British
North America act to the provinces, have already
been detailed. They are so clearly defined in the
act, which also decrees that all classes of subjects
not specifically assigned to the provinces fall
automatically to the Dominion, that there can
never be much conflict or friction between the
Ottawa government and the governments at the
provincial capitals.

An account has also been given of the method
of appointing lieutenant-governors, and of the

[483]

cial
capitals

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Fran- franchises on which the nine provincial legislatures
chises 3j.g elected. The economic interests of the nine
economic provinces, and the racial and religious interests
interests peculiar to Quebec, have also been described;
and there has also been made clear the connection
between political leaders at Ottawa and political
leaders at the provincial capitals, particularly at
crises at Ottawa, when Dominion administrations
are in process of formation.
Bi- Furthermore, in the history of Confederation,

camerai j^ }^^5 ^jgQ been told how it comes about that
latures today only two of the nine provincial legislatures
— Quebec and Nova Scotia — are bicameral.
The provincial legislatures existing in 1867 were
given power to amend the constitutions of the
provinces, except as regards the office of lieu-
tenant-governor.
Single- Ontario, in 1867, when the union with Quebec

S^^**^ of 1840 came to an end, abandoned the bicameral
latiires system. British Columbia organized its legisla-
ture on the single-chamber plan before it came
into Confederation in 1871. Prince Edward
Island made a similar reform before it became a
province of the Dominion in 1873.
Bi- Manitoba, the first province created and

camerai provided with a constitution by parliament at

system ^ ...

discarded Ottawa, was organized in 1870, with two cham-
bers. The legislative council at Winnipeg, which
opened its first session with only seven members,
disappeared at the end of the session of 1876.
The second chamber of the New Brunswick

[484]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

legislature survived until as long after Con-
federation as 1892.

In 1905, when parliament created the provinces
of Saskatchewan and Alberta, and provided
them with constitutions, the single-chamber plan
for provincial legislatures was so well established,
was working so satisfactorily, and the principle
was so generally accepted, that it was enacted in
the organic law that the legislatures should have
only one chamber, to be known as the legislative
assembly.

No claim is ever made that the legislatures of Legis-
Quebec and Nova Scotia, with their elected J^^^g
legislative assemblies, and legislative councils
appointed nominally by the lieutenant-governor
acting for the crown, but in practice by the pre-
mier of the province, are one whit superior to
the legislatures of the provinces in which there
are only legislative assemblies.

Legislative councils, in the provinces in which
they still survive, have even fewer friends in the
constituencies and in the press than the senate at
Ottawa; for while there are ninety-six members
of the senate, there are only twenty-four legisla-
tive councilors at Quebec and twenty-one at
Halifax.

The legislative councils are of some slight value Their
to the political party in power. They add a
little to the patronage of the premiers. But,
even if the provincial governments of Quebec
and Nova Scotia were disposed to follow the

[485]

value In
politics

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Obstacle

to

abolition

of

councils

Member-
ship of
legls-
latxires

example of the five provinces that since 1867
have discarded legislative councils, there are
difficulties that are not easy to surmount.

Legislative councilors, like senators at Ottawa,
hold office for practically as long as they have
the strength to carry themselves to the legislative
chambers. In Quebec a councilor is paid a
salary of ^1500. At Halifax the salary is $700.
These salaries have come to be regarded as
pensions; and at Halifax when attempts were
made to abolish the second chamber, it was
found that men appointed to the council, under a
pledge to vote for its abolition, developed con-
scientious scruples against implementing the
pledge "as it is unconstitutional to pledge oneself
in advance to vote in any particular way." ^ If
salaries ceased to be paid at Quebec and Halifax,
the legislative councils there would fall of their
own weight. The outside props are few, and
they are admittedly weak and rickety.

Membership of the legislatures in the seven
provinces in which there are no upper chambers
varies from thirty in Prince Edward Island to
106 in Ontario. There are eighty-one members
of the legislative assembly of Quebec. The odd
member is from the Magdalen Islands, which
have been represented in the assembly since
1897.2

1 Riddell, "Constitution of Canada," footnote, xxi, 82.
* In the winter before the war — the winter of 1913-1914,
■no fewer than 819 men were engaged in the legislative work

[486]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

Salaries of members of legislatures range from
$200, with an additional allowance of ^400 for
the speaker, in Prince Edward Island, to ^1500,
with a salary of ^4000 for the speaker, in Quebec.
The term of a legislature, like the term of parlia-
ment at Ottawa, is not definitely fixed. It may
not extend beyond four years.

In its organization a government at a pro-
vincial capital is as nearly as possible a replica
of the government at Ottawa, with a lieutenant-
governor, domiciled at government house, in
place of the governor-general; and with a
secretary of state — or provincial secretary —
through whom communication is maintained
with the central government acting through the
department of state at Ottawa.

With the colonial oflice in London, provincial
governments, on the comparatively few occasions
on which they come into touch with Whitehall,
communicate through the department of state
and the government at Ottawa.

Responsible government has been established
at all the provincial capitals since 1870, when
British Columbia attained the power, rank, and

Salaries
of mem-
bers of
legis-
latures

Organi-
zation of
provin-
cial

govern-
ment

Colonial
office
and
provin-
cial

govern-
ments

Party
lines

of the Dominion and the provinces. At Ottawa there were
308 so employed — senators, 87; members of the house of
commons, 221. At Quebec the number of members of the
assembly and of the council was 105; at Toronto, 106; at
Halifax, 59; at Fredericton, 46; at Charlottetown, 30;
at Winnipeg, 41; at Regina, 41; at Edmonton, 41; and
at Victoria, 42.

[487]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

dignity that the other British North American
provinces had enjoyed for twenty years before
Confederation. Party Hnes in the provincial
legislatures are the same as in Dominion politics

— Liberal and Conservative. In some of the
legislatures there are usually two or three Labor
or Socialist members, acting apart from the older
parties, and not accepting instructions from either
the government or the opposition whips.

Legifr- At each of the provincial capitals the relations

Jj^' between the legislature and the ministry — often
cabinet called, as at Ottawa, the cabinet or the council

— are the same as at Ottawa; and the procedure
of the cabinet, in its day by day business, and in
the event of a ministerial crisis, is the same as
at the Dominion capital.

Con- A provincial ministry remains in power only

ditions so long as it can command a majority in the
which legislative assembly. If defeated on a vote in
cabinet ^^g assembly, it must either ask the lieutenant-
power governor to dissolve the legislature, or the premier
must tender his resignation to the lieutenant-
governor, in which case the tenure of office of
all his colleagues of the ministry, in accordance
with the constitutional practice at Ottawa,
comes to an end.
Disso- In the event of a premier resigning without

ieS^°' asking for a dissolution of the legislature, the
lature procedure of the lieutenant-governor is similar
to that of the governor-general under similar
circumstances. He sends for the leader of the

[488]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

opposition and calls upon him to form an ad-
ministration. After the leader of the opposi-
tion has succeeded in this undertaking — after
he himself has become premier, and has formed
his ministry — it is open to him to ask the
lieutenant-governor for an immediate dissolution,
if he is convinced that his following in the legis-
lative assembly is not sufficiently numerous and
cohesive to enable him to carry on the king's
business.

The ministry of Ontario, as it existed in 191 7, Ministry
is not quite typical of provincial ministries. The Qj^^f^^
political civilization of Ontario is more advanced,
and more comprehensive, than that of some of
the other provinces. There is a larger population,
and more cities and urban Hfe, than in any of
the other provinces; and Ontario stands towards
the other provinces in somewhat the same rela-
tion as Massachusetts stands towards the other
states of New England.

The offices constituting the ministry at Toronto A
are, however, sufficiently typical to illustrate ^^'^
the composition of a provincial government, vinciai
They are: °^*^

(i) Prime Minister, and

(2) President of the Council — two offices
usually held, as at Ottawa, by the same man.

(3) Attorney-General.

(4) Provincial Secretary.

(5) Provincial Treasurer or Minister of Finance.

(6) Minister of Agriculture.

C 489 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Members

without

portfolio

Salaries

of

premiers

and

ministers

Franking
letters

(7) Minister of Education.

(8) Minister of Public Works.

(9) Minister of Lands, Forests, and Mines.

The long-standing usage at Ottawa of appoint-
ing men to the cabinet without portfolios — with
the inherent advantages and disadvantages —
has been established at Toronto and other of
the provincial capitals. In the Whitney ad-
ministration — a Conservative administration —
at Toronto, as it stood in February, 191 2, there
were no fewer than three members without
portfolios. Every member of a provincial cabi-
net, with or without portfolio, must, of course,
be a member of the legislature.

Salaries of provincial premiers range from
$2700 in Prince Edward Island, where the premier
usually holds also the office of attorney-general,^
to ^9000 in Ontario, where the premier is also
president of the council. Salaries of other
ministers range from $1500 in Prince Edward
Island to $6000 in Ontario and Quebec. These
salaries are in addition to salaries or indemnities
— to use the Canadian parliamentary and legal
term — received as members of the legislature.

Members of legislatures, unlike members of
parliament, do not have the privilege of franking
letters to be carried through the mails. But near
the table of the clerk, on the floor of the legisla-
tive chamber, is a basket into which members

* Premier, $1000; attorney-general, $1700.
[490]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

throw letters written on public business, and
these letters are stamped at the expense of the
province.

Salaries of lieutenant-governors, paid by the Lieu-
Dominion government, range from ^7000 in go^^oj
Prince Edward Island, to $10,000 in Quebec
and Ontario. The upkeep of government house,
the official home of the lieutenant-governor, is
defrayed by the province. There is no fixed
term for the lieutenant-governor. He holds
office "during pleasure"; but he cannot be
removed within five years of his appointment,
except for cause assigned. This provision pre-
vents vacation of the office merely in order to
add to the patronage of a new government at
Ottawa.

Like the governor-general at Ottawa, a lieu- An even
tenant-governor at a provincial capital must ride ^^^
on an even keel as regards political parties and poutics
all political agitations. In nearly every instance
the appointment of lieutenant-governor is made
as an acknowledgment of partisan service ren-
dered to the political party in power at Ottawa.

Once inside government house, however, all
party activities must cease. The office is rarely
held by a man who has been in the front rank in
parliamentary or administrative life at Ottawa.
Men who attain this rank, and who can hold on
to their seats in the house of commons, stay at
Ottawa to the end of the chapter. A lieutenant-
governorship is usually bestowed on a man of

C491]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

the "old party war horse'' variety of poHticians
— on a man who needs an income, and realizes
that he has reached an age at which he can do
little more continuous hard work.^
Link As the governor-general is the most apparent

***o^nce ^^^^ connecting the Dominion with Great Britain,
and so the Heutenant-govemor is the most apparent

Dominion jj^^j^ connecting a province with the Dominion.
In all the ceremonies of state, at a provincial
capital, the lieutenant-governor takes much the
same part as the governor-general in state cere-
monies at Ottawa. He formally opens and
closes the sessions of the legislature, with a
speech from the throne, which as regards arrange-
ment and phrasing is closely patterned after the
speech from the throne at Ottawa.
Organi- A provincial legislature is organized for business
zationof -j^ exactly the same way as parliament. At the
lature Opening of a new session there is the debate
on the address in reply to the speech from the
throne. Committees are organized as at Ottawa.
Bills are read a first and second time, considered
in committee, reported back to the assembly,
read a third time, and then receive the royal
assent.

* "The lieutentant-governorship is an office where the
average occupant may be much seen and little heard. The
office, apart from its social side, is, in fact, designed to take
up so little of a man's real time, that the suggestion has been
made to combine it with that of the chief-justiceship in the
respective provinces." — Tribune, Winnipeg, November 6,
1917.

[492]

lative
measures

, PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

Measures before the assembly are classified as ciassi-
at Ottawa or at Westminster into (i) government ^^^^°°^
bills, (2) private members' bills, and (3) private- legis-
bill legislation. Members have the same oppor-
tunities as in the parliament of the Dominion of
introducing bills and motions, and seeking
information from the government by questions
addressed in the assembly to ministers.

Procedure on the budget and on the estimates Budget
is similar. The budget system, with ministerial ^^
responsibility for every item of expenditure and mates
for every tax imposed, is as well established, and
as closely adhered to, at the provincial capitals
as at Ottawa. The event of a legislative session
at a provincial capital, in normal years, is the
exposition of the budget by the provincial treas-
urer, its discussion in the assembly, and the
passing of any bill that may be necessary for
raising additional taxation, or reducing taxes
previously sanctioned by the legislature.

In the provinces which possess crown lands — Sources
British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, New Bruns- °f
wick, and Nova Scotia — the treasury is re-
plenished from three sources. These are (i) two
annual subventions — one a fixed sum determined
when the province came into Confederation, and
the other a grant based on the population of the
province as ascertained at the last decennial
census, both paid out of the Dominion treasury;
(2) direct taxation, such as license fees, income
tax, and succession duties, levied and collected

[493]

revenue

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Direct
taxation

Loans

and

subsidies

Province
of

legis-
latures

Checks
on

legis-
latures

by virtue of enactments of the legislature; and
(3) money accruing from the sale or renting of
crown lands, from stumpage dues collected in
respect of logs cut on crown lands, and from
royalties on coal and other minerals; for all
minerals in Canada are crown property.^

All the legislatures have power to levy direct
taxation; and until 191 5, when the Dominion
parliament, as a war measure, passed an act
levying a tax on excess profits, the only direct
taxation in ' Canada was that collected under
provincial enactments.

Legislatures have power to pledge the credit of
a province to raise loans. They have power also
to grant subsidies to railway companies. This
power was so lavishly used from 1876 onward
that by the end of 1916 the total amount paid
by provincial governments to railway companies
stood at nearly thirty-seven and a half million
dollars.

Provincial legislatures deal with what may be
described as municipal affairs — using the word
in a comprehensive sense, and "generally," to
quote the British North America act, "all matters
of a merely local or private nature within the
province."

Under the organic law of the Dominion there
are three checks on the legislatures. The lieu-

1 In the year before the war — 1913 — royalties on coal
alone turned nearly $8oo,cxx5 into the treasury of the province
of Nova Scotia.

C 494 ]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

tenant-governor can withhold the royal assent
to a bill. He can reserve a bill for the governor-
general-in-council at Ottawa; and even after a
bill has received the royal assent and become
an act, the governor-general-in-council — prac-
tically the cabinet at Ottawa — can disallow it.
Disallowance, however, must be proclaimed
within one year after enactment.

Under responsible government, as it exists in Checks
all the provinces, the two checks that the Heu- ^^'f'*
tenant-governor can exercise can seldom come
into service. They are about as obsolete as the
king's veto at Westminster and at Ottawa, and
for the same reasons. The real check is the power
of disallowance at Ottawa.

In the early days of Confederation the govern- Power
ment at Ottawa was imbued with the idea that °'

dis-

the relation between the Dominion and the aUow-
provinces was analogous to that between parent *"*^®
and child. It acted accordingly. Disallowance
was frequent. To the older provinces that had
enjoyed the full measure of responsible govern-
ment for nearly twenty years before there was a
parliament and privy council at Ottawa, this
attitude of the cabinet was disturbing. It was,
moreover, everywhere resented.

Cases were carried to the judicial committee Assumed
of the privy council at London — the court of Ef^®^ °'

, ... Dominioi

last resort for issues arising in Great Britain's ctir-
overseas possessions. This court overthrew the *^^
early conception of Ottawa as to the status of the

[495]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

provinces, by a series of decisions which clearly
established that the provinces, acting within
the scope of their powers, conferred on them by
the organic law of the Dominion, are almost
sovereign states, and that they are entitled to
exercise all the prerogatives of the crown not
conferred on the Dominion.^
Dis- Only very infrequently are acts of the provin-

aiiow- -J legislatures disallowed. Disallowance is a

ance °

in- power that the Dominion government is exceed-

frequent Jngly loath to exercisc. Its exercise is antago-
nistic to the principle of home rule on which the
government of the Dominion itself is based; and
moreover the government is as responsible to
parliament at Ottawa for the disallowance of an
act of a provincial legislature as it is for any
other executive proceeding.
Indirect It is Only through this power of disallowance

'^^^^^ ®' that the imperial government can influence or
office check legislation by a province that may impair
or threaten an imperial interest outside the
Dominion.
Inter- Intervention in such cases comes in the form of

vention ^ dispatch to the governor-general from the
White- secretary of state for the colonies. If the objec-
^^^ tion so communicated from Whitehall to Ottawa

is held to be good by the minister of justice, he

* "So far as necessarily and properly incidental to the
powers of legislation conferred upon them by the British
North America act." — Lefroy, " Canada's Federal System/*
footnote, 37.

C 496 ]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

recommends the disallowance of the provincial
act to the cabinet, and disallowance follows.

As recently before the war as 191 1 an act instance
relating to accountants in Ontario — an act °J
making accountancy, like medicine, a closed vention
profession, closed against accountants from other **^
provinces, and also from the United Kingdom — office
was disallowed on colonial office intervention,
an intervention in the interests of members of
the English Institute of Chartered Accountants.^

There is still in existence power by which the
imperial government can disallow an act of the
Dominion parliament. But only indirectly can
it bring about the disallowance of an act of a
provincial legislature.

There is one other restriction on the powers of Restric-
a provincial legislature which will come at once "°°g°g
to mind when the chapters on Confederation of
and the British North America act are recalled. 1®?^"

lature

No province may, without liability of coming
into serious conflict with the government at
Ottawa, legislate prejudicially affecting any right
or privilege with respect to denominational
schools which any class of persons — Protestants
or Roman Catholics — had by law at the time
of the union of 1867.

The rights of minorities in respect to separate Separate
schools — parish schools, as they would be called ^*^^°°^^
in the United States — are strictly safeguarded
by the British North America act. In practice
^ Cf. Lefroy, "Canada's Federal System," 33.

C497]

ment of
judges

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

four of the provinces — British Columbia, New
Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward
Island — are not affected by this section of the
organic law of the Dominion. There were no
parish schools, within the interpretation of section
93 of the British North America act, in British
Columbia or in any of the Maritime Provinces,
at the times when these four provinces entered
Confederation.

I. The Judicial System

Appoint- Courthouses are built and maintained at the

expense of the provinces. Judges, however, are

appointed by the government at Ottawa. On

reaching the age of seventy a judge may retire

on pension. Appointees to the bench must be of

the bar of the province in which they are to serve.

Courts of In each province there is a supreme court or

appeal ^ court of appeal. From this court cases can be

carried to the supreme court of Canada, which

holds its sessions at Ottawa. In certain cases

appeals can be carried to the judicial committee

of the privy council at Whitehall. The power

of the supreme court at Ottawa is not comparable

with that of the supreme court at Washington.

Legisia- "In the United States,'* Mr. Justice Riddell,

tares and ^f ^j^^ supreme court of Ontario, told students

courts at Yale University in 1916, **the courts are

supreme: in Canada, the people through their

representatives. In one country a few men say

to the legislative bodies, *thus far shalt thou go

C 498 ]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

and no further/ In the other the legislating
bodies say to the courts, 'thus far and thus
shalt thou go, and no further or otherwise/"

"Half a dozen men in the United States," Aeon-
continued Riddell, "sitting up in a quiet chamber, ^^^
can paralyze the activity of a senate and house, supreme
may say that a measure imperatively called ^J*^
for in the public interest cannot be validly en- United
acted, and the legislators, the people, are help- ^*^
less. That is called republicanism, democratic of the
government; and there is searching of soul and ^°™^°"
shaking of heads, when anyone suggests that the
people be asked if that little coterie have cor-
rectly interpreted the popular will formerly and
formally expressed in a state constitution. In
Canada should the court fail to apprehend the
real intention of an enactment, any government
which can command the support of the people
can at once correct the error." ^

Occasionally men have been appointed to the
bench in Canada whose distinction had been
achieved, not at the bar, but by long and con-
tinuous service in Dominion politics. But there
is less of politics, and political maneuvers, in
connection with the courts than in any other
department of state service in the Dominion.

The judiciary stands high in public estimation judiciary
— as high as the judiciary of the United King- ^
dom; and it there is one department of state in esteem
Canada that is imbued and permeated with the
1 Riddell, 145-146.

C 499 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

spirit that actuates the people of England and
Scotland in the working of their political institu-
tions— local as well as national — it is that which
is charged with the administration of justice.

II. Character of Municipal and Provincial
Governments

Munici- Each of the provinces has its own municipal
^ code for the organization and administration of

municipal affairs in counties, villages, towns,

and cities. Each legislature enacts its own code;

but the codes of the several provinces are fairly

uniform.
Vari- In municipal organization and economy the

ations provinces have not followed British precedents
British as closely as these have been followed from
municipal ^q beginning of political civilization in Canada

system • , • • r i • i

m the organization or the representative and
administrative institutions of the provinces and
the Dominion.

More of the municipal officers in Canada are
directly elected than in Great Britain. There
is also some divergence from the British system
in the organization of municipal councils. Mont-
real has long been notorious for its poor, loose,
and inefficient municipal administration.^ It is

1 Cf. Queen's Quarterly, Kingston, Vol. XXV, No. 2, 130;
L. D. David, "Our Municipal Situation," Gazettey Montreal,
October 14, 1917; "Municipal Affairs," Gazette, October 16,
1917; "Gave Montreal a Poor Character," Gazette, November
2, 1917; "The City's Government," Gazette, November 3;

[500]

con-
ditions

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

singular in this respect among the cities of the
Dominion; for elsewhere municipal administra-
tion — like the administration of justice all over
the Dominion — attains the municipal standards
of England and Scotland.

The reputation of the provinces of Ontario, PoUticai
Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island for a
generation before the war stood high. The in
history of these three provinces in this period is ^°^"
free from exposures of ineptitude, disregard of
public interests, and corruption. Their govern-
ment was stable, and little affected by the ups
and downs of parties in Dominion politics.

Their legislatures, their administrations, and
the provincial officers working under the direction
and supervision of these administrations, enjoyed
popular confidence and esteem. People of On-
tario, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island
had to offer no apologies for political conditions
in their provinces.

Of none of the other six provinces could similar
statements be made.^ Governments in these

"Citizens' Association Discuss City Government, Gazette,
November 3; "Municipal Honors," Gazettey Montreal.
December i, 1917.

^ "There is not much evidence of administrative jobbery
under Sir Lomer Gouin in Quebec. In New Brunswick there
have been many deplorable incidents, but unfortunately
there has always been a good deal of political looseness in
that province. Gross corruption has been exposed in Mani-
toba and Saskatchewan. There is much suspicion surround-
ing methods of administration in Alberta. The government

[501]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Exposure
of

corrup-
tion

Scandals

in

Manitoba

and

British

Columbia

Replen-
ishing
campaign
ftmds

provinces were not always pointed to with pride.
Exposures — some of them forthcoming at trials
in the criminal courts — of corruption in connec-
tion with contracts for public buildings, railway-
subsidies, government guarantees of bonds of
railway undertakings, grants of public lands to
promoters of railways, or scandals in the legis-
latures, or scandals in connection with campaign
funds or the liquor trade were, in the fifteen or
twenty years before the war, common to all of
them.

Peculiarly gross scandals were revealed in
Manitoba in 1916; in British Columbia in 1917;
and in New Brunswick in 1916, and again in
191 7. In Manitoba it was corruption in the
awarding of contracts for a new legislative
building.^ In British Columbia it was graft in
abundance in connection with subsidies to a
railway company — some of which accrued to a
campaign fund of the Conservative party —
that was laid bare.

It was the same in New Brunswick, where it
was revealed in 191 7 that in 191 2 the campaign
fund of the local Conservative party was gener-

of British Columbia is under attack, and wholesale persona-
tion has been exposed in Vancouver. Thus conditions in the
west may warrant the deliverance of the Methodist Laymen's
Association. But the statements are not justified by condi-
tions in Ontario." — News^ Toronto, June 18, 19 16.

1 Cf. "The Manitoba Trial," Gazette^ Montreal, September
6, 1916.
[502]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

ously replenished by a contractor then engaged
in building a railway, the second mortgage bonds
of which had been guaranteed by the provincial
government at Fredericton.

At this revelation in New Brunswick, where
there had been a campaign-fund exposure in
1916,^ the Gazette, of Montreal, long the leading
Conservative newspaper of the Dominion, edi-
torially recalled the similar scandal revealed in
British Columbia, in May, 191 7. "Now," it
continued,^ "come charges of a similar nature,
with New Brunswick as the center. East or
west, it is all the same." *

* Cf. "How Parties Are Recruited," Tribunf, Winnipeg,
June 7, 19 16.

* August 17, 1917.

' Revelations of political conditions In several of the
provinces in 1916-1917 were described in the undermentioned
editorial articles:

"What Is a Party For?" Tribune, Winnipeg, April 20, 1916.

"Under Thick Clouds," Tribune, Winnipeg, June 24, 1916.

" Game's Up in New Brunswick," Citizen, Ottawa, May 19,
1916.

"A Trial of Import," Gazette, Montreal, June 16, 1916.

"The Manitoba Trial," Gazette, Montreal, September 6,
1916.

"A Western Scandal," Gazette, Montreal, May 14, 19 17.

"A Bit Too Thick," Beacon, Stratford, Ontario, reprinted.
Globe, Toronto, August 4, 19 17.

"Campaign Contributions," Globe, Toronto, August 18,
1917.

"The Flemming Incident," and also "Sir Hibbert Tupper
as a Critic," Tribune, Winnipeg, August 21, 1917.

C503]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

III. Political Civilization in New and in Old
World Countries

Where These failures of leaders of political parties

responsi- ^j^q were in control at several of the provincial

biUty • 1 • 1 L r 1

for capitals m the twenty years before the war

*°*^" to maintain high standards in public life — like
politics obvious evils that have developed in fifty years'
lies working of the representative and administrative

institutions of the Dominion — are, it must be
emphasized, not inherent in the democratic
franchises on which the house of commons at
Ottawa and the provincial legislatures are
elected. Nor are they inherent in the system of
responsible government — a system which, with
the constitutional machinery of which the cabinet
is the center, and with the wide powers conferred
on the governments of the Dominion and of the
provinces by the constitution of 1867, can be
made to afford the Canadian people a larger
political freedom than is enjoyed under the
constitutional system of any other country.
Democ- Fifty years in the life of a nation is a very

^^^ brief period; and conditions in Canada from

new and Confederation to 191 7 are not likely to continue
develop- indefinitely. In this period, and in particular
country ftom 1880 to 1914, Canada was essentially a new
and developing country. In new and develop-
ing countries public spirit is seldom continuously
operative at its full strength. It is usually not
aggressive in asserting itself.
[504]

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES

There are no long traditions of service to the Lack of
state. Social distinction does not go in the fullest tJ^aditions
measure to men who are serving the state, except, service
perhaps, in the highest offices. Opportunities for *° *^®
making money — for piling up wealth — are much
more numerous than in an old world country;
and men who are making money by exploiting
the resources and people of a new country — men
who are wholly engrossed in making money —
are disposed to be indifferent as to the forces
that are molding the political civilization in
which they live. Especially is this so if the poli- "PoUtics
ticians are complaisant and accommodating when °'
men who are concerned only in the "politics of
business" — men who are always amply repre-
sented at the political capitals of new world coun-
tries — are seeking tariff and bounty concessions,
and other valuable concessions and privileges
which it is in the power of government to bestow.

The development of political standards and stand-
ideals, and the establishment of rules and codes ^^^s
of political life and conduct, are apt to be post- ideals
poned to a more convenient season, until individ- slow in
ual and national material success shall have been Ashing
abundantly achieved. Obviously in a new coun- t^*™-
try democracy as regards the electoral franchise
and the working of representative institutions,
such as parliament and the cabinet, has not the
fair field that since 1867, and particularly since
1 884-1 885, has been the good fortune of
democracy in England and Scotland.

C 505 ]

SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES

Adderley, Sir C. B. "The Colonial Policy
of Lord J. Russell's Administration, and Subse-
quent History." 1869.

Acer, Clarus. "The Farmer and the Inter-
ests, A Study in Parasitism.'* 1916.

Argyll, Ninth Duke of. "Passages from
the Past." 1907.

AuDETTE, A. L. "Canadian Historical Dates
and Events." 1918.

Begg, Alexander, "History of British Colum-
bia." 1894.

Bell, Sydney Smith. "Colonial Administra-
tion of Great Britain." 1859.

Benson, A. C, and Esher, Viscount. "The
Letters of Queen Victoria, 1837-1861." 1907.

BouRiNOT, J. G. "How Canada is Governed."
1895.

BouRiNOT, Sir J. G. "Canada." 1908.

Boyd, J. "Sir George Etienne Cartier. A
Political History of Canada from 18 14 until
1873." 1914.

Bradshaw, E. " Self-Government in Canada,
and How It Was Achieved." 1909.

Bruce, Sir Charles. "The Broadstone of
Empire: Problems of Crown Colony Adminis-

C507]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

tration, with Records of Personal Experience."
1910.

Buckingham, William, and Ross, George W.
"The Hon. Alexander Mackenzie: His Life and
Times." 1892.

Burpee, L. J. "Sandford Fleming: Empire
Builder." 1915.

Burt, A. F. "Imperial Architects: Propos-
als in the Direction of a Closer Imperial Union,
Made Previous to the First Colonial Conference
of 1897." 1913.

Canadian Council of Agriculture, Winnipeg.
"The Farmers' Platform." 1917.

"Canadian Politics, Handbook on." 1904.

Canal Commission. Sessional Papers, Ottawa,
1871. No. 54.

Cartwright, Sir Richard. "Reminiscences."
1912.

Clarke, C. " Sixty Years of Upper Canada."
1908.

Clifford, Frederick. "A History of Private
Bill Legislation." 1885.

Clowes, W., and Sons. "Rules and Regu-
lations for Her Majesty's Colonial Service."
1843.

Cowie, F. W. "The Transportation Prob-
lem in Canada and Montreal Harbor." Pro-
ceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers,
London. 1915.

Denison, William. " Varieties of Vice-regal
Life." 1870.

C508]

SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES

Durham, Lord. "Report on the Affairs of
British North America." Edited by Sir C. P.
Lucas. 1912.

Edgar, J. D. "Canada and Its Capital.
With Sketches of Political and Social Life at
Ottawa.'* 1898.

Egerton, H. E., and Grant, W. L. "Cana-
dian Constitutional Developments, Shown by
Selected Speeches and Despatches, with Intro-
ductions and Explanatory Notes." 1907.

Egerton, H. E. "A Historical Geography
of the British Colonies." Edited by Sir Charles
P. Lucas. Vol. V, "Canada." 1908.

Gray, J. H. "Confederation of Canada."
1871.

Grey, Charles, Third Earl Grey. "The
Colonial Policy of Lord John Russell's Adminis-
tration." 1853.

Griffin, Watson. "Canada: The Country
of the Twentieth Century." 191 5.

Hammond, M. O. "Confederation and Its
Leaders." 1917.

Harpell, James J. "Canadian National
Economy: The Cause of High Prices and Their
Effect upon the Country." 1911.

Herbertson, a. J., and Howarth, O. J. R.
"The Oxford Survey of the British Empire.
America: Including Canada, Newfoundland, the
British West Indies, and the Falkland Islands
and Dependencies." Vol. IV, 1914; also "Gen-
eral Survey," Vol. VI, 1914.

[ 509 ]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

HuRD, P. and A. "The New Empire Partner-
ship." 1916.

Johnson, Stanley C. "A History of Emi-
gration from the United Kingdom to North
America, 1763-1912." 1913.

Keith, A. B. "Responsible Government in
the Dominions." 1909.

Leroy, a. H. F. "Canada's Federal System;
A Treatise on Canadian Constitutional Law
under the British North America Act." 191 3-

Liberal Convention of 1893. Official Report
of the Liberal Convention Held in Response to
the Call of Hon. Wilfrid Laurier, Leader of the
Liberal Party of the Dominion of Canada. 1893.

Mackenzie, Alexander. "The Life and
Speeches of George Brown." 1882.

Macphail, Andrew. "Essays in Politics."
1909.

Merivale, Herman. "Lectures on Coloniza-
tion and Colonies." 1841.

Parker, C. S. "Sir Robert Peel." 1899.

PoRRiTT, E. and A. G. "The Unreformed
House of Commons: Parliamentary Represen-
tation before 1832." 1903.

PoRRiTT, E. "A Century and a Half of Eng-
lish Journalism in Canada." The World's Press.
London, 1906.

PoRRiTT, E. "Sixty Years of Protection in
Canada." 1908.

Pope, Sir Joseph. "Memoirs of the Right
Honourable Sir John Alexander MacDonald,

C510]

SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES

G. C. B., First Prime Minister of the Dominion
of Canada/' 1894.

Pope, Sir Joseph. "Confederation Papers."
1895.

Reid, Stuart J. "Life and Letters of the
First Earl of Durham, 1792-1840." 1906.

Report of Proceedings in the Hearing by Mem-
bers of the Government of the Farmers' Dele-
gation, December 16, 1910. 191 1.

RiDDELL, William Renwick. "The Consti-
tution of Canada in Its History and Practical
Working." 1917.

Roche, W.J. "Immigration: Facts and Fig-
ures." 1915.

Ross, Sir George Willlam. "The Senate of
Canada." 1910.

Rules of the House of Commons of Canada.
1909.

Saunders, E. M. "Life and Letters of Sir
Charles Tupper." 1916.

ScROPE, G. PouLETT. "Memoir of the Life
of Lord Sydenham. With a Narrative of His
Administration in Canada." 1843.

Sinclair, Robert Victor. "The Rules and
Practice before the Parliament of Canada upon
Bills of Divorce." 19x5.

Stimson, E. R. "History of the Separation of
Church and State in Canada." 1888.

Todd, Alpheus. " Parliamentary Government
in the British Colonies." 1880.

Tremenheere, Hugh Seymour. "Notes on

[5"]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA

Public Subjects, Made During a Tour in the
United States and Canada/' 1852.

TuppER, Sir Charles. "Recollections of
Sixty Years/' 1914.

Wallace, W. S. "The United Empire Loyal-
ists: A Chronicle of the Great Migration."

Walrond, Theodore. "Letters and Journals
of the Earl of Elgin." 1872.

Weaver, Emily P. "A Canadian History."
1900.

WiLLSON, Beckles. "Life of Lord Strathcona
and Mount Royal." 1915.

WiLLisoN, J. S. "Sir Wilfrid Laurier and
the Liberal Party." 1903.

Wrong, G. M., Willison, Sir John, Lash,
Z. A., and Falconer, R. A. "The Federation of
Canada." 1917.

C512:

INDEX

Abbott, Sir John J. C,
290, 362

Aberdeen, Earl of, 155, 256

Aberdeen government, 158

Act of 1774, 64

Act of 1905, increasing allow-
ances of members of parlia-
ment, 388

Act of 1872, against dual
representation, 334

Act of Union, 1840, 108, 109;
and raising of revenue,
109; demands not con-
ceded in, no

Adams, G. B., 72 n

Adderley, colonial secretary,
206, 226

Addington, speaker, 380

Address to the crown, debate
on, 403, 404, 405, 406

Adjournment, leave to move,
426

Advertising by Canada, 448,

479
Agriculture, minister of, 354
Agriculture, power of prov-
inces over, 234
Alabama claims, 201, 206
Alberta, 14, 31, 41, 188, 212,

474; created a province,
16; climate of, 18; and
crown lands, 56; and
divorce, 166; and federal
union, 217; and separate
schools, 239, 371; and the
senate, 270; representation
of, in house of commons,
305, 309; and the cabinet,
358; and enfranchisement
of women, 376; and Brit-
ish preference, 440; and
single-chamber legislature,
48s

Algoma, 317; franchise in
territory of, 318

American revolution, lesson
of, II

Amherst, N. S., 198

Antigonish, 317

Appropriation bills, 419

Argyll, Duke of, 255; remi-
niscences of, 256

Aristocracy, hereditary, at-
tempt to establish, 70;
dislike of, 366; end of
third attempt to establish,
370

Ashcroft, so

[513]

INDEX

Attorney-general, 354

Augusta, Maine, 201

Australia, 59, 166; and con-
victs, 61; and British
connection, 129; and fiscal
freedom, 443; and British
preference, 448

Austria, and British com-
mercial treaties, 449

Autonomy for dominions,
and tie to Great Britain, 12

Bagot, Sir Charles, hi,
119, 123, 145, 179; life
of, 116; English disap-
proval of, 118

Baldwin, Robert, 117, 120,
123, 251; and responsible
government, 124

Balfour, A. J., 443

Ballot papers, 346; counting

of, 347

Banks, representative, 202

Baronetcies, in Canada, 73,
36s, 366

Barrie, Isaac, 64

Belgium, and British prefer-
ence, 442, 443

Belle Island, 29

Bicameral system, 56, 484,

485
Bilingual legislatures, 75, 80,

108, 152, 403
Bill No. I, 386
Bills, rejected by senate, 272,

288; procedure on, in

house of commons, 409,

C514]

410, 411; stages of, 411,
422; reserved, 412; classes
of, 414; appropriation, 419

Bills, reserved, in Act of
Union, HO

Black rod, 280, 384

Blaine, J. G., 203

Blair, minister of railways
and canals, 374

Blake, Edward, 11, 310, 332,
362, 412, 414

Borden, Sir Robert L., 298,
314, 333> 363; and cabinet,
360; attends British cabinet
meetings, 364

Borden government, 301,
353; and obstruction, 422

Boston, 35

Bounties, on hemp, in New
Brunswick, 174; on fish,
in Prince Edward Island,
174; opposed by liberals,
395; and National Policy,
430, 434, 457; on iron
and steel, 479

Bowell, Sir Mackenzie, 290,

374

Boyd, 72 n, 82 n

Brandon, 20, 471

Brassey, Lord, 113

Bridge, The, 38, 217; climate
of, 40; and the prairie
provinces, 40

Bright, John, 333

British cabinet, and Cana-
dian premiers, 364

British empire, extent of, 2

INDEX

British, and election to Do-
minion house of commons,
330

British colonial history,
dreary period in, 82

British colonial policy, three
eras in, 9; and central
Canada, 23; previous to
1846, 81; and British
shipping, 81; until 1846,
109; and responsible gov-
ernment, 144; change in,

British colonies, in 1783, 59;
indifference to, 60

British Columbia, 16, 163,
187, 213, 297, 305; indus-
tries of, 46; boundaries
of, 49; description of,
50; people of, 51; immi-
gration into, 5 1 ; history of,
before Confederation, 52,
54; statesmen of, 53;
and Confederation, 55;
and crown lands, 56; and
immigration 57, 327; and
grain-growing provinces,
57; resources of, 57; poli-
cies of, 58; and sectarian
education, 75; and bi-
lingual legislature, 75; and
protection, 176; and Bul-
wer Lytton, 191; and
Confederation, 211, 220;
and Chinese immigration,
234; and unsectarian
schools, 242; and the

senate, 270; divorce courts
in, 287; and the cabinet,
358; and bounties, 431;
and railways, 471; and
single-chamber legislature,
484; and separate schools,
498; scandals in, 502

British connection, 162;
strengthening of, 131; and
French Canada, 153, 154;
and the senate, 271

British navy, 398, 422

British North America act,
180, 216, 339; and reso-
lutions of Quebec con-
vention, 200; in parlia-
ment, 205, 206; working
of, 214; division of powers
in, 228; provisions of, 229;
and education, 236, 238,
497; and money bills, 249;
and representation in house
of commons, 306; and
electoral franchises, 317;
and assembling of parlia-
ment, 378; and the prov-
inces, 483, 494, 497

British North American prov-
inces, number of, 74;
rights of, in 1867, 213, 327

British parliament, and Ca-
nadian reforms, 151, 159;
and clergy reserves bill,
156; procedure of, 400

British preference, none be-
fore 1897, 177, 447; of
1897, 435; reduced in

INDEX

1907* 435. 452; protection
and, 437; and British
trade, 437; political effect
of, 439, 451; and grain
growers, 441; return for,
447; for other colonies, 448;
as advertising, 448; and
United States, 450; effects
of, 451; adopted by other
dominions, 451

British West Indies, 59

Brockville, 106

Brown, George, 11, 162, 332;
and Confederation, 195,
197, 209, 220; and schools
question, 237; and elective
senators, 268; and sena-
torial divisions, 271; and
senate deadlocks, 276; as
senator, 290; and reciproc-
ity, 454

Bruce, Sir Charles, 8 n

Bruce, "Broadstone of Em-
pire," 88 n

Buchanan, Isaac, 169

Budget, 415; debate on, 417;
of provinces, 493

Buffalo, 32, 35, 36

Burke, Edmund, 64

Burpee, 64 n

Bytown, Ottawa, 106

Cabinet, and the senate,
293; and elections, 351;
appointment to, 351, 355;
members of, 352, 353;
salaries of members of,

[516]

354; representation of,
provinces in, 357, 358;
and ministry, 363; and
titles, 369; reelection after
appointment to, 370; func-
tions of, 372; collective
responsibility of, 373; res-
ignations from, 373; and
open questions, 376; and
assembling of parliament,
378

Cabinet government, estab-
lishment of, 112; in United
Provinces, 164

Cabinet ministers, reelection
of, 370, 371; resignation
of» 373> 374; duties of,
377

Cabinet system, based on
usage, 249

Calder, of Saskatchewan, 359

Calgary, 26

Cameron, Simon, 204

Canada, in 1783, 59; popu-
lation of, 60

Canada, Dominion of, area
of, 13; coastline of, 14;
climate of, 18

Canadians and election to
British parliament, 330

Canadian barons, 37

Canadian Manufacturers'
Association, 453

Canadian Northern Railway,

57
Canadian Pacific Railway,
25, 36, 38, 41, 457; open-

INDEX

ing of, 15; double-tracking
of, 473

Canadian Pacific Railway
scandal of 1872, 260, 335,
336

Canals, American, 15

Canals, Canadian, 15

Candidates for election, de-
posits by, 341, 342; nomi-
nation papers of, 344;
and ballot papers, 346

Cape Breton, as province,
74 «

Cape Colony, 145

Cardwell, Edward, secretary
for colonies, 207

Carleton, Guy, 182

Carnarvon, Earl of, 206;
and Confederation, 221,
226; and separate schools,
238, 246

Cartier, George Etienne, 11,
72 «, 86, 190, 424; and
Confederation, 191, 209,
223

Cartier, Jacques, 15

Cartier-Macdonald govern-
ment, 197

Cartwright, Sir Richard, 11,
99, 290, 291, 333

Cattle ranching, 44

Caucus, 387, 388, 420

Cayley tariff, 167, 169, 175,

398
Census of industries, 471
Central Canada, 22; and

Canadian constitutional

history, 23; and manu-
facturing, 29

Ceylon, 87

Chairing a member, 328

Chamberlain, Joseph, 113,
333; and colonial prefer-
ences, 452

Charlottetown, 17, 24; con-
ference of, in 1864, 74

Charlottetown convention,
198

Chatham, Earl of, 64, 65

Chiltern Hundreds, 350

China, trade with, 471

Chinese, in British Colum-
bia, 234

Civil list, in Act of Union,
109; amendment concern-
ing, 152; control over, 163

Civil servants, and the fran-
chise, 320, 323, 328

Clarke, Charles, 109 n

Clarus Ager, 37 n, 47 w

Clear Grits, 148

Clergy reserves, 70, 155, 163,
177; at union of provinces,
105; settlement of ques-
tion of, 151, 156; and
tithes, 15s n

Clerk of the crown in chan-
cery, 338

Closure, 421, 422; and
Quebec, 424

Coal companies, of Nova
Scotia and Alberta, 36

Coal, duties on, 432; and
reciprocity, 457

C517]

INDEX

Coal fields, 19; of Nova
Scotia, 433

Coal supplies of Canada, 20

Colborne, 35

CoUingwood, 35

Colonial Advocate, 91

Colonial constitutions, 67

Colonial office, and respon-
sible government, 144;
and fiscal policy of
colonies, 174; and provin-
cial governments, 487; and
provincial legislation, 496

Colonial policy, British, see
British Colonial Policy

Colonies, and British con-
nection, 129

Commercial policy of Great
Britain, 81

Commercial treaties, right to
make, 150

Committee stage on bills, 411

Committees of house of com-
mons, 407

Compensation for rebellion
losses, 135

Concurrent legislation, 233

Concurrent tariff legislation,
461

Confederation, principle of
representation at, 107;
coming of, 180; influences
for, 181; first suggestions
of, 182, 183; forces for,
188; agreement concern-
ing, 198; and Quebec con-
vention, 199; resolutions

[518]

against in Congress, 202;
British attitude towards,
210; and separate schools
question, 236; and pro-
tection, 432; and bicameral
legislatures, 484
Confederation, Fathers of,

189, 206, 208, 214, 223
Conference between senate

and house, 285
Connaught, Duke of, 256
Conservatives, 150, 343; and
the senate, 288, 301; and
electoral franchises, 320;
and the tariff, 398, 434;
and British preference, 439,
440
Consolidated fund, 152
Constitution of Canada, 228-

233
Constitution of Dominion of

Canada, unwritten, 249
Constitution of United Prov-
inces, 249; amendments to

151, 157, 160
Convention of 18 18, threat

to abrogate, 187
Convicts, and transportation,

61; in American colonies,

61
Cornwall, Ontario, 106
Corruption, at Toronto and

Quebec, 82; at Ottawa, 85,

257
Cost of living in Canada, 481
Cotton industry and National

Policy, 469

INDEX

Cowie, F. W., 34 n

Crown colonies, and colonial
office, i; government of,
6; classification of, 6;
British policy towards, 7;
grants in aid to, 8; and
British preference, 448

Crown colony rule, before
1837, 86, 87; modem
principles of, 88

Crown lands, 149; at Con-
federation, 56; in British
North America act, 233;
granted to railways, 473;
and provincial legislation,

493. 494
Customs duties, 416
Customs, ministerof, 354, 363

Dawson City, 299

Deadlock, between senate
and house, 275

Debates in parliament, re-
porting of, 398; and
closure, 423, 424

Democracy in Canada, 499,
504; in 1840-1867, 179

Denison, Sir William, and re-
sponsible government, 252

Denmark, trade with, 471

Dent, John Charles, 84 n

Department of immigration
and colonization, 352, 359

Department of interior, 353

Departments, government,
3S2> 353» 354; and esti-
mates, 418

Deposits by candidates, 342,

344> 345
Deputy speaker, 383
Derby administration, 191,

209, 212

Derby, Earl of (Lord Stan-
ley), 141, 158, 160; and
" Dominion of Canada,'*
200

Derby-Disraeli government,

210, 221

Desks, in house of commons,

392

Detroit River, 60

Dingley bill, 450, 467

Direct taxation, 494

Disallowance of legislation,
234. 253, 495, 496, 497

Disqualifications of parlia-
mentary candidates, 333

Disraeli, Benjamin, 212, 333

Dissolution of parliament,
335; in 1872, 336; in 1911,
336; by governor-general,

337

Divorce and United Prov-
inces legislature, 165; at
Confederation, 166

Divorce bills, in senate, 284,
286; number of, 286; and
Ontario and Quebec, 287;
reserved, 412

Divorce courts, 287

Doak, printer, 75

Dominion of Canada, 483;
rights of, 215; and British
treaties, 215; powers of,

C519]

INDEX

224; status of, in 1876,

413

Dominion franchise bill of
1885, 319; condemned in
provinces, 321; arguments
against, 322; repealed in
1898, 323

Dominion government, 211;
and grants to railways, 473;
and subventions to prov-
inces, 493

Dominion Trades and Labor
Congress, 344

Dominions, and colonial
office, i; enumerated, 2;
area of, 3; population of,
3; tariffs of, 4; and
contributions to Great
Britain, 4; and British
national debt, 4; no in-
terference with, from
Westminister, 5

Draper-Viger government,
124, 140; and Lord Elgin,
133; and rebellion losses,

13s
Dual membership, 333
Dufferin, Marquis of, 335,

414
Dunning, John, 64
Duration of parliament, 335
Durham, Earl of, 112, 119,

128, 132, 145, 146, 183;

mission of, to Canada, 95,

96; Report of, 97-102;

return of, to England, 97;

and American influence

[520]

on Canada, 100; and
advantages of union, 102,
103; as a statesman,
IIS

East India Company, 119
Economisty The^ 114
Edgar, J. D., 24 n, 54 n
Edmonton, 17, 24
Education act of 1863, 237
Education, in British North

America act, 236
Egerton, 64 n, 74 «, 87
Egerton and Grant, 121 n,

122 n
Election petitions, 348
Elections act of 19 17, 324 «
Elections, British, expenses

of, 340
Elections, corruption in, 178;
holding of, 338; procedure
of> 339> 346; expenses of,
340, 341, 348; usages at,
340; uncontested, 342;
nomination papers for, 344;
day of, 347; controverted,
348
Electoral divisions, settle-
ment of, 310; inequality
of, 314, 315; single-mem-
ber, 316
Electoral franchise, reform of,
demanded, 149; left to
provinces, 309; civil ser-
vants debarred from, 320;
civil servants admitted to,
323; reforms in, 324

INDEX

Electoral reform in 1856,

161
Electors, qualifications of,

1791, &T., manifestoes to,

339
Elgin, Earl of, iii, 145, 151,
170, 179, 213; as a states-
man, 115, 146; governor-
general, 127, 132; his policy,
128, 132, 138; politics of,
129; and British connec-
tion, 131; and respon-
sible government, 133, 248,
252; and rebellion losses
bill, 134, 136; demon-
strations against, 139, 140;
tenders resignation, 141,
142; his achievement, 146;
and use of French, 153, 154
Elgin-Marcy Treaty, 188, 432,
447, 454, 456, 461, 466; and
British G)lumbia, 55
Ellenborough, Earl of, 120 w
Enfranchisement of women,
an open question, 376, 377;
in prairie provinces, 376
Episcopal church, and clergy

reserves, 71
Established church, 401
Estimates, prepared by
cabinet, 372, 373; in house
of commons, 418
Excess profits tax, 416, 494
Executive councils, H2

Family compacts, 72, 132,
137, 147, 168, 177; and

corruption m government,

83
Farrer, James Anson, 414 n
Federal union, inevitable, 178
Federal v. legislative union,

217-221
Fielding, William S., II, 445,

447» 467
Finance bill, 415; amend-
ments to, 417; debate on,

417
Finance, minister of, 353
Financial centers of Canada,

36
Financial year of Canada,

378
Financiers, and government,

37

Fiscal freedom of colonies,
17,442

Fish, and reciprocity, 458

Fish, Hamilton, 454

Fisheries, and United States,
460

Fleming, Sandford, 64 n

Flour exports, 470, 471

Flour milling, 470

Flour mills, 32

Fort Garry, 52

Fort William, 15, 19, 31,
34, 40, 473» 475

Forty shilling freehold quali-
fication, 328

Foster, G. E., 333

France, and Canadian tariffs,

447
Franchise, dominion, 317

C521]

INDEX

Franking privilege, 279, 490

Fredericton, 17

Freedom of speech, and
closure, 423

Freedom of the press, struggle
for, 75

Free trade, 284; adoption
of, by Great Britain, 147;
and concessions to Canada,
164, 440

French, use of in king's
speech, 280; use of, in
parliament, 403

French Canada, and separate
schools, 236; and places in
cabinet, 357; and the
speakership 383; and di-
vision of offices, 384

Frontenac, 317

Galleries in house of com-
mons, 393

Gait, Alexander, TuUoch, and
right of tariff making, 1 1,
169; and friction with
British government, 170;
his reply to Newcastle, 172;
and Confederation, 189,
191, 209, 223

Gait tariff, 171-175, 398

Gazette y Canada, 253

Gazette, Montreal, 503

George III, 414

George IV, 414

German tariff war, 435-444,
and peace without victory,
446
[522]

Germany, and British prefer-
ence, 442, 443, 450

Gerrymander, in Canada,
310; abolished by Liberals,
312

Gladstone, W. E., 104, 333;
and rebellion losses bill,
143; and corruption in
Canada, 259, 260

Glengarry, address to Elgin
from, 141

Globe, of Toronto, 423

Gosford, Lord, 95

Governing class in Canada,
72; in Lower Canada, 83

Government bills, 415, 420;
in provincial legislatures,

493

Government leader in senate,
282

Governor-general of Canada,
as Hnk with Great Britain,
5; appointment of 6, 162;
at Quebec, in 1792, 76;
powers of, 81; partisan,
84; can dissolve legis-
lature, 124; appointment
of, as patronage, 128;
and reserved bills, 157;
payment of salary of, 163;
nomination of, 215; before
and after Confederation,
247; in British North
America act, 251; duties
of, 254; nonpartisan, 256;
limitations on freedom of,
264; suggestion of election

INDEX

of, 265; and dissolution
of parliament, 335; and
cabinet, 351, 373; and
convening of parliament,
378; and election of
speaker, 385; never in
house of commons, 393;
and speech from the throne,
402; and speaker of house
of commons, 420; and
disallowance of provincial
legislation, 496

Governor-in-council, 253; and
rights of minorities, 240

Governors-general, list of,
256

Grain, and railroads, 473,

474

Grain crop, 35

Grain growers, and American
interests, 32; organization
of, 47; and agitation
against titles, 367; and
British preference, 440;
political movements of,
441; and reciprocity, 457,
460, 463; and Sir W.
Laurier, 463, 464

Grain Growers' Guide , 367 w,
44in

Grain growing, beyond Great
Lakes, 35; increase of, 44;
importance of, 45

Grain handling, charges for,

34
Grain harvests, and pros-
perity, 31

Grand Trunk Pacific Rail-
way, 42, so, 57

Grand Trunk Railway, 34,
36; double tracking of,

474
Grants to railways, 473
Granville, Earl of, 207 n
Great Britain, and Canadian
taxation, 173; and Hudson
Bay Co.'s territory, 186;
welcomes Confederation,
186; and responsible gov-
ernment for Canada, 261;
denounces treaties for sake
of Canada, 442; and Brit-
ish preference, 447
Great Lakes, 14; climate on,
19; and prairie provinces,
31; warships on, 187
Grenville act of 1770, 349
Grey, third earl, 136, 141,
153, 256; and Elgin's offer
of resignation, 142
Grey, Sir George, 157
Grey, fourth earl, and co-
operation, 264
Grits, 168

Halifax, 17, 24, 33, 37, 43,
I39> 163; and legislative
assembly of 1758, 64, 76,
251

Hamilton, 24, 45, 106, 150,
167, 169

Harpell, James J., 42 n, 46 n

Head, Francis Bond, 85, 92,
122

C523]

INDEX

Head, Sir Edward Walker,
governor-general, 170, 171,
179, 252; and Confeder-
ation, 190

Herries, J. C, 143

Hill, printer, 75

Hincks, Francis, 177 n

"Hiving the grits," 311

Holland, trade with, 471

Homesteads, 479

"Honorable," 362

House of Commons, Domin-
ion, and money bills, 250,
409; membership of, 305;
representation of provinces
in, 305, 306; and election
of speaker, 385; organi-
zation of new, 385; seat-
ing of members in, 390;
rules of, 400; procedure
in, 401, 402, 409, 410;
quorum of, 401; atten-
dance in, 401; select stand-
ing committees of, 407;
and supply, 418; and
obstruction, 421

Howe, Joseph, 75

Hudson Bay, 14, 474

Hudson Bay Company, 16,
24, 53; and the Bridge,
41; and immigration, 43;
end of rule of, 54; territory
of, 59; Lower Canada and,
185; and United States,
188; and crown lands, 233

Hume, Joseph, 119

Hustings, 327

C524]

Immigration, 27, 478; into
prairie provinces, 43; Do-
minion rights over, 216;
Chinese, 234; legislation
concerning, 234; propa-
ganda, 235, 473; expendi-
tures on, and corruption,
258; and National Policy,
430; and British prefer-
ence, 451; polyglot, 478;
and Ontario, 481

Immigration and coloniza-
tion, minister of, 354

Indemnities, for members
of parliament, 279

Independent political move-
ments, 480

India, 59

Industries of United Kingdom
and Canadian tariffs, 175

Ineligibility for parliament,

334
Inland revenue duties, 416
Inland revenue, minister of,

354,363

Institute of chartered accoun-
tants, 497

Intercolonial Railway, 259,

299, 359, 471
Interior, minister of, 354;

from prairie provinces, 359
Intermediate tariff, 437
Irish Nationalist party, 343
Iron and steel bounties, 258
Iron and steel manufacture,

29; in Sydney, 45; and

National Policy, 469, 470

INDEX

Italy, and British preference,
442, 449

Jamaica, 119, 127
Japan, trade with, 471
Johnson, President, 202, 205
Journals of parliament, 401
Judges, appointment of, 498,

499
Judicial committee of privy
council, 495; and separate
schools question, 245
Judiciary of Canada, 499
Justice, minister of, 354

Kamloops, 50
Kenny, Edward, 358
Kenora, 38, 41, 50, 471
" Kingdom of Canada," 200,

205
Kingston, 24, 35, 106, 113,

120, 163
Knighthoods, 72, 365, 366,

369

Labor and socialist parties,
480; and elections, 345; in
provincial legislatures, 488
Labor candidates, 343
Labor, minister of, 354
Labouchere, Henry, 113; co-
lonial secretary, 190
Lafontaine, Louis Hyppolite,

117, 120, 123, 251
Lafontaine- Baldwin govern-
ment, 123, 124, 133, 13s,
136, 140

Lake Erie, 35

Lake navigation and United

States, 33
Lake of the Woods, 38
Lake Superior, 34, 44
Lansdowne, Marquis of, 256,

443

Lash, 414 n

Laurier, Sir Wilfred, 11, 297,
310,333,363; and separate
schools, 244; and redistri-
bution, 307, 315; and end
of gerrymandering, 313;
and cabinet, 360; and the
grain growers, 463

Laurier government 150 n;
repeals Dominion franchise
act, 323; and electoral
reform, 324; and reci-
procity with United States,
336, 396, 456, 461, 462;
and obstruction, 421, 422;
defeat of, 465

Lawyers, and parliament,

331
Legislative assembly, Quebec,

76; made bilingual, 80;

limitations of, 81, 85;

refused to vote supplies, 93
Legislative assembly. Upper

Canada, powerlessness of,

85
Legislative council, Quebec,

76; power of, 81; bishops

and judges in, 85
Legislative council. United

Provinces, demand for elec-

INDEX

tion of, 150, 158; New-
castle and, 160; members
of, elected, 161, 267; num-
ber of members of, 162

Legislative councilors, salaries
of, 486

Legislative councils, disap-
pearance of, 484; member-
ship of, 485

Legislative union of 1840,
104; debates at West-
minister on, 105; consti-
tution of, 106

Legislature of United Prov-
inces, constitution of, 107;
bilingual, 108

Legislatures, early, 76; con-
stitution and procedure of,
77, 400; limitations of
80; bicameral, 484

Lemieux, Rodolphe, 424

Le Pas, Manitoba, 14, 474

Lewis, George Cornewall, 87

Liberal-Conservatives, 168,
284

Liberal convention of 1859,

19s

Liberals, 343; after Con-
federation, 284; and the
senate, 288, 302; and the
gerrymander, 312; and
electoral franchise, 320;
and Dominion franchise
act of 1885, 322; and
electoral reform, 324; and
the tariff, 398, 417, 434

Lieutenant-governors, as

[526]

links with Great Britain, 5;

appointment of, 6, 253,
483; and resignation of
premier, 488; salaries of,
491; terms of, 491; non-
partisan, 491; duties of,

492, 493
Links of empire, 364, 434, 492
Lisgar, Lord, 314
London, 0., 106
Lord Chancellor, 280
Lome, Marquis of, 128 n,

255, 414

Lower Canada, (fjy 74; and
constitutional development,
75; legislature of, in 1792,
79; and import duties, 81;
corruption in government
of, 82; and governing class,
83; population of, in 1838,
loi; and disputes with
Upper Canada, 102; repre-
sentation of, 106; con-
cession to, in 1848, 152;
overrepresentation of, 184

"Loyalist," 75

Lucas, Sir C. P., on crown
colonies, 7 n, 82 n; on
Durham, 115

Lumber, and reciprocity, 457

Lytton, Bulwer, colonial sec-
retary, 191

Macdonald, Baroness, first
Canadian peer, 73 n

Macdonald government, 362,
431; and Canadian Pacific

INDEX

Railroad scandal, 260;
members of, 352
Macdonald, Senator, 278 n
Macdonald, Sir John A., 11,
297> 332, 336, 363, 424;
and Confederation, 200,
209, 216, 223, 225; and
electoral franchises, 318,
320, 323; and National
Policy, 432, 433, 466; and
reciprocity, 458
Mace, the, 381, 384, 391
McGee, Thomas Darcy, 209
Mackenzie, Alexander, 297,

335. 336, 363, 412, 414
Mackenzie government, 453
Mackenzie, William Lyon,
rebellion of, 10, 89, 94,
122, 138, 145, 269; life of,
91, 92, 93; amnestied, 94
McKinley tariff, 466, 467
MacLeans Magazine, 367 n
Magdalen Islands, 486
Magna Charta, as advertise-
ment, 449
Mails, 416

Maine, and Confederation,
201; resolutions against,
from, 202
Maisonneuve, 314
Manhood suffrage, 325
Manitoba, 14, 31, 41, 186,
188, 212, 297, 474; created
a province, 16; climate of,
18; and crown lands, 56;
and divorce, 166; and
federal union, 217; and

separate schools, 239;
representation of, in house
of commons, 305; and
the cabinet, 358; and
enfranchisement of women,
376; and British prefer-
ence, 440; and bicameral
system, 484; scandals in,
502
Manitoba school question,

243, 374

Manufacturers, British, pro-
tests of, 171

Manufacturers, Canadian,
and protection, 30, 170,
437; and the preference,
435, 452; and British
trade, 438; more protec-
tion for, 440, 467; and
reciprocity, 457, 461

Manufacturing in Canada,
29; first impulse towards,
27; influenced by United
States, 28; and National
Policy, 469

Marine and fisheries, minis-
ter of, 354

Maritime Provinces, climate
of, 18; and union, 21, 219;
economic interests of, 22;
immigration into, 27; and
crown lands, 56; and union
in 1864, 74, 198; and
Confederation, 180; union
of, urged by Moore, 182;
and overtures for Con-
federation, 195; and jeal-

INDEX

ousy of United Provinces,
'283; divorce courts in,
287; and exclusion of
civil servants from fran-
chise, 320; and protection,
432

Marriage, power over, 230,
232

Melbourne administration,95;
and Lord Durham, 97

Member of house of com-
mons, resignation of, 349;
attendance of, 401; oppor-
tunities of, 425

Merritt, of Lincoln, 183

Metcalfe, Sir C. T., 118, 124,
128, 153, 252; life of, 119;
policy of, 120, 121, 126;
and election of 1844, 125

Metcalfe commission, 134,

13s
Michigan, Lake, 15, 163, 164
Mileage allowances, 279
Militia and defense, minister

of, 354
Mines, minister of, 354
Minister of finance, 353;
his statement to parlia-
ment, 415
Minister of public works, 353
Minister of railways and
canals, 353; from New
Brunswick, 358
Minister of trade and com-
merce, 353
Ministers without portfolio,
361, 390

[528]

Minorities, safeguards for, 240
Minto, Earl of, 256
Molesworth, Sir William, 156 n
Monck, Viscount, governor-
general, 179, 252; and
Confederation, 208
Moncton, 42, 359
Money bills, originating in
lower house, 136; in legis-
lature, 249; and senate,
286; and the cabinet, 373;
procedure on, 409
Montgomery's tavern, 94
Montreal, 24, 26, 33, 34, 37,
79, 106, 132, 150, 167, 360;
as financial center, 36;
population of, 45; and
governing class 72; bad
municipal government in,
500
Moore, Colonel, 182
Move to reduce salary, 361
Mowat, Oliver, 209, 290
Mulock, Sir William, 311 n
Municipal code for United

Provinces, 109
Municipal elections, 346
Municipal government, 500
Municipal ownership, in prai-
rie provinces, 48
Municipalities, and Act of

Union, 109
Munro-Ferguson, 114
Musgrave, General, 5671

Natal, a crown colony to
i893» 3

INDEX

National debt of Great
Britain, and dominions, 4

National grain route, 19,
430; improvements to, 35,
36

National Policy, 169, 457,
463, 466; definition of,
430; beginnings of, 431,
434; and McKinley tariff,
466; results of, 469, 477,
479; and industries, 479;
and farmers, 479, 481;
and high cost of living,
481

National Policy tariffs, 432

National Transcontinental
Railway, 42

Navigation laws, 162, 163;
right to make, 215

Navigation laws. United
States, 33

Navy, British, and Canada,
163

Navy Island, Niagara River,

94

Nelson, B. C, 50

New Brunswick, manufactur-
ing in, 29; and crown
lands, 56; government es-
tablished in, 66; and politi-
cal demands of United
Empire Loyalists, (^\ and
constitutional development,
74; and hemp bounties,
174; adopts Confederation
resolutions, 200; and Con-
federation, 211; and sepa-

rate schools, 241; and the
senate, 270; representation
of, in house of commons,
305; and the cabinet, 358;
and iron industry, 470;
and bicameral system, 484;
and separate schools, 498;
scandals in, 502

Newcastle, Duke of, 161,
170, 292; and colonies,
130; colonial secretary,
155; and Canadian re-
forms, 158, 159; and pro-
tection, 171; and tariff of
1859, 174, 176

Newfoundland, 59, 213; and
protection, 4; area of,
13; population of, in 1783,
60; and Confederation,
275; and fiscal freedom,

443

New Glasgow, 477

Newport News, 35

New South Wales, 61; and
responsible government,
145; and protection, 176

Newspaper organs, 393, 395;
and reciprocity in 191 1,
396

Newspaper press, 262; and
the senate, 291

Newspapers, political rewards
for, 394; and reporting of
parliament, 399; and criti-
cism, 429

New Westminster, 50, 57

New York, 35

C529]

INDEX

New Zealand, 59, 146, 166;
and the British connection,
129; and responsible gov-
ernment, 145; and pro-
tection 176; and fiscal
freedom, 443; and British
preference, 448

Niagara, 75, 106; and meet-
ing of legislature of Upper
Canada 78

Nomination papers, 344

Nordegg, 42

North Bay, Ontario, 38

North, Lord, 63

North Sydney, 45

Northwest Territory, 16

Norway, trade with, 471

Nova Scotia, 327, 371, 430;
climate of, 19; manufac-
turing in, 29; and crown
lands, 56; and United
Empire Loyalists, 63; gov-
ernment of, in 1758, 64;
and constitutional develop-
ment, 74; and tariffs of
United Provinces, 175; and
Confederation resolutions,
200; and Confederation,
211; and separate schools,
241; and the senate, 270;
representation of, in house
of commons, 305; fran-
chise in, 325; and plural
voters, 329; and coal, 433;
and iron industry, 470;
and manufacturing, 471;
bicameral legislature of,

C530]

484, 485; and separate
schools, 498; municipal
government in, 501
Nova ScotiaUf 75

Oaths, of members of parlia-
ment, 379

Obstruction in house of com-
mons, 421-423, 462

Ogdensburg, 33

Ontario, 213, 430; climate of,
18; economic interests of,
22; antagonism of, to
Quebec, 23; and manufac-
turing, 26; and immigra-
tion, 27; and protection,
30; and prairie prov-
inces, 31; and crown
lands, 56; and divorce,
166; and Confederation,
211; and separate schools,
236; and the senate, 270;
and divorce bills, 287;
representation of, in house
of commons, 305; and
the cabinet, 357; and
wheat, 433; and British
preference, 440; and manu-
facturing, 471; abandons
bicameral system, 484; gov-
ernment of, 489; municipal
government in, 501

Open questions, 376

Opposition leader, 352; elec-
tion of, 386; salary of,
387, 388

Orders-in-council, 254, 372

INDEX

Ottawa, 23, 139, 283; foun-
dation of, 24

Pakington, Sir John, 156

Palmerston, Lord, 113, 130

Palmerston-Russell adminis-
tration, 170

Papineau, Louis Joseph, re-
bellion of, 10, 86, 93, 117,
153, 269; life of, 89, 90;
success of, 95, 145; return
of, 137 n

Parliament, British, and re-
bellion losses bill, 144

Parliament, Dominion, and
creation of provinces, 16;
and divorce, 166; as con-
tinuation of United Prov-
inces legislature, 284; and
electoral divisions, 3 10;
duration of, 335; time of
assembling of, 378

Parliamentary candidates in
United Kingdom, Cana-
dians as, 330

Parliamentary reform, move-
ment for, in England, 91

Parliamentary secretaries,

3S4» 363
Party conventions, 339
Party lines in Canada, 263;

after Confederation, 284
Party names in Canada, 148 n
Patronage of the crown, 163,
267, 295; and revision of
electoral rolls, 321; titles
as, 366; and independent

political movements, 480;

and legislative councils, 485
Patrons of Industry, 343, 480,

481
Payne- Aid rich tariff, 461
Payne, Sereno E., 450
Peel, Sir R., 87, 104, 117,

143, IS3

Peerages, 73, 365-370

Pensions for ex-cabinet minis-
ters, 389

Pensions for government offi-
cials, abolition of, de-
manded, 150

Philadelphia, 35

Pitt, 69, 71

Plural office holders, 85

Plural voter, in Canada, 328

Political parties, not recog-
nized by law, 346

Politics, popular interest in,

399
Pontiac, 317
Population of Canada, 305;

and railway mileage, 473;

slow increase, of 477, 479
Pork barrel, in Canada, 85
Port Arthur, 15, 19, 34, 40,

4i> 475
Port Jackson, 61
Portland, 32* 33> 43
Port Nelson, 14, 474
Port Roseway, 63
Postmaster general, 354
Prairie provinces, 29, 30;
and Ontario and Quebec,
31, 45; and immigration,

[531]

INDEX

43; crops of, 44; and the
tariff, 45; politics of, 48;
parliamentary represen-
tation of, 49; forward
policies of, 218; railway
lands in, 473

Preferential tariff for United
Kingdom, 434, see British
preference

Premier, and cabinet, 351,
3SS-3S7. 359; and con-
ferring of titles, 365; and
legislation, 420

Premier, British, and for-
mation of cabinet, 355

President of council, 352

Press gallery, in house of
commons, 39; and prefer-
ment, 397

Press gallery, in senate, 291

Prices in Canada, 41; of
grain, 45

Prime minister, see Premier

Primogeniture, abolition of,
demanded, 149

Prince Edward Island, 31,
305, 327; and crown lands,
56; and United Empire
Loyalists, 63; and fish
bounties, 174; and Con-
federation, 211; and sepa-
rate schools, 241, 498; and
the senate, 270; and the
cabinet, 358; and single-
chamber legislature, 485 ;
municipal government in,
SOI
C532]

Prince Rupert, 42, 50, 57

Private bills, 415; definition
of, 428; in provincial
legislatures, 499

Private members' bills, 415;
definition of, 428; in pro-
vincial legislatures, 493

Privilege, question of, 427,

429
Privy council at Whitehall,

Canadian members of, 363
Privy council for Canada,

251, 338, 361, 364, 371;

members of, in parliament,

390

Procedure of house of com-
mons, 401, 402, 409, 410

Procedure of senate, 284, 285

Progressive Republican

party, 434

Property qualifications, abo-
lition of, demanded, 149,
158

Protection in Canada, and
United States, 28, 30;
movement for, 167, 168;
adopted by Liberals, 395;
and National Policy, 430,
431; and British prefer-
ence, 438; increases in, 440;
and high cost of living, 482

Protective tariff, demand for,
151; Liberal opposition to,
394; as dividing line in
politics, 398; before Na-
tional Policy, 431; Domin-
ion committed to, 434

INDEX

Protectorates, and colonial
office, I

Provinces, North American,
i6; area of, 17; represen-
tation of, 17, 272

Provinces, power to create,
212; and representation in
house of commons, 309;
and electoral franchises,
3". 318

Provincial governments, and
grants to railways, 473;
and advertising, 478; defi-
nition of, 483; dependent
on parliamentary majority,
488; formation of, 489;
salaries of ministers in,
490; revenues of, 493

Provincial legislatures, pow-
ers of, 231; members, of,
and Dominion cabinet,
356; membership of, 486;
salaries of members of,
487; terms of, 487; party
lines in, 488; procedure in,
492; powers of, 494; checks
on, 494

Public Advertiser, 75

Public opinion in Canada,
262

Public works, minister of,

353
Puget Sound, 50

Qualifications, for mem-
bers of legislative council,
j6i; for voters, 319, 325,

327; disappearance of, 328;
for members of house of
commons, 329

Quebec, economic interests
of, 22; antagonism of, to
Ontario, 23; manufactur-
ing in, 26; rural economy,
of, 26; and immigration,
27; and prairie provinces,
31; and crown lands, 56;
and United Empire Loyal-
ists, 63; and constitution
of 1774, 64; and divorce,
166; and Confederation,
211; and legislative union,
220; and separate schools,
236, 240; and the senate,
270; representation of, in
house of commons, 305;
and redistribution, 308;
and electoral franchise, 326;
and plural voters, 329;
and the cabinet, 357; and
iron and steel bounties,
430; and the iron industry,
470; and manufacturing,
471; bicameral legislature
of, 484, 485

Quebec act of 1791, 69, 82;
and number of provinces, 74

Quebec City, 17, 24, 106, 139,
163; legislature meets at,
in 1792, 79

Quebec convention, 199; in-
dependence of, 208; con-
stitution of, 209; and
distribution of powers, 224

[533]

INDEX

Queen Anne, 414

Queen Victoria, 88, 96; and
Canada, 24; and colonial
governors, 113; and Sir
Charles Bagot, 118; and
Sir C. T. Metcalfe, 125;
and Lord Elgin, 127

Questions in Parliament, 426

Quorum of house of commons,
401

Rails, steel, 470

Railway building, 471, 473

Railways and canals, minister
of, 353

Railways, and corruption, 258;
and government grants, 473,
494; mileage of, 473, 475

Readings of bills, 410, 411

Rebellion losses bill, 134,
138, 139; and British
parliament, 144

Reciprocity with United
States, 163, 174, 395, 398;
endangered by Gait tariff,
174, 175; denunciation of
treaty of, 187; in 191 1, 336,
396; and obstruction, 421;
in National Policy, 430,
431, 432; movements for,
4S4> 455, 459; and Cana-
dian tariffs, 455; over-
tures for, from Canada,
456, 459; overtures for,
from United States, 461;
opposition to, in 191 1, 462;
in wheat and flour, 467

[534]

Red chamber, 280
Redistribution act of 1882,

310, 341
Redistribution act of 1914,

18
Redistribution, after census,

306, 307, 309; principle

of, 308; in 1903, 312; in

1914, 314
Reforms, demand for, in

Upper Canada, 148-15 1;

and British parliament,

160
Regal chair, 255
Regina, Sask., 17, 26
Registrars of deeds, ineligible

to parliament, 334
Reporting of parliamentary

debates, 397
Reserved bills, 157, 214
Residential qualification for

members of parliament,

330, 332

Resolutions, preceding bills,
415, 416

Responsible government, de-
fined, 2; development of,
9; granted to dominions,
12; granting of, in, 163;
and Sir C. Bagot, 118;
and Sir C. T. Metcalfe, 120;
and Robert Baldwin, 124;
in United Provinces, 127;
and Elgin, 133, 139; on
trial, 142; and Earl Rus-
sell, 144; extended in 1850,
145; conceded to United

INDEX

Provinces, 164; or military
rule, 176; definition of,
248; based on usage, 249;
and corruption, 259; and
Canadian leadership, 260;
and people of Canada,
261; from 1840, 487; in
provinces, 495

Retaliation, against Gei>
many, 445

Returning officers, 339, 342,

348
Revelstoke, B. C, 50
Rhodes, Edgar, 381 «
Riddell, Justice, 65 n, (i^ n, 71

«, 261 n, 409 n, 414 n\ on

United States Supreme

Court, 499
Ridings, county divisions, 316
Robertson, Senator J. E.,

27871
Robinson, Sir John Beverley,

first Canadian baronet,

73 n
Roebuck, J. A., 116, 119, 207
Roll call of house of commons,

401
Roman Catholic church, and

Quebec constitution of

1774, 65; and American

Revolution, 65
Roman Catholics, as electors,

69; and separate schools,

236, 240, 244, 24s, 497;

in Canada in 1867, 238;

and the cabinet, 358
Rose, attorney-general, 168

Rossland, B. C, 50
Rouges, Liberals, 148
Royal assent, 412, 419
Royal commission, 429
Royalties, mining, 416, 494
Russell, Lord John, 104;
and Act of Union of 1840,
no; and Earl of Elgin,
127; and rebellion losses
bill, 143; and responsible
government, 145; and Con-
federation, 221
Russell administration, 136

St. Denis, 94
St. John, 24, 33, 43
St. John River, 66
St. Lawrence, 14, 460; and
development of Canada,

15
St. Lawrence canals, 36, 147,

151. 475
St. Lawrence ship channel,

36, 475
St. Michael and St. George,

order of, 363
Salisbury, Marquis of, 333,

443

San Francisco, 187

Saskatchewan, 14, 31, 41,
186, 188, 212, 474; created
a province, 16; climate of,
18; and crown lands, 56;
and divorce, 166; and
federal union, 217; and
separate schools, 239, 243,
374; and the senate, 270;

[535]

INDEX

representation of, in house
of commons, 305, 309;
and the cabinet, 358; and
enfranchisement of women,
376; and British prefer-
ence, 440; and single-
chamber legislature, 485

Saskatoon, 44

Sault Ste. Marie, canal locks
at, 35; and steel rails,
470, 475

Scandals at Ottawa, 257, 258;
in municipal government,
502

Schools, in Upper Canada
in 1867, 237

Schools, separate, see Sepa-
rate schools

Scotch immigration, 27

Second chambers in Canada,
289, 292, 303

Secretary of state, 354

Secretary of state for external
affairs, 352

Sectarian schools, 236

Select standing committees
of house of commons, 407;
powers of, 408

Senate, Dominion, 267; and
elective principle, 268; and
money bills, 269; appoint-
ment to, as patronage, 270,
293 > 29s; use of, 272, 303;
bills rejected by, 272, 299;
an independent body, 277;
seating of members of,
281; and the cabinet, 282;

C536]

procedure in, 284; divorce
bills in, 284, 286, 303; and
tariff legislation, 286; num-
ber of bills in, 286; as
revising chamber, 288; its
place in Canada, 289;
agitation against, 291; no
office holders in, 292; and
house of commons, 296;
first appointments to, 297;
adverse majorities in, 297;
docility of, 299; vacancies
in, 300; applicants for, 300,
301; party service by, 303;
and speech from throne,
402; and finance bills, 418 .

Senatorial divisions of Que- I
bee, 268, 270, 271 *

Senators, qualifications of,
267; number of, 273, 275;
appointments of, to break
deadlock, 275; tenure of,
276, 277; resignation of,
278; vacation of seat
of, 278; payments to, 278;
age of, 294; periods of
vigilance of, 298

Separate schools, 236, 244,

245» 374. 497
Sergeant at arms, 280, 378,

383,384

Sheep industry, 44

Sheffield, 171

Sherbrooke, 106

Sheriffs, ineligible to parlia-
ment, 334; and elections,
337

INDEX

Shipbuilding in Canada, 35,

477
Sifton, minster of interior,

374

Simcoe, John Graves, 78 n

"Six months' hoist," 410

Slavery forbidden in Upper
Canada, 78

Smith, Goldwin, 262 n

Soap, duties on, 168

Socialist movements, 480

Solicitor-general, 354, 363

Sorel, Quebec, 79

Soulanges, 314

South Africa, Union of, 443,
448

Southampton, 129

South Australia, and pro-
tection, 177

Speaker, British, 379

Speaker of house of commons,
378* 379; choice of, 380;
duty of, 382; patronage
of, 382; election of, 384;
and governor-general, 420

Speaker of house of repre-
sentatives, 380

Speaker of legislative council,
158

Speaker of senate, 280, 295

Speakerships, as spoils, 295

Spectator, The, Hamilton, 168

Speech from the throne, 284,
402

Speeches, time limit for, 403,
422

Spoils, political, 295, 296

Stagesof bills, 411

Stanley, Lord, Earl of Derby,

104, 121, 126, 205, 256
State church, attempt to

establish, 70
State departments, 363
Stickene River, 299
Stimson, 71 n, 105 n
Stony Plain, 42
Strathcona, Lord, 439 «
Strong, Sir Henry, 215
Stuart, John, 165 n
Subsidies to railways, 494
Subventions to provinces, 493
Sudbury, Ontario, 40
Supplies, voting of, 415
Surtax, German, 446
Sword, girding with, 328
Sydenham, Lord, 97, iii,

112, 119, 120, 128, 145,

179, 248; life of, 113;

character of, 115
Sydney, N. S., 45, 175, 436;

and steel rails, 470
Sydney, New South Wales,

61

Tache-Macdonald govern-
ment, 197
Taft, William H., 225 n, 461
Tariff, dividing line in poli-
tics, 47; schedules of, 436;
and commercial treaties,

447
Tariff duties in Canada, 109,
150, 162; right to enact,
165, 166; rates of, in 1856,

C537]

INDEX

167; and reciprocity with

United States, 455
Tariff for revenue only, 417
Tariff of 1870, 432; discon-
tent with, 433
Tariff policy of Dominion,

37; enunciated by Gait,

172
Tariff preferences, 4
Taxation, imposing of, 415;

resolutions for, 415, 416
Teslin Lake, 299
Textile industry, 37
Thomson, Poulett, Lord

Sydenham, 97
Thompson, premier, 363
Thornton, British minister,

454
Three Rivers, 26, 79, 106
Tilley, Samuel Leonard, 209
Titles, new attitude towards,
365; bargains for, 366;
agitation against, 367;
minute of council against,
368
Toronto, 17, 24, 37, 106, 123,
150, 167, 360; as financial
center, 36; population of,
45; and governing class,
72; became capital, 75;
as capital, 489
Toronto East, 316
Toronto West, 3 16
Toryism in Canada, 84
Townshend, Thomas, 64
Trade and commerce, minis-
ter of, 353

C538]

Transport policy of Do-
minion, 37

Transport system of central
Canada, 29

Treasury bench, 392

Treaties, British, and Do-
minion of Canada, 215,
442

Treaties, commercial, ap-
pointment of plenipoten-
tiaries for, 10; and British
preference, 442

Tupper, Sir Charles, 11, 198,
332, 363, 458 n; and Con-
federation, 209, 226; and
separate schools, 245

Two Mountains, 317

Two-party system, 343

Underwood-Simmons tariff,
467

Union of Quebec and On-
tario, 10

United Empire Loyalists,
61, 168; exodus of, from
United States, 62; settle-
ment of, in Canada, 63;
and Quebec constitution,
64; and New Brunswick,
66; and Family Compacts,
72; and United States, 84

United Farmers of Ontario,
480

United Provinces, constitu-
tion of, 105; legislature of,
106, 112, 154; political
civilization of, 146; and

INDEX

tariff laws, 147; develop-
ment of, 147; and British
cabinet, 152; and clergy
reserves, 156; and amend-
ments to constitution, 157-
159; concessions to, 163;
rights assumed by, 164;
protection in, 168, 432; and
Confederation, 180; dead-
lock in, 189; and sugges-
tions for Confederation,
195; instability in, 197;
adopt Confederation reso-
lutions, 200; dominant in
Dominion parliament, 283

United States constitution,
compared with British
North America act, 227

United States, influence on
Canada, 9, 166, 180, 465,
467; between 1820 and
1837, 83; in 1838, 99;
and protection in Canada,
169,465; equality of treat-
ment of, 177; opposition
of, to Confederation, 200;
mistakes of, emphasized,
224; and British prefer-
ence, 449, 450; and reci-
procity, 454, 455

United States supreme court,

499
University representation in

Canada, 315 n
Upper Canada, 74; created

in 1 79 1, 67; constitutional

contribution of, 75; and

British law, 78; and In»-
port duties, 81; corruption
in government of, 82;
population of, in 1838,
loi; and disputes with
Lower Canada, 102; repre-
sentation of, 106; political
development of, 147; re-
formers of, 148; discontent
with representation of, 183;
and defense of northwest
provinces, 188
Upper chambers, 74

Vancouver, 24, 51, 57

Vancouver Island, description
of, 49, 50; history of, 54

Van Dieman's Land, 61;
and responsible govern-
ment, 145

Veto power, 414, 495

Victoria, 17, 24; description
of> 49~Si; and protection,
176

Wages, of members of parlia-
ment, 69

Wages, of senators, 278

Wallace, 62 n

Ways and means, committee
on, 415

Weaver, Emily, 64 n

Welland canal, 35, 147, 151,

475
Wellington, Duke of, 87, 104,
143; and Sir C. Bagot,
117; maxim of, 265

C539]

INDEX

West Australia, a crown

colony, to 1890, 3
West IndieS; and British

preference, 448
Wheat growing in Ontario,

433
Whigs, and Canadian con-
stitution of 1774, 64
Whips, party, 401, 402, 429
Whitemouth, Manitoba, 42
Whitney administration, 490
Wilberforce, 156
William IV, and colonies, 95
Willson, Beckles, 439 n
Wilson, James, 113
Winnipeg, 17, 24, 41, 42,

314, 471; formerly Fo

Garry, 52
Woolen duties and Britis

preference, 452
Wrecking, reciprocity in, 46
Writs, for elections, 338, 34:
Wrong, Professor, 290; anc

the senate, 294

Yale, Caribou, 317
York, now Toronto, 75
Young, Sir John, governor-
general, 207 n
Yukon, territory of, 16; and
representation in house
commons, 305

)use oi

C540]

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
BERKELEY

Return to desk {rom which borrowed.
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.

20Aug'53L0

REC'D LD
NOV 2 5 1956

^ IN STACKJ:

NOV 1 8 m

8EC. CIR.0C1 18 "77

LD 21-100ro-7,'62(A2528sX6)476

XB 65474

845822

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY