|
|
men's minds, and a feeling of the responsibilities attaching to self-
government had had time to grow up.
His first letter on the subject is to Lord Grey, written so early as April
26,1848:--
The question which you raise in your last letter respecting the
military defence of Canada is a large one, and, before irrevocable
steps be taken, it may be well to look at it on all sides.
The first consideration which offers itself in connection with this
subject is this, 'Why does Canada require to be defended, and against
whom?' A very large number of persons in this community believe that
there is only one power from which they have anything to dread, and
that this power would be converted into the fastest friend, bone of
their bone, and flesh of their flesh, if the connection with Great
Britain were abandoned.
In this respect the position of Canada is peculiar. When you say to
any other colony 'England declines to be longer at the expense of
protecting you,' you at once reveal to it the extent of its dependence
and the value of Imperial support. But it is not so here. Withdraw
your protection from Canada, and she has it in her power to obtain the
security against aggression enjoyed by Michigan or Maine: about as
good security, I must allow, as any which is to be obtained at the
present time.
But you may observe in reply to this, 'You cannot get the security
which Michigan and Maine enjoy for nothing; you must purchase it by
the surrender of your custom houses and public lands, the proceeds of
which will be diverted from their present uses and applied to others,
at the discretion of a body in which you will have comparatively
little to say.' The argument is a powerful one, so long as England
consents to bear the cost of the defence of the Colony, but its force
is much lessened when the inhabitants are told that they must look to
their own safety, because the mother-country can no longer afford to
take care of them.
On the other hand very weighty reasons may be adduced in favour of the
policy of requiring the province to bear some portion at least of the
charge of its own protection. The adoption of free-trade, although its
advocates must believe that it tends to make the Colonies in point of
fact less chargeable than heretofore, will doubtless render the
English people more than ever jealous of expenditure incurred on their
behalf. I am, moreover, of opinion, that the system of relieving the
colonists altogether from the duty of self-defence is attended with
injurious effects upon themselves. It checks the growth of national
and manly morals. Men seldom think anything worth preserving for which
they are never asked to make a sacrifice.
My view, therefore, would be that it is desirable that a movement in
the direction which you Lave indicated should take place, but that it
ought to be made with much caution.
The present is not a favourable moment for experiments. British
statesmen, even Secretaries of State, have got into the habit lately
of talking of the maintenance of the connection between Great Britain
and Canada with so much indifference, that a change of system in
respect of military defence incautiously carried out, might be
presumed by many to argue, on the part of the mother-country, a
disposition to prepare the way for separation. Add to this, that you
effected, only a few years ago, a union between the Upper and Lower
Provinces by arbitrary means, and for objects the avowal of which has
profoundly irritated the French population; that still more recently
you have deprived Canada of her principal advantages in the British
markets; that France and Ireland are in flames, and that nearly half
of the population of this Colony are French, nearly half of the
remainder Irish.
That Canada felt no need of bulwarks except against England's foes was a
point on which he constantly insisted. On one occasion he wrote:--
Only one absurdity can be greater, pardon me for saying so, than the
absurdity of supposing that the British Parliament will pay L200,000
for Canadian fortifications; it is the absurdity of supposing that
Canadians will pay it themselves.
L200,000 for defences! and against whom? against the Americans. And
who are the Americans? Your own kindred, a flourishing swaggering
people, who are ready to make room for you at their own table, to give
you a share of all they possess, of all their prosperity, and to
guarantee you in all time to come against the risk of invasion, or the
need of defences, if you will but speak the word!
[Sidenote: Recommends gradual reduction of forces.]
On the whole he was of opinion that the Government should quietly, and
_sans phrase_, remove their troops altogether from some points, reduce
them in others, and 'aim at the eventual substitution of a Major-General's
command for that of a Lieutenant-General in Canada; but that nothing should
be done hastily or _per saltum_, so as to alarm the Colonists with the
idea that some new and strange principle was going to be applied to them.'
You may if you please (he wrote) largely reduce the staff, and more
moderately the men, leaving the remainder in the best barracks. I
think you may do this without, in any material degree, increasing the
tendency towards annexation; provided always that you make no noise
about it.... But, I repeat it, you must not, unless you wish to drive
the Colony away from you, impose new burdens upon the Colonists at
this time.[7]
The course thus sketched out he himself steadily pursued; and his last
letters on the subject, written early in 1853 to the Duke of Newcastle, who
had recently become Secretary for the Colonies, were occupied in
recommending a continuance of the same quietly progressive policy:
When I came here we had a Commander-in-Chief and two Major-Generals.
We have now only one General on the Station, and the staff has
undergone proportional diminution. If further reductions are to be
made, let them be effected in the same quiet way without parade or the
ostentatious adoption of new principles as applicable to the defence
of colonies which are exposed, as Canada is by reason of their
connection with Great Britain, to the hazard of assaults from
organised powers.
Continue then, if you will pardon me for so freely tendering advice,
to apply in the administration of our local affairs the principles of
Constitutional Government frankly and fairly. Do not ask England to
make unreasonable sacrifices for the Colonists, but such sacrifices as
are reasonable, on the hypothesis that the Colony is an exposed part
of the empire. Induce her if you can to make them generously and
without appearing to grudge them. Let it be inferred from your
language that there is in your opinion nothing in the nature of things
to prevent the tie which connects the Mother-country and the Colony
from being as enduring as that which unites the different States of
the Union, and nothing in the nature of our very elastic institutions
to prevent them from expanding so as to permit the free and healthy
development of social, political, and national life in these young
communities. By administering colonial affaire in this spirit you will
find, I believe, even when you least profess to seek it, the true
secret of the cheap defence of nations. If these communities are only
truly attached to the connection and satisfied of its permanence (and,
as respects the latter point, opinions here will be much influenced by
the tone of statesmen at home), elements of self-defence, not moral
elements only but material elements likewise, will spring up within
them spontaneously as the product of movements from within, not of
pressure from without. Two millions of people, in a northern latitude,
can do a good deal in the way of helping themselves when their hearts
are in the right place.
[1] Colonial Policy, i. 232.
[2] 'United Empire Loyalists,' i.e. descendants of the original Loyalists
of the American War.
[3] Despatch of the Earl of Elgin, Dec. 18, 1854.
[4] Compare _Junius_:--'Unfortunately for his country, Mr. Grenville
was at any rate to be distressed, because he was Minister: and Mr.
Pitt and Lord Camden were to be the patrons of America, because they
were in opposition. Their declaration gave spirit and argument to the
Colonies; and while, perhaps, they meant no more than the ruin of a
Minister, they in effect divided one half of the empire from the
other.'
[5] 'Perhaps I may see reason after a little more experience here to modify
my opinion on these points. If I were to tell you what I now think of
the relative amount of influence which I exercised over the march, of
affairs in Canada, where I governed on strictly constitutional
principles, and with a free Parliament, as compared with that which
the Governor-General wields in India _when at peace_, you would
accuse me of paradox.'--_Letter to Sir C. Wood, December 9,1862._
[6] Vide infra, p. 159.
[7] In entire accordance with this view, Be recommended that Great Britain
should take upon herself the payment of the Governor's salary, 'with a
view to future contingencies, and to calls which at a period more or
less remote we may have to make on the loyalty and patriotism of
Canadians.'
CHAPTER VI.
CANADA.
THE 'CLERGY RESERVES'--HISTORY OF THE QUESTION--MIXED MOTIVES OF THE
MOVEMENT--FEELING IN THE PROVINCE--IN UPPER CANADA--IN LOWER CANADA--AMONG
ROMAN CATHOLICS--IN THE CHURCH--SECULARIZATION--QUESTIONS OF EMIGRATION,
LABOUR, LAND-TENURE, EDUCATION, NATIVE TRIBES--RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED
STATES--MUTUAL COURTESIES--FAREWELL TO CANADA--AT HOME.
[Sidenote: The 'Clergy Reserves']
We have had frequent occasion to observe that the guiding principle of Lord
Elgin's policy was to let the Colony have its own way in everything which
was not contrary either to public morality or to some Imperial interest. It
was in this spirit that he passed the Rebellion Losses Act; and in this
spirit he watched the contest which raged for many years on the memorable
question of the 'Clergy Reserves.'
[Sidenote: History of the question.]
By the Canada Act of 1791 one-seventh of the lands then ungranted had been
set apart for the support of a 'Protestant Clergy.' At first these reserves
were regarded as the exclusive property of the Church of England; but in
1820 an opinion was obtained from the Law Officers of the Crown in England,
that the clergy of the Church of Scotland had a right to a share in them,
but not Dissenting Ministers. In 1840 an Act was passed in which the claims
of other denominations also were distinctly recognised. By it the Governor
was empowered to sell the reserves; a part of the proceeds was to be
applied in payment of the salaries of the existing clergy, to whom the
faith of the Crown had been pledged; one-half of the remainder was to go to
the Churches of England and Scotland, in proportion to their respective
numbers, and the other half was to be at the disposal of the Governor-
General for the benefit of the clergy of any Protestant denomination
willing to receive public aid.
But the old inveterate jealousy of Anglican ascendency, aggravated, it is
said, by the political conduct of Bishop Strachan, who had identified his
Church with the obnoxious rule of the Family Compact, was not content with
these concessions. Allying itself with the voluntary spirit, caught from
the Scottish Free Church movement in 1843, it took the shape of a fanatical
opposition to everything in the nature of a public provision for the
support of religion; and the cry was raised for the 'Secularisation of the
Clergy Reserves.' Eagerly taken up, as was natural, by the Ultra-radicals,
or 'Clear-grits,' the cry was echoed by a considerable section of the old
Tory party, from motives which it is less easy to analyse; and so violent
was the feeling that it threatened to sweep away at one stroke all the
endowments in question, without regard to vested interests, and without
even waiting for the repeal of the Imperial Act by which these endowments
were guaranteed. More loyal and moderate counsels however prevailed, owing
chiefly to the support which they received from the Roman Catholics of
Lower Canada, at one time so violently disaffected. In 1850 the Assembly
voted an Address to the Queen, praying that the Act referred to might be
repealed, and that the Local Legislature might be empowered to dispose of
the reserved lands, subject to the condition of securing to the existing
holders for their lives the stipends to which they were then entitled. To
this Address a favourable answer was returned by Lord Grey; who, while
avowing the preference of Her Majesty's Government for the existing
arrangement, by which a certain portion of the public lands of Canada were
applied to religious uses, admitted at the same time that the question of
maintaining it was one so exclusively affecting the people of Canada, that
its decision ought not to be withdrawn from the Provincial Legislature.
A Bill for granting to the Colony the desired powers was intended to be
introduced into Parliament during the session of 1851, but owing to the
pressure of other business it was deferred to the next year. It was to have
been brought forward in a few days, when the break-up of Lord John
Russell's Ministry caused it to be again postponed; and it was not till May
9, 1853, that the long looked-for Act received the Queen's assent.
No action could be taken in the matter by the Colonial Parliament for
that year, as its session closed on June 14; and when it met again next
year a ministerial crisis, followed by a dissolution and a change of
Ministers, caused a postponement of all legislation. Finally, on October
17, 1854, a Bill for the 'Secularisation of the Clergy Reserves' was
introduced into the Assembly. The more moderate and thoughtful men of every
party are said to have been at heart opposed to it; but it was impossible
for them to stand against the current of popular feeling. The Bill speedily
became law; the Clergy Reserves were handed over to the various municipal
corporations for secular uses; and though by this means 'a noble provision
made for the sustentation of religion was frittered away so as to produce
but few beneficial results,'[1] a question which had long been the
occasion of much heart-burning was at least settled, and settled for ever.
A slender provision for the future was saved out of the wreck by the
commutation of the reserved life-interests of incumbents, which laid the
foundation of a small permanent endowment; but, with this exception, the
equality of destitution among all Protestant communities was complete.[2]
The various stages through which this question passed may be traced in the
following letters, of which the first was written to Lord Grey on July 5,
1850:
Two addresses to the Queen were voted by the Assembly a few days ago
and brought up by the House to me for transmission. The one is an
address, very loyal in its tone, deprecating all revolutionary
changes.
[Sidenote: Address to the Queen.]
The other address is not so satisfactory. It prays Her Majesty to
obtain the repeal of the Imperial Act on the Clergy Reserves passed in
1840, and to hand them over to the Canadian Parliament to deal with
them as it may see fit--guaranteeing, however, the life interests of
incumbents. The resolutions on which this address was founded were
introduced by a member of the Government, which has treated the
question as an _open_ one.
You are sufficiently acquainted with Canadian history to be aware of
the fact, that these unfortunate Clergy Reserves have been a bone of
contention ever since they were set apart. I know how very
inconvenient it is to repeal the Imperial Act which was intended to be
a final settlement of the question; but I must candidly say I very
much doubt whether you will be able to preserve the Colony if you
retain it on the Statute Book. Even Lafontaine and others who
recognise certain vested rights of the Protestant churches under the
Constitutional Act, advocate the repeal of the Imperial Act of 1840:
partly because Lower Canada was not consulted at all when it was
passed; and, secondly, because the distribution made under that Act is
an unfair one, and inconsistent with the views of the Upper Canadian
Legislature, as expressed at the time but set aside in deference, as
it is alleged, to the remonstrances of the English bishops. Some among
the Anglo-Saxon Liberals, and some of the Orange Tories, I suspect,
share these views.
A considerable section is for appropriating the proceeds of the
reserves at once, and applying them to education, without any regard
to the rights either of individuals or of churches. These persons are
furious with the supporters of the address for proposing to preserve
the life interests of incumbents. The sentiments of the remainder are
pretty accurately conveyed by the terms of the address.
* * * * *
_To the Earl Grey._
Toronto, July 19, 1850.
[Sidenote: Reasons for agreeing.]
The 'Clear Grit' organs, which have absorbed a large portion of the
'Annexationists,' talk very big about what they will do if England
steps in to preserve the 'Clergy Reserves.' That party would be only
too glad to get up a quarrel with England on such a point. It is, of
course, impossible for you to do anything with the Imperial Act till
next session. A little delay may perhaps enable us to see our way more
clearly with respect to this most perplexing subject.
Lord Sydenham's despatch of January 22,1840, is a curious and
instructive one. It accompanies the Act on the 'Clergy Reserve'
question, which he induced the Parliament of Upper Canada to pass, but
which was not adopted at home; for the House of Lords concocted one
more favourable to the Established Churches. He clearly admits that
the Act is against the sense of the country, and that nothing but his
own great personal influence got it through, and yet he looks upon it
as a settlement of the question. I confess I see few of the conditions
of finality in measures which are passed under such circumstances.
* * * * *
_To the Earl Grey._
Toronto, March 18,1851.
I am far from thinking that the 'Clergy Reserves' will necessarily be
diverted from religious purposes if the Local Parliament has the
disposal of them. I should feel very confident that this would not be
the case, were it not that the tone adopted by the Church of England
here has almost always the effect of driving from her even those who
would be most disposed to cooperate with her if she would allow them.
* * * * *
_To the Earl Grey._
Toronto, June 14,1851.
On the whole the best chance for the Church interest as regards the
question, in my judgment, is that you should carry your empowering
bill through the Imperial Parliament this session, and that we should
get through our session and the general election, which is about to
follow, with as little excitement as possible. The province is
prosperous and the people contented; and at such a time, if no
disturbing cause arise, moderate and reasonable men are likely to be
returned. At the same time the 'Clergy Reserve' question is
sufficiently before the public to insure our getting from the returns
to Parliament a pretty fair indication of what are the real sentiments
of the people upon it. I need not say that there can be no security
for the permanence of any arrangement which is not in tolerable
conformity with those sentiments.
* * * * *
_To the Earl Grey._
July 12,1851.
[Sidenote: Movement not prompted by Roman Catholics.]
As to the insinuation that the movement against the endowments of the
Church of England is prompted by the Romans, events will give the lie
to it ere long. The following facts, however, seem to be wholly
irreconcilable with this hypothesis. Before the Union of the Provinces
there were very few, if any, Roman Catholic members in the Upper
Canada Parliament; they were all-powerful in the Lower. Now it is
recorded in history, that the Upper Canadian Legislative Assembly kept
up year after year a series of assaults on the 'Clergy Reserves;' in
proof of which read the narrative part of the Address to Her Majesty
on the 'Clergy Reserves' from the Legislative Assembly last year. And
it is equally a fact that the Lower Canadian Legislative Assembly
never meddled with them, except I think once, when they were invited
to do so by the Government.
Some months later, in the beginning of 1852, Lord John Russell's
Administration was broken up, and Lord Grey handed over the seals of the
Colonial Office to Sir John Pakington. One of the first subjects on which
the new Secretary asked to be furnished with confidential information was
as to the state of public feeling in Canada upon the question of the future
disposal of the 'Clergy Reserves.' Lord Elgin replied as follows:
[Sidenote: Feeling in the Province;]
You require, if I rightly understand your letter, that I should state,
in the first place, whether I believe that the sentiments of the
community in reference to the subject-matter of this Address are
faithfully represented in the votes of the Assembly. I cannot answer
this question otherwise than affirmatively. Not that I am by any means
disposed to under-rate the importance of the petitions which may have
been sent home by opponents of the measure. The clergy of the Church
of England and of that portion of the Presbyterian Church which
preserves its connection with the Established Church of Scotland, are
generally unwilling that the question of the reserves should be left
to the decision of the Local Legislature. They are, to a considerable
extent, supported by their flocks when they approach the throne as
petitioners against the prayer of the Assembly's Address, although it
is no doubt an error to suppose that the lay members of these
communions are unanimous, or all alike zealous in the espousal of
these views. From this quarter the petitions which appear to have
reached Lord Grey and yourself have, I apprehend, almost exclusively
proceeded. Other bodies, even of those which participate in the
produce of the reserves, as for example the Wesleyans and the Roman
Catholics of Upper Canada, have not, that I am aware of, moved in the
matter, unless it be in an opposite direction.
[Sidenote: in Upper Canada;]
[Sidenote: in Lower Canada;]
Can it then be inferred from such indications that public opinion in
the province does not support the cause taken by the Assembly in
reference to the 'Clergy Reserves'? or, what is perhaps more to the
purpose, that a provincial administration, formed on the principle of
desisting from all attempts to induce the Imperial Government to
repeal the Imperial statute on this subject, would be sustained? I am
unable, I confess, to bring myself to entertain any such expectation.
It is my opinion, that if the Liberals were to rally out of office on
the cry that they were asserting the right of the Provincial
Government to deal with the question of the 'Clergy Reserves' against
a Government willing, at the bidding of the Imperial authorities, to
abandon this claim, they would triumph in Upper Canada more decisively
than they did at the late general election. I need hardly add, that
if, after a resistance followed by such a triumph, the Imperial
Government were to give way, it would be more than ever difficult to
obtain from the victorious party a reasonable consideration for Church
interests. These remarks apply to Upper Canada. It is not so easy to
foresee what is likely to be the course of events in Lower Canada. The
party which looks to M. Papineou as its leader adopts on all points
the most ultra-democratic creed. It professes no very warm attachment
to the endowments of the Roman Catholic Church, and is, of course, not
likely to prove itself more tender with respect to property set apart
by royal authority for the support of Protestantism. The French-
Canadian Representatives who do not belong to this party are, I
believe, generally disinclined to secularisation, and would be brought
to consent to any such proposition, if at all, only by the pressure of
some supposed political necessity. They are however, almost without
exception, committed to the principle that the 'Clergy Reserves' ought
to be subject to the control of the Local Legislature. While the
battle is waged on this ground, therefore, they will probably continue
to side with the Upper Canada Liberals, unless the latter contrive to
alienate them by some act of extravagance....
I am aware that there lie, beyond the subjects of which I have
treated, larger considerations of public policy affecting this
question, on which I have not ventured to touch. On the one hand there
are persons who contend that, as the 'Clergy Reserves' were set apart
by a British Sovereign for religious uses, it is the bounden duty of
the Imperial authorities to maintain at all hazards the disposition
thus made of them. This view is hardly, I think, reconcilable with the
provisions of the statute of 1791; but, if it be correct, it renders
all discussion of subordinate topics and points of mere expediency,
superfluous.
[Sidenote: In the Church;]
On the other hand even among the most attached friends of the Church,
some are to be found who doubt whether on the whole the Church has
gained from the Reserves as much as she has lost by them--whether the
ill-will which they have engendered, and the bar which they have
proved to private munificence and voluntary exertion, have not more
than counter-balanced the benefits which they may have conferred; and
who look to secularisation as the only settlement that will be final
and put an end to strife.
Up to this time Lord Elgin appears to have entertained at least a hope,
that, if the Colony were left to itself, it would settle the matter by
distributing the reserved funds according to some equitable proportion
among the clergy of all denominations. But as time went on, this hope
became fainter and fainter. In his next letter he recounts a conversation
with a person (not named) 'of much intelligence, and well acquainted with
Upper Canada,' not a member of the Church of England, but favourable to the
maintenance of an endowment for religious purposes, who, after remarking on
the infatuation shown by the friends of the Church in 1840, expressed a
decided opinion that the vantage ground then so heedlessly sacrificed was
lost for ever, so far as colonial sentiment was concerned; and that
'neither the present nor any future Canadian Parliament would be induced to
enact a law for perpetuating the endowment in any shape.' The increasing
likelihood, however, of a result which he regarded as in itself undesirable
could not abate his desire to see the matter finally settled, or shake his
conviction that the Provincial Parliament was the proper power to settle
it. With his correspondent it was not so; nor can it be wondered at that
the organ of a Tory Government should have declined to accede to the prayer
of an Address, which could hardly have any other issue than secularisation.
But the decision was not destined to be left in the hands of the Tories.
Before the end of 1852 Lord Derby was replaced by Lord Aberdeen, and Sir J.
Pakington by Lord Elgin's old friend the Duke of Newcastle, who saw at once
the necessity of conceding to the Canadian Parliament the power of settling
the question after its own fashion. Accordingly on May 21, 1853, Lord Elgin
was able to write to him as follows:
[Sidenote: Empowering Bill passed.]
I was certainly not a little surprised by the success with which you
carried the Clergy Reserves Bill through the House of Lords. I am assured
that this result was mainly due to your own personal exertions. I am quite
confident that both in what you have done, and in the way you have done it,
you have best consulted the interests of the Province, the Church, and the
Empire. I trust that what has happened will have here the favourable moral
effect which you anticipate. It cannot fail to have this tendency.
As respects the measures which will be ultimately adopted on this vexed
subject, I do not yet venture to write with confidence. If the
representation of the Bishop of Toronto, as to the feelings which exist
among the great Protestant denominations on the question, were correct,
there could be no doubt whatsoever in regard to the issue. For you may
depend upon it the Roman Catholics have no wish to touch the Protestant
endowment; although, when they are forced into the controversy, they will
contend that it does not rest on the same basis as their own. But I confess
that I place no reliance whatsoever on these calculations and
representations. Almost the greatest evil which results from the delegation
to the Imperial Parliament of the duty of legislating on Colonial questions
of this class, is the scope which the system affords to exaggeration and
mystification. Parties do not meet in fair conflict on their own ground,
where they can soon gain a knowledge of their relative strength, and learn
to respect each other accordingly; they shroud themselves in mystery, and
rely for victory on their success in outdoing each other in hard swearing.
Many men, partly from good nature and partly from political motives, will
sign a petition spiced and peppered to tickle the palate of the House of
Lords, who will not move a yard, or sacrifice a shilling, on behalf of the
object petitioned for. I much fear that it will be found that there is much
division of opinion even among members of the laity of the Church, with
respect to the propriety of maintaining the 'Clergy Reserves;' and that,
even as regards a certain section of the clergy, owing to dissatisfaction
with the distribution of the fund and with the condition of dependence in
which the missionaries are kept, there is greater lukewarmness on the
subject than the fervent representations you have received would lead you
to imagine.
Meanwhile there is a very good feeling in the Province--a great absence of
party violence. Your course has tended to confirm these favourable
symptoms. We must prevent anything being done during this session of the
Provincial Parliament to commit parties with respect to the 'Clergy
Reserves,' and as respects the future we must hope for the best.
[Sidenote: The Reserves secularised.]
The result has been already stated. The 'Clergy Reserves' were secularised,
contrary, no doubt, to the individual wishes of Lord Elgin; but the general
principle of Colonial self-government had signally triumphed, and its
victory more than outweighed to him the loss of any particular cause.
One other measure remains to be noticed, on which Lord Elgin had the
satisfaction of inducing the Home Government to yield to the wishes of the
Colony, viz. the Reform of the Provincial Parliament.
[Sidenote: Reform of the Provincial Parliament.]
By the Constitution of 1840 the legislative power was divided between two
chambers: a council, consisting of twenty persons, who were nominated by
the Governor, and held their seats for life; and a House of Assembly, whose
eighty-four members were elected in equal proportions from the two sections
of the province. As the population of the Colony grew--and between 1840 and
1853 it nearly doubled itself--it was natural that the number of
legislators should be increased; and there were other reasons which made an
increase desirable.
[Sidenote: Increase of representation.]
The Legislative Assembly (wrote Lord Elgin early in 1853) is now
engaged on a measure introduced by the Government for increasing the
representation of the province. I consider the object of the measure a
very important one; for, with so small a body as eighty members, when
parties are nearly balanced, individual votes become too precious,
which leads to mischief. I have not experienced this evil to any great
extent since I have had a liberal administration, which has always
been strong in the Assembly; but, with my first administration, I felt
it severely.
To this change no serious opposition was offered, either in the Colony or
in the Imperial Parliament; and the members of the two Houses were raised
to one hundred and thirty, and seventy-two, respectively. It was otherwise,
however, with the proposal to make the Upper House elective; a measure
certainly alien to English ideas, but one which Lord Elgin appears to have
thought necessary for the healthy working of the constitution under the
circumstances then existing in the province. As early as March, 1850, he
wrote to Lord Grey:--
[Sidenote: Proposal to make the Upper House elective.]
[Sidenote: Reasons in favour.]
A great deal is said here at present about rendering our second branch
of the Legislature elective. As the advocates of the plan, however,
comprise two classes of persons, with views not only distinct but
contradictory, it is difficult to foresee how they are to agree on
details, when it assumes a practical shape. The one class desire to
construct a more efficient Conservative body than the present Council,
the other seek an instrument to aid them in their schemes of
subversion and pillage. For my own part, I believe that a second
legislative body, returned by the same constituency as the House of
Assembly, under some differences with respect to time and mode of
election, would be a greater check on ill-considered legislation than
the Council as it is now constituted. Baldwin is very unwilling to
move in this matter. Having got what he imagines to be the likest
thing to the British constitution he can obtain, he is satisfied, and
averse to further change. In this instance I cannot but think that he
mistakes the shadow for the substance. I admire, however, the
perseverance with which he proclaims, '_Il faut jeter l'ancre de la
constitution_,' in reply to proposals of organic change; though I
fully expect that, like those who raised this cry in 1791, he will
yet, if he lives, find himself and his state-ship floundering among
rocks and shoals, towards which he never expected to steer.
Three years later he held the same language to the Duke of Newcastle.
Writing on March 26, 1853, to inform him that the Bill for increasing the
representation had been carried in the Assembly by a large majority, he
adds:--
The Lords must be attended to in the next place. The position of the
second chamber in our body politic is at present wholly
unsatisfactory. The principle of election must be introduced in order
to give to it the influence which it ought to possess; and that
principle must be so applied as to admit of the working of
Parliamentary Government (which I for one am certainly not prepared to
abandon for the American system) with two elective chambers. I have
made some suggestions with this view, which I hope to be able to
induce the Legislature to adopt.
When our two legislative bodies shall have been placed on this
improved footing, a greater stability will have been imparted to our
constitution, and a greater strength, I believe, if England act
wisely, to the connection.
[Sidenote: The Act passed.]
The question did not come before the British Parliament till the summer of
1854, after Lord Elgin's visit to England, during which he had an
opportunity of stating his views personally to the Government. At his
instance they brought in a Bill to enable the Colonial Legislature to deal
with the subject; and the measure was carried, with few dissentients,
although vehemently denounced by Lord Derby in the House of Lords. The
principles of colonial policy which Lord Durham had expressed so powerfully
in 1888, and on which Lord Grey and Lord Elgin had been acting so
consistently for many years, had at last prevailed; and many of those who
most deprecated the proposed reform as a downward step towards pure
democracy, yet acknowledged that, as it had been determined upon by the
deliberate choice of the Colony, it ought not to be thwarted by the
interference of the mother-country.
[Sidenote: Speech of Lord Derby.]
In the course of the speech above referred to, Lord Derby made use of the
following eloquent words:--
I have dreamed--perhaps it was only a dream--that the time would come
when, exercising a perfect control over their own internal affairs,
Parliament abandoning its right to interfere in their legislation,
these great and important colonies, combined together, should form a
monarchical government, presided over either by a permanent viceroy,
or, as an independent sovereign, by one nearly and closely allied to
the present royal family of this country.
I have believed that, in such a manner, it would be possible to uphold
the monarchical principle; to establish upon that great continent a
monarchy free as that of this country, even freer still with regard to
the popular influence exercised, but yet a monarchy worthy of the
name, and not a mere empty shadow. I can hardly believe that, under
such a system, the friendly connection and close intimacy between the
colonies and the mother-country would in any way be affected; but, on
the contrary, I feel convinced that the change to which I have
referred would be productive of nothing, for years and years to come,
but mutual harmony and friendship, increased and cemented as that
friendship would be by mutual appreciation of the great and
substantial benefits conferred by a free and regulated monarchy.
But pass this Bill, and that dream is gone for ever. Nothing like a
free and regulated monarchy could exist for a single moment under such
a constitution as that which is now proposed for Canada.
From the moment that you pass this constitution, the progress must be
rapidly towards republicanism, if anything could be more really
republican than this Bill.
The dream has been realised, at least in one of its most important
features; the gloomy forebodings have hitherto happily proved groundless.
But the speaker of these words, and the author of the measure to which they
refer, would probably have been alike surprised at the course which events
have taken respecting the particular point then in question. For once the
stream that sets towards democracy has been seen to take a backward
direction; and the constitution of the Dominion of Canada has returned, as
regards the Legislative Council, to the Conservative principle of
nomination by the Crown.
* * * * *
|
