Alexandre Antonin Taché. From a photograph lent by Rev. L. Messier, St. Boniface.Alexandre Antonin Taché.From a photograph lent by Rev. L. Messier, St. Boniface.
Alexandre Antonin Taché. From a photograph lent by Rev. L. Messier, St. Boniface.Alexandre Antonin Taché.From a photograph lent by Rev. L. Messier, St. Boniface.
When the news of this barbarous murder reached the East, a political crisis was imminent. Scott was an Orangeman; and Catholic priests, it was said, had been closely identified with the rising. This was enough to start an agitation and to give it the character of a race and creed struggle. There existed also a suspicion that a miniature Quebec was tobe set up on the Red River, thus creating a sort of buffer French state between Ontario and the plains. Another cause of discontent was the belief that the government proposed to connive at the assassination of Scott and to allow his murderers to escape punishment. McDougall returned home, mortified by his want of success, and soon resigned his position. He blamed the government for what had occurred, and associated himself with the agitation in Ontario. The organization known as the Canada First party took a hand in the fray. It was composed of a few patriotic and able young men, including W. A. Foster, a Toronto barrister; Charles Mair, the well-known poet; John Schultz, who many years later, as Sir John Schultz, became governor of Manitoba, and who with Mair had been imprisoned by Riel and threatened with death; and Colonel George T. Denison, whose distinguished career as the promoter of Imperial unity has since made him famous in Canada and far beyond it.
The circumstances of the time, the distrust between the races and the vacillation of a sorely pressed government, combined to make an awkward situation. The evidence does not show that the Ontario agitators let slip anyof their opportunities. The government was compelled to send under Colonel Wolseley an expeditionary force of Imperial troops and Canadian volunteers to nip in the bud the supposed attempt to establish French ascendancy on the Red River. This expedition was completely successful without the firing of a shot. Riel, at the sight of the troops, fled to the United States, and the British flag was raised over Fort Garry. So, in 1870, Manitoba entered the Dominion as a new province, and the adjacent territories were organized under a lieutenant-governor and council directly under federal jurisdiction. Out of them, thirty-five years later, came the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan.
But the fruits of the rebellion were evident for years. One result was the defeat in Ontario of Sandfield Macdonald's ministry in 1871. 'I find the country in a sound state,' wrote Sir John Macdonald during the general elections of 1872, 'the only rock ahead being that infernal Scott murder case, about which the Orangemen have quite lost their heads.'[1]
When order was restored the clever miscreant Riel returned to the settlement. By raising a force to aid in quelling a threatened Fenianinvasion, he gulled Bishop Taché and the new governor, Adams G. Archibald, and had himself elected to the Dominion parliament. But Riel's crimes were too recent and too gross to be overlooked. His effrontery in taking the oath as a member was followed by his expulsion from the House; and once more he fled the country, only to reappear in the rôle of a rebel on the Saskatchewan in 1884, and, in the following year, to expiate his crimes on the scaffold.
Having carried the Dominion to the foot of the Rocky Mountains, the next step for the government was the acquisition of British Columbia. After the Oregon Treaty of 1846 the British possessions on the Pacific coast lay in three divisions, Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and the Stikeen Territory, all in the domains of the Hudson's Bay Company. In 1863, after the inrush of gold-seekers, the two latter had been united under one government and granted a Legislative Council, partly elective. Vancouver Island already had a legislature with two chambers, one elective. In 1865 Amor DeCosmos, one of the members of the Assembly for Victoria, began the union movement by proposing that Vancouver Island should be joined to British Columbia. Therewas friction between the two colonies, largely on commercial grounds. A tariff enacted by the colony on the mainland proved injurious to the island merchants who flourished under a free port. So in 1866 the Imperial parliament passed an Act uniting the two colonies. Despite the isolation of the Pacific coast settlements from the British colonies across the continent on the Atlantic, the Confederation movement had not passed unnoticed in the Far West; and in March 1867 the Legislative Council of British Columbia adopted a resolution requesting Governor Seymour to take measures to secure the admission of British Columbia into the Dominion 'on fair and equitable terms.' In transmitting the resolution to the home authorities the governor candidly pointed out the difficulties. He was not strongly in favour of the policy. The country east of the Rocky Mountains, it should be kept in mind, was still in the hands of the Hudson's Bay Company. An alien population from the United States was increasing in number. Enormous obstacles stood in the way of communication eastward. 'The resolution,' wrote Seymour, 'was the expression of a despondent community longing for change.' However, a public meeting in Victoria held on January29, 1868, urgently recommended union. A memorial to the Canadian government declared that the people generally were enthusiastic for the change. The leading newspapers endorsed it. The popularly elected councils of Victoria and New Westminster were of the same mind. Opposed to this body of opinion were the official class and a small party who desired annexation to the United States. The terms demanded were the assumption by Canada of a debt of about $1,500,000, a fixed annual subsidy, a wagon-road between Lake Superior and the head of navigation on the Fraser within two years, local representative institutions, and representation in the Canadian parliament.
The legislature, despite the alluring prospect set forth in an address to the Queen moved by DeCosmos, cautiously adopted an amendment declaring that, while it adhered to its previous action in endorsing the principle of union 'to accomplish the consolidation of British interests and institutions in North America,' it lacked the knowledge necessary to define advantageous terms of union. A convention of delegates met at Yale to express dissatisfaction with local conditions in British Columbia and to frame the terms on whichunion would be desirable. The Legislative Council, still unconvinced, again declared for delay; but a dispatch from Lord Granville in August 1869, addressed to the new governor, Anthony Musgrave, who, on the recommendation of Sir John Macdonald, had succeeded Seymour, emphatically endorsed Confederation, leaving open only the question of the terms. The Confederation debate took place in the Legislative Council in 1870. In concluding his speech in favour of the policy, Joseph Trutch, one of the three delegates who afterwards went to Canada to perfect the bargain, said:
I advocate Confederation because it will secure the continuance of this colony under the British flag and strengthen British interests on this continent, and because it will benefit this community—by lessening taxation and giving increased revenue for local expenditure; by advancing the political status of the colony; by securing the practical aid of the Dominion Government...; and by affording, through a railway, the only means of acquiring a permanent population which must come from the east of the Rocky Mountains.
The arrangement made by Canada was a generous one. It included a promise to begin within two years and to complete within ten a railway to the Pacific, thus connecting British Columbia with the eastern provinces. The terms were ratified by the people of British Columbia in the general election of 1870, and the union went into force on July 20, 1871. The Dominion now stretched from sea to sea.
Prince Edward Island had fought stoutly in resistance to the union. For six years it remained aloof. The fears of a small community, proud of its local rights and conscious that its place in a federal system could never be a commanding one, are not to be despised. At first federation had found eloquent advocates. There could not be, it was pointed out, any career for men of distinction in a small sea-girt province cut off completely from the life and interests of the larger area. But these arguments failed, as also did proposals of a more substantial kind. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick desired greatly to augment the maritime importance and influence in the Dominion by the inclusion of the little island province. During the summer of 1866, while the delegates from the two maritime provinceswere waiting in London for the arrival of their Canadian colleagues, they made an offer to James C. Pope, prime minister of the Island, who happened to be in London, that the sum of $800,000 should be allowed the Island, in order to extinguish the rights of the absentee land-owners, an incubus that had long caused discontent. The Canadian delegates, at first reluctant, were brought to agree to this proposal. But it was declined, and the same fate overtook better financial terms which Tilley offered in 1869. The Island went its way, but soon found that the capital necessary for internal development was hard to secure and harder still to repay if once obtained. A railway debt was incurred, and financial difficulties arose.
This situation came to the knowledge of Sir John Rose, the first finance minister of Canada, who had gone to reside in London as a partner in the great banking house of Morton, Rose and Co. There is a touch of romance both in the career of Rose and in the fact that it was through his agency that the little province entered the federation. Rose was a Scottish lad who had come to Canada to make his fortune. When a practising barrister in Montreal he had lost his silk gown as Queen's Counselfor signing the Annexation Manifesto in 1849. His abilities were of the first order, but his tastes inclined to law rather than to politics. The Dominion was in its infancy when his talents for finance attracted attention abroad and secured him the handsome offer which drew him away from Canada and led to his remarkable success in the money centre of the world. But he never lost interest in the Dominion. He maintained a close and intimate correspondence with Sir John Macdonald, and, learning of Prince Edward Island's difficulties, communicated with the Canadian prime minister. Thus was the way opened for negotiations. Finally a basis of union was arranged by which the Dominion assumed the provincial burden and made the Island railway part of the state system of railways. Prince Edward Island joined the union on July 1, 1873, and has contributed its full quota of brain and energy to the upbuilding of Canada.
Newfoundland definitely rejected union in the general election of 1869, and only once since has it shown an inclination to join the Dominion. During the financial crisis of 1893 delegates from Newfoundland visited Ottawa and sought to reach a satisfactoryarrangement. But the opportunity was allowed to pass, and the ancient colony has ever since turned a deaf ear to all suggestions of federation. But it is still the hope of many that the 'Oldest Colony' will one day acknowledge the hegemony of Canada.
[1]Memoirs, vol. ii, p. 150.
The lapse of fifty years should make it possible for us to value the work of the Fathers with due regard for historical truth. Time has thrown into bold relief the essential greatness of their undertaking and has softened the asperities of criticism which seem inseparable from all political movements. A struggle for national unity brings out the stronger qualities of man's nature, but is not a magic remedy for rivalries between the leading minds in the state. On the contrary, it accentuates for the time being the differences of temperament and the clash of individual opinions which accompany a notable effort in nation-making. But distance from the scene and from the men furnishes a truer perspective. The Fathers were not exempt from the defects that mark any group of statesmen who take part in a political upheaval; who uproot existing conditions and disturb settled interests; and who bid, eachafter his own fashion, for popular support and approval. The chief leaders in the federation movement survived to comparatively recent years. The last of them, Sir Charles Tupper, died in the autumn of 1915. All were closely associated with party politics. There yet live many who walked and talked with them, who rejoiced with them in victory and condoled with them in defeat. It were vain to hope that the voice of faction has been silenced and that the labours of the Fathers can be viewed in the serene atmosphere which strips the mind of prejudice and passion. And yet the attempt should be made, because the founders of Canada are entitled to share the fame of those who made the nineteenth century remarkable for the unification of states and the expansion of popular government.
During Sir John Macdonald's lifetime his admirers called him the Father of Confederation. In length and prestige of official service and in talent for leadership he had no equals. His was the guiding hand after the union. The first constructive measures that cemented the Dominion are identified with his régime. When he died in the twenty-fourth year of Confederation he had been prime minister for nearly nineteen years. To his contemporarieshe towered above others. Time established his reputation and authority. The personal attachment of his followers was like to nothing we have seen since, because to their natural pride in his political triumphs was added a passionate devotion to the man himself. His opponents have cheerfully borne tribute to the fascination he exercised over young and old. Holton's delightfully ambiguous remark, on the occasion of Macdonald's marvellous restoration to office in 1878, is historic: 'Well! John A. beats the devil.' Sir Oliver Mowat said, 'He was a genial man, a pleasant companion, full of humour and wit.' Even his satirical foe, Sir Richard Cartwright, recognized in him an unusual personality impressing all who came in contact with it. 'He had an immense acquaintance,' wrote Cartwright, 'with men of all sorts and conditions from one end of Canada to the other.'
As long as he lived, therefore, an impartial estimate of Macdonald's share in effecting Confederation could not be expected. After his death the glamour of his name prevented a critical survey of his achievements. Even yet it is too soon to render a final verdict. He took control of the situation at an early stage, because to frame a new constitution was a taskafter his own heart. He managed the Quebec Conference with the arts which none of the other members possessed in equal degree. As political complications arose his remarkable astuteness soon overcame them; and he emerged from the negotiations the most conspicuous figure in a distinguished group. It is inevitable that genius for command should overshadow the merits of others. True in every line of endeavour, this is especially so in politics. With his great gifts, Macdonald preserved his ascendancy in the young nation and was the chief architect of its fortunes for many years.
An election campaign--George Brown addressing an audience of farmers. From a colour drawing by C. W. JefferysAn election campaign—George Brown addressing an audience of farmers.From a colour drawing by C. W. Jefferys
An election campaign--George Brown addressing an audience of farmers. From a colour drawing by C. W. JefferysAn election campaign—George Brown addressing an audience of farmers.From a colour drawing by C. W. Jefferys
To assert, however, that one person was the author of Confederation, in the sense that the others played subordinate parts and were mere satellites revolving round the sun, is to mistake the nature and history of the movement. It was a long battle against adverse influences. If left unchallenged, they forbade the idea of a Dominion stretching from sea to sea. It was not Macdonald who forced the issue to the front, who bore down stubborn opposition, and who rallied to its support the elements indispensable to success. Into the common fund contributions were made from many sources. At least eight of the Fathers of Confederationmust be placed in the first rank of those to whom Canada owes undying gratitude. The names of Brown, Cartier, Galt, Macdonald, Tupper, Tilley, McGee, and McDougall stand pre-eminent. All these performed services, each according to his opportunities, which history will not ignore.
The foremost champion of union at the critical moment was George Brown. But for him, it is easy to believe, Confederation might have been delayed for a generation or never have come at all. His enthusiasm inspired the willing and carried the doubting. In the somewhat rare combination of courage, force, and breadth of view no one excelled him. As a political tactician he was not so successful, and to this defect may be traced the entanglements in which he was prone to land both himself and his party. His resignation from the coalition in 1865 was a mistake. It could not be explained. In leaving the ship before it reached the haven of safety he laid himself open to charges of spleen and instability. Impulsive he was, but not unstable, and his jealousy was not greater than other men's. He was always embarrassed by the fact that the criticisms of his newspaper theGlobe, in the exercise of its undoubted rights as an organof public opinion, were laid at his door. He found, as other editors have found, that the compromises of political life and the freedom of the press are natural enemies. In his patriotic sacrifice in behalf of Confederation lies his best claim to the respect and affection of his countrymen.
The quality most commonly ascribed to Cartier is courage; and rightly so. But equally important were his freedom from religious bigotry and his devotion to the interests of his own people. He guarded at every step the place of his race in the constitution of the Dominion; and if we are to believe the story that he fought stoutly in London for strict adherence to every concession agreed upon at Quebec, his insight into the future proved equal to his courage. The French were rooted in the belief that union meant for them a diminished power. There were grounds for the apprehension. To Cartier was due the subordination of prejudice to the common good. He was great enough to see that if Lower Canada was to become the guardian of its special interests and privileges, Upper Canada must be given a similar security; and this threw him into the closest alliance with Brown. This principle, as embodied in theconstitution, is the real basis of Confederation, which cannot be seriously menaced as long as neither of the central provinces interferes with the other. Cartier exemplified in his own person the truth that the French are a tolerant and kindly community, and that pride of race, displayed within its own proper bounds, makes for the strength and not the weakness of the Dominion. Unhappily, his health declined, and he did not live to lead his race in the development of that larger patriotism of which, with good reason, he believed them to be capable. But his example survives, and its influence will be felt in the generations to come.
What share Galt had in affecting Cartier's course is not fully known, but the two men between them dominated Lower Canada, and theirrapprochementwas more than a match for the nullifying efforts of Dorion and Holton. Galt's best work was also done before the consummation of the union. After 1867 he practically retired from the activities of politics, owing more to a distaste for the yoke of party than to any loss of interest in the welfare of Canada. He had an ample mind, and in his speeches and writings there is a valuable legacy of suggestion.
Thomas D'Arcy McGee was the orator of the movement. While other politicians hung back, he proclaimed the advantages of union in season and out with the zeal of the crusader. His speeches, delivered in the principal cities of all the provinces, did much to rouse patriotic fervour.
To Tupper and to Tilley, as this narrative has sought to show, we owe the adherence of the Maritime Provinces. The present Dominion would have been impossible but for their labours and sacrifice. A federated state without an Atlantic seaboard would have resulted in a different destiny for Canada. Each of these statesmen withstood the temptation to bend before the storm of local prejudice. By yielding to the passion of the hour each would have been a hero in his own province and have enjoyed a long term of office. If evidence were needed that Confederation inspired its authors to nobler aims than party victories, the course taken by these leaders furnishes conclusive proof.
William McDougall's part in the movement has suffered eclipse owing to his political mishaps. No one brought more brilliant qualities to bear upon the work than he. On the platform and in parliament he had, as aspeaker, no superior. In his newspaper, theNorth American, he had espoused a federal union as the first article of his political creed; and when Brown purchased the paper, McDougall, as the chief writer for theGlobe, strengthened Brown's hands and became his natural ally in the coalition. They quarrelled openly when McDougall elected to cast in his lot with Macdonald in the first Dominion ministry. The Red River episode ruptured his relations with Macdonald, who never again sought his support. Avoided by both leaders and never tolerant of party discipline, McDougall sought to fill the rôle of independent critic and thus earned for himself, unfairly, the sobriquet 'Wandering Willie.' But the Dominion owed much to his constructive talent. There is evidence that his influence was potent in the constitutional conferences, and that during his term as minister he had a strong hand in shaping public policy.
Oliver Mowat left politics for the judicial bench immediately after the Quebec Conference. He has related that, as the delegates sat round the table, Macdonald, on being notified of the vacancy in the vice-chancellorship of Upper Canada, silently passed him a note in appreciative terms offering him the place.For seven years he remained on the bench. But he returned in 1872 to active political life, and his services to the nation as prime minister of Ontario display his balanced judgment and clearness of intellect.
Some Canadian statesmen who were invaluable to the new nationality suffer in being judged too exclusively from a party standpoint. Canada was fortunate in drawing from the ranks of both Conservatives and Liberals many men capable of developing the Dominion and adapting an untried constitution to unforeseen conditions. None had quite the same opportunities as Sir John Macdonald, who not only helped to frame the union but administered its policy for a lengthy period. Alexander Mackenzie gave the country an example of rectitude in public life and of devotion to duty which is of supreme value to all who recognize that free government may be undermined and finally destroyed by selfishness and corruption. Edward Blake, with his lofty conceptions of national ambition and his profound insight into the working of the constitution, also exerted a beneficial effect on the evolution of the state. He, like Sir John Thompson, was a native of the country. In temperament, in breadth of mind, and in contempt for pettyand sordid aims, Blake and Thompson had much in common. They, and others who are too near our own day for final judgment, fully grasped the work of the Fathers and helped to give Canada its honourable status in the British Empire and its distinctive place as a self-governing community.
A retrospective glance reveals the extent to which the Fathers attained their principal objects. A threefold purpose inspired them. Their first duty was to evolve a workable plan of government. In this they succeeded, as fifty years of experience shows. The constitution, after having stood the usual tests and strain, is firmly rooted in national approval; and this result has been reached by healthy normal processes, not by exaggerated claims or a spurious enthusiasm. The constitution has always been on trial, so to speak, because Canadians are prone to be critical of their institutions. But at every acute crisis popular discontent has been due to maladministration and not to defects of organization. The structure itself stands a monument to those who erected it.
In the second and most trying of their tasks, the unification of the provinces, the Fatherswere also triumphant. From the beginning the country was well stocked with pessimists and Job's comforters. They derived inspiration during many years from the brilliant writings of Goldwin Smith. But in the end even the doubters had to succumb to the stern logic of the facts. Under any federation, growth in unity is bound to be slow. The relations of the provinces to the federal power must be worked out and their relations to each other must be adjusted. Time alone could solve such a problem. Until the system took definite shape national sentiment was feeble. But a modified and well-poised federation, with its strong central government and its carefully guarded provincial rights, at last won the day. Years of doubt and trial there were, but in due course the Nova Scotian came to regard himself as a Canadian and the British Columbian ceased to feel that a man from the East was a foreigner. The provinces have steadily developed a community of interest. They meet cordially in periodical conferences to discuss the rights and claims possessed in common, and if serious, even menacing, questions are not dealt with as they should be, the failure will be traced to faulty statesmanship and not to lack of unity.
To preserve the Imperial tie was the third and greatest object of the Fathers. They realized that many dangers threatened it—some tangible and visible, others hidden and beyond the ken of man. It may not be denied that the barque of the new nationality was launched into an unknown sea. The course might conceivably lead straight to complete independence, and honest minds, like Galt's, were held in thrall by this view. Could monarchy in any shape be re-vitalized on the continent where the Great Republic sat entrenched? What sinister ideas would not the word Imperialism convey to the practical men of the western world? These fears the Fathers met with resolute faith and the seeing eye. They believed that inherent in the beneficent rule of Queen Victoria there was a constitutional sovereignty which would appeal irresistibly to a young democracy; that unwavering fidelity to the crown could be reconciled with the fullest extension of self-government; and that the British Empire when organized on this basis would hold its daughter states beyond the seas with bonds that would not break.
And so it has proved. Of all the achievements of the Fathers this is the most splendidand enduring. The Empire came to mean, not the survival of antiquated ideas, but the blessings of a well-ordered civilization. And when in 1914 the Great War shook the world, Canadians, having found that the sway of Britain brought them peace, honour, and contentment, were proud to die for the Empire. To debate the future of Canada was long the staple subject for abstract discussion, but the march of events has carried us past the stage of idle imaginings. A knowledge of the laws by which Divine Providence controls the destinies of nations has thus far eluded the subtlest intellect, and it may be impossible for any man, however gifted, to foresee what fate may one day overtake the British Empire. But its traditions of freedom and toleration, its ideals of pure government and respect for law, can be handed on unimpaired through the ages. The opportunity to maintain and perpetuate these traditions and ideals is the priceless inheritance which Canada has received from the Fathers of Confederation.
The printed material relative to Confederation is voluminous. The earliest proposals are to be found in theConstitutional Documentsby Shortt and Doughty. The parliamentary debates of the four provinces from 1864 to 1867 record the progress of the movement which culminated in the British North America Act. For the intimate history of the coalition ministry and the conferences in Quebec and in London the two works by Sir Joseph Pope,Memoirs of Sir John MacdonaldandConfederation Documents, are mines of indispensable information. The files of the TorontoGlobeand the HalifaxChronicleare valuable, while the pamphlets, especially those relating to the events in Quebec and Nova Scotia, are essential. Gray'sConfederationconfirms other material, but is not in itself of paramount importance. Mr Chisholm'sSpeeches and Public Letters of Joseph Howeand Dr Saunders'sThree Premiers of Nova Scotiamust be consulted. Mr John Boyd'sSir George Etienne Cartier: His Life and Timesexhibits full knowledge and is free from bias. See also theLife and Speeches ofGeorge Brown, by Alexander Mackenzie, which contains some valuable material. For a clear and impartial biography of Brown, seeGeorge Brown, by John Lewis. For the period after the union, consult Pope'sMemoirs of Sir John Macdonaldand Sir John Willison'sSir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal Party.The Life and Times of Sir Leonard Tilleyby James Hannay and Sir Charles Tupper'sRecollectionsthrow light on the question in the Maritime Provinces. The official dispatches between the colonial secretary and the governors of the provinces laid before the Imperial parliament are collected in one volume. Mr William Houston'sConstitutional Documentscontains useful notes.
See alsoCanada and its Provinces, vols. v, vi, xiii, xix, xxi; and, in the present Series,The Day of Sir John Macdonald,The Day of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, andThe Railway Builders.
Adderley, Mr,134.
Alberta, in the Dominion,159,168.
American Civil War, the, and Confederation,20,24-5,67.
American Revolution,1; cause of,4.
Annand, William, his opposition to Confederation,28,115,152,154.
Annexation Manifesto of 1849, the,15,18.
Archibald, Adams G., a father of Confederation,49,62n.,82,102,122,145,152-3; lieutenant-governor of Manitoba,169.
Australia, her form of government,66.
Belleau, Sir Narcisse, prime minister of Canada,106,123.
Bernard, Hewitt, secretary of the Quebec Conference,61.
Blair, A. J. Fergusson,107,141,145.
Blake, Edward,76,153,186-187.
Bright, John, his anti-Imperial views,119,134-5.
British American League, the,15.
British Columbia,169-70; joins the Dominion,170-3.
British North America Act, the,76,124-36. See Confederation.
Brown, George, advocates a federation confined to the Canadas,19,20; and extension westward,22-3,158; his relations with Macdonald,31-2,106,138,142; his committee on federal union,32-3; expresses his readiness to co-operate with the Conservatives in promoting the federal system,32-3,143; his conference with Macdonald and Galt,34-8; joins Macdonald in a coalition government,38-43,138,151; an amusing incident in the House,42-3; at the Charlottetown Conference,50-1; his speech emphasizing the happy relations of Canada with Britain,52-3; at the Quebec Conference,57,62n.,64,71-3,74,77-8,79,80and note,82,158; his speech upholding the Imperial link,86-7,88; admits imperfection in the Confederation constitution scheme,89-90,94; resigns from the coalition,106-7; and the Manchester School,106,110-11, his influence in the London Conference,124; after Confederation denounces any further coalition of parties,141-2,144-5,185; a member of the Senate,153; an estimate of his work,181-2; his personality,31-2,43,73,86,152n.,181-2.
Buckingham, William,161.
Cameron, Hillyard,95.
Cameron, M. C.,95.
Campbell, Alexander, a father of Confederation,50-1,62n.,146.
Canada, in the early nineteenth century,11-14; the call of the West,22-3; the visit of the Prince of Wales (Edward VII),23-4; her relations with United States,25-6,107; the intercolonial railway negotiations,28-9. See Dominion, Parliament.
Canada First party, the,167.
Canada Union Bill of 1822, the,8.
Cape Breton Island,45.
Cardwell, Mr, colonial secretary,109,134; his dispatch urging federation,112-13.
Carleton, Sir Guy,2. See Dorchester.
Carling, John,153.
Carnarvon, Lord, on Canadian currency,13-14; and Confederation,123,133-4.
Carter, F. B., a father of Confederation,63n.
Cartier, George E., his work on behalf of Confederation18,19,37,41-3,50-1,62n.,73,86,95,122,145,153,160; Brown's tribute to,42-3; accepts a baronetcy,147-8; an estimate of his work,182-3.
Cartwright, Sir Richard, on land communication in the early nineteenth century,12-13; an amusing incident in the House,42-3; on Sir John Macdonald,179.
Chandler, E. B., a father of Confederation,49,63n.,67.
Chapais, Jean C., a father of Confederation,62n.,146.
Charlottetown Conference, the,47-55,77. See Confederation.
Cobden, William,26.
Cockburn, James, a father of Confederation,62n.
Coles, George H., a father of Confederation,50,63n.
Confederation, when first mooted,2; William Smith's plan,3-6; Sewell's plan,7; W. L. Mackenzie's belief in,8-9; Lord Durham's plan,9-10; Constitutional Act of 1791,10-11; a period of Particularism,11-15;21,30-1; makes headway in Nova Scotia,16-17,26-7,44-5; becomes a question of practical politics,17-20; events which hastened,20-5; political deadlock,30-2; coalition government formed to promote,34-41; some opposition and objection to,42-3,49,84,89-90,135; the CHARLOTTETOWN CONFERENCE,47-55,77. THE QUEBEC CONFERENCE: constituted,56-7,61-2; held with closed doors,58-61; the Fathers of Confederation,62n.-63 n.; federal union,62-64; provincial legislatures with a strong central government,64,66-9; federal powers,69-71; provincial powers,71-77; the governor-general's powers,76-7; the House of Commons,77; the Senate,77-80,91-2,129-31; the financial terms,80-3,90; the Quebec resolutions adopted in Canada,84-96; opposition in Maritime Provinces,97-105; finally accepted in New Brunswick,112-14, and in Nova Scotia,114-16. THE FRAMING OF THE BILL: the lukewarm reception of the delegates in London,118-22,124,135-6,173-4; the desire to cement the Imperial tie by framing a constitution similar in principle to that of Britain,125-7; naming of the Dominion,127; the Senate,129-131; the educational privileges of minorities,131-2; the passage of the British North America Act,133-5; some criticism,90-1,92-5; a priceless inheritance,187-90. THE DOMINION: Nova Scotia reconciled,152-7; the prairie provinces,158-9,168; British Columbia,158,169-73; Prince Edward Island,173-6. See Dominion, Fathers, Parliament.
Constitutional Act of 1791, the,3,11.