Really, the western party front had only been formed three years earlier, from Liberal factions that had joined in the “Reform Alliance” under Brown’s strong impetus and carried the elections of 1857-8 in Upper Canada. He had undoubtedly had to use all his skill and forcefulness to keep the factions together at the Convention of 1859. Perhaps, indeed, the apparent unity of Reform (with no government patronage to weld it) was largely a tribute to his forcefulness – and to the persuasive publicity of the Globe. Yet there still existed three main elements within Upper Canada Reform: Clear Grit radicalism, whose roots were deep in the agrarian western peninsula; Brownite Liberalism, focused on Toronto though spread across the West; and “moderate” Reformism, more in evidence eastward from the city, and particularly in the constituencies along the Upper St. Lawrence River, a region dominated by the proud and prickly John Sandfield Macdonald, who before Brown’s rise had been the top contender for party leadership.
Of these three factions, the Brownite Liberals had plainly become the strongest: that group best characterized by its unwavering devotion to the pronouncements and principles of the Globe. In fact, the acceptance of Brown as party leader by radicals to the left and moderates to the right was above all a recognition of the predominance of his own faithful following. Clear Grit radicalism, moreover, had been successfully held under control by the Toronto Brownite leaders, a fact marked at the Convention by the defeat of radical hopes for dissolution and “organic changes” – the remaking of the constitution on the American pattern of elective, democratic institutions.
The old drive of Grit agrarian democracy in truth had lost much force. The original Clear Grit champions had either withdrawn from politics, like John Rolph and William Lyon Mackenzie, or grown progressively more moderate, like William McDougall and Malcolm Cameron. They had found no real successors. The most promising new radical spokesman, the journalist George Sheppard, had been outplayed at the Convention and effectively muzzled thereafter in his writings for the Globe.35 The unhappy Sheppard had departed the Globe office in January of 1860 (with a bland farewell editorial of praise written by George Brown) to take more congenial employment on the Hamilton Times.36 He was soon to leave an unresponsive Canada for the United States. It seemed he lacked the courage of his political convictions; he had chopped and changed about, and always it was the party or the country that had failed him. Able as he was, Sheppard did not have the fibre for consistent leadership.
Thus, lacking real direction, radicalism had become subdued. Increasingly its adherents were merging into the Brownite Liberal following. Thus, too, the Globe at last grew willing to use the name “Clear Grit” for the whole Upper Canada Reform party.37 Initially the term distinguished the radical faction alone, whose American democratic tendencies the Globe had fervently deplored. It was the Liberal-Conservative press that had freely applied “Clear Grit” to the general mass of Western Reformers, helpfully implying that they were all ultras and republicans at heart, while Brown’s journal had naturally shunned the title for that very reason. But now the name was safe enough. The Upper Canada Liberals could be “the Grits” henceforth, as far as the Globe was concerned.
Nevertheless, the old Grit radicalism had by no means wholly disappeared; and, in particular, the dissolutionist sentiment with which it had been associated was still a powerful undercurrent in western popular feeling. Should federation not look strong in parliament, therefore, dissolutionism might surge forth in Upper Canada once more. Western impatience might yet threaten Liberal unity with a radical revival on the left. Brown could not wholly dismiss that possibility.
More possible at the moment, however, was a party split on the right. Moderate Reformers in Upper Canada still toyed with the idea of applying representation by population, or the double majority (Sandfield Macdonald’s pet scheme), to the existing union. They might have been swept along by the Convention’s uproarious acceptance of the joint authority principle, yet afterwards they wondered if so great a change were really necessary. Some moderate politicians such as Michael Foley might even have worked with Brown throughout the party meeting, but this rather in an effort to avoid the still more drastic policy of dissolution than from any ardent desire for federal union.38 Furthermore, there were a few moderate M.P.s, such as Sandfield Macdonald, who had not attended the Convention at all and could well consider themselves not bound by it. For the party democracy had little coercive power over the loose parliamentary Reform front of that day.
Moderates, too, the true descendants of Francis Hincks, were often inclined to that worthy’s view that it was more important to have a winning Liberal government than a losing Liberal principle. Here was further cause to wonder whether they would shy from Brown’s direction if he pushed them too fast at the federation hurdle in parliament. Actually this right wing was the smallest of the three elements in Upper Canada Reform. Hence the party leader could reasonably count on holding behind him a large majority of western Liberal members, of the left as well as the centre. But would this be enough? Could he afford any split at all, or even rumours of dissension within his party’s ranks? What then would happen to a strong vote for federation – to the Convention policy and his leadership? These were the problems George Brown brought with him when he finally arrived in Quebec for the ticklish session of 1860.
4
Temporary accommodation had been prepared for the provincial parliament until the new Ottawa capital was ready. The buildings previously provided for the legislature in the old French city had been destroyed by fire: both the former Lower Canada parliament buildings and their successors. (Incidentally, the Governor-General’s residence, Spencer Wood, also burned down the night after the session of 1860 opened, to round out a distinctly gloomy record.)39 Yet the temporary arrangements made for parliament seemed quite satisfactory – in a brand new building that would become the post office when the capital had moved. It stood on a commanding eminence near the Prescott Gate, looking down the great sweep of the ice-bound St. Lawrence; a plain but ample structure with a front of the best white brick, its more humble red-brick rear plastered over to match.40
Inside, the Assembly chamber was shorter but broader than that in Toronto.41 It was embellished with portraits of past speakers, hung on the front of narrow galleries that ran around three sides. The one hundred and thirty members arrayed below – sixty-five from each section – were seated much as in Toronto. Premier Cartier, galvanically active, and his Minister of Finance, portly Alexander Galt, shared a desk in the front rank on the government side; the mass of Cartier’s Bleu supporters from Lower Canada ranged behind them. As leader of the Upper Canadian half of the cabinet, John A. Macdonald also had a desk in the front row. Here was the master-politician, still Brown’s greatest foe – easy, smiling, and adroit, and as deadly effective as ever.
On the opposite side of the House, Brown and Dorion also shared a front-row desk, as the opposition leaders of West and East. Foley and McDougall were in the same line, Mowat behind Brown and Dorion, McGee and Sandfield Macdonald somewhat more removed. The opposition forces comprised some forty-nine members: thirty-four of them Upper Canada Reformers, ten Rouges, and the remainder, more independent Liberals from Lower Canada. The ministerial side numbered about seventy-five: thirty-three being French-Canadian Bleus; sixteen, English-speaking Lower Canadians; twenty-three, John A. Macdonald’s Conservatives from Upper Canada; and the rest, the few western Coalition Liberals remaining with the government.42 It was hard to define the fringes remaining on either side, however. In those days of weaker party discipline there were usually quite a number of uncertain votes, as the independent or converted, or the merely disappointed, shifted back and forth. Hence Macdonald’s manoeuvring and managing abilities were at such a premium; and hence George Brown might hope to gain significant additions in a well-staged vote on federation.
The opening ceremonies went off smoothly on February 28. The day was wonderfully warm and sunny, and melting waters gushed down the steep and narrow roadways of Quebec.43 The Speech from the Throne, read by Governor-General Sir Edmund Head, held no surprises. The forthcoming visit of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales was officially announced for the summer. The rest was serene platitude, with no mention of the general British North American union that the government