III
CONFEDERATION
NOW and for many a year past the whole vast country has been under one government, and this is a fact that is of a good deal of importance outside merely political circles. Unlike the Federal Government of its great neighbour, the several states of which united to resist pressure from the mother country without, “Confederation” in the case of the Dominion resulted largely from troubles within the provinces.
After the rebellion of 1837-38, the two provinces of Upper and Lower Canada were united under one government, with one legislature in which, though the population of the latter province was considerably larger than that of the former, each province was represented in the House of Assembly by forty-two members elected by the people, and in the Legislative Council by ten councillors appointed for life by the governor. The French naturally objected to this arrangement. They also objected to the assumption by the new province of the debts of both older ones, when the debt of Lower Canada was much smaller than that of Upper Canada; for, though part of the debt of the latter had been incurred in making canals and other improvements likely to be of advantage to the country generally, the French Canadians had, of course, never been consulted about the spending of the money.
In process of time, however, the relative position of the uneasily-yoked-together provinces altered.
In 1853 a bill was brought in, increasing the number of members of the Assembly from forty-two for each province to sixty-five. By this time the population of Upper Canada had outstripped that of the Lower Province, and there arose a demand amongst the English-speaking people for representation in proportion to population.
It is not surprising that the French Canadians, who had at first been the party to suffer by the forced equality of membership, resented and resisted the agitation for “Rep. by Pop.,” as it was often called. At that time it seemed as if the long-desired boon of responsible government were going to prove a failure in Canada, for the representatives of the people were split up into so many different groups—French and English; Reformers and Conservatives, both moderate and extreme, none of whom could arrive at any means of working harmoniously together. Any one of the numerous parties, standing alone, was sure to be outvoted; and it sometimes happened that opponents would unite to drive a third party from power, but not to give strength to any government.
The rivalry between the representatives of the French and English provinces was most dangerous to the principle of responsible government, for it could, and did happen, that measures affecting only one of the provinces were forced upon it by a majority drawn chiefly from the other province; and this caused very bitter and angry feeling. For instance, in this way a number of separate public schools for the Roman Catholics were firmly established in Upper Canada. Some people asserted, therefore, that it was the duty of a government to resign office if outvoted on a particular measure by the representatives of the province chiefly concerned, even though the majority of the whole House might be with it.
Another grave difficulty was that it led to grievous waste of the public money, for if money were voted for some public work in one province, an equal amount, whether needed or not, was usually voted for the other. These complications absolutely paralysed the working of the system of Party Responsible Government. Ministers rose and fell; dissolution of parliament succeeded dissolution; but there was no sign of any end to the confusion.
In different parts of British North America the plan of a Confederation of the Provinces, with one central government to control matters common to all, and provincial legislatures to manage local affairs, was advocated from time to time. The Maritime Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island had their own problems and difficulties, and in 1864 their statesmen agreed to meet at Charlottetown, in Prince Edward Island, to discuss the question of a union amongst themselves.
By that time affairs in United Canada (was there ever a greater misnomer?) had reached a positive deadlock. At the beginning of the year, in succession to a reform ministry, which had only weathered the political tempests for a few months, Sir Etienne Taché and Mr. (afterwards Sir) John A. Macdonald had formed a Conservative government. Even at first they had a bare majority and presently they were outvoted by a majority so narrow that there was not any reasonable ground for hope that if they resigned, their opponents would be less helpless, or that if parliament were dissolved parties would be less evenly balanced. A dissolution seemed inevitable, however, when there arose a sudden light in the darkness.
George Brown, the leader of the English-speaking reformers, came to the rescue and promised the support of himself and his party to the ministers, if they would seriously set themselves to find a way out of the difficulty. Macdonald and his coadjutors met their old opponents half way. A coalition government was formed, and it was decided to try to form a federal, in place of a legislative, union, including all the provinces or the two Canadas alone. It is needless here to dwell on the delays and difficulties with which the project was beset. In October, 1864, representatives of Upper and Lower Canada, and of the Maritime Provinces, including Newfoundland, met at Quebec to formulate a scheme of confederation; but neither of the two island provinces made part of the Dominion of Canada, as it commenced its existence on July 1, 1867. Prince Edward Island came into the union six years later; but Newfoundland stands aloof to this day.
The British North America Act of the Imperial parliament, which finally gave effect to the desire of the provinces for union, embodied, with little alteration, the scheme agreed upon at Quebec in 1864. The act provided for the admission into confederation of other provinces besides the original four, and, as has already been mentioned, the Dominion of Canada now consists of nine provinces besides some large tracts of unorganized and sparsely populated territory in the north.
The Dominion parliament has power to make laws for “the peace, order and good government of Canada,” except with regard to certain matters put under the jurisdiction of the provincial legislatures. The parliament consists of the King (represented by the Governor-General), an Upper House, or Senate, and a Lower House, or House of Commons.
The Senate consists of eighty-three members, who are appointed for life by the Governor-in-Council, but no man who is under thirty years of age, or not by birth or naturalization a British subject, is eligible for appointment. He must also be possessed of real or personal property worth $4,000 (£800), and must be, and continue to be, a resident of the province for which he is appointed.
The House of Commons consists (at present) of two hundred and fourteen members, elected with regard to a fair representation of the relative population of the different sections of the country by the following plan:—The province of Quebec has always sixty-five members, and the other provinces have a number of members bearing the same proportion to their populations as sixty-five bears to the population of Quebec. The representation is adjusted after every decennial census—the last census being taken in 1911. The population of the West naturally increases much faster than that of the older provinces, and consequently every census requires a readjustment in favour of the West. For instance, during the decade following the census of 1891, Ontario had ninety-two members and Manitoba had only seven, but since 1901 the number of Ontario’s members has dropped to eighty-six, while that of Manitoba has risen to ten, and the next readjustment, which is already overdue, will show an even greater change in the balance of population.
In the Dominion, as in the provincial parliaments, the principle followed is that of responsible cabinet government; and in this important respect it resembles the British system, and differs from the government of the United States. In the latter country, the appointment of all the chief executive officers rests with the President, subject to the consent of the Senate. Thus, as Professor Goldwin Smith puts it, “instead of a ministry responsible to the legislature and dependent for existence on its vote, America has a ministry independent of the legislature and irremovable during its term of four years.” But, in Canada, when a man takes office in the ministry he must go back to his constituents for re-election; and though the normal life of the House of Commons is five years, it may be dissolved at any time by the Governor-General on the advice of his ministers. Of course, if a cabinet is defeated it must resign and give place to one which has the confidence of the House. In this way, the will of the people (or it would be more correct to say of the men, for