SMITH

G

OLDWIN SMITH, an English essayist and historical writer, was born at Reading, England, August 13, 1823. He was educated at Eton and Oxford; took his degree of B. A. at Magdalen College, Oxford, in 1845; became Fellow and tutor, and was called to the bar in 1850. In 1856 he was made regius professor of modern history at Oxford. In 1868 he came to the United States, having been elected professor of constitutional history in Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. In 1871 he became connected with the University of Toronto, where he has since lived. He has delivered numerous lectures upon social and political topics. Among his works are "The Study of History," delivered at Oxford (1861); 'Irish History and Irish Character " (1861); "Three English Statesmen " (Pym, Cromwell, and Pitt); a "Course of Lectures on the Political History of England" (1867); "A Short History of England, down to the Reformation (1869); "William Cowper (1880); "Life of Jane Austen" (1890); "Canada and the Canadian Question (1891); "The United States, 1492-1871 " (1893); 'Bay Leaves (1893); Essays on Questions of the Day (1893); "Oxford and her Colleges (1894); "Guesses at the Riddle of Existence (1897).

66

THE EVOLUTION OF THE DOMINION

N Great Britain Liberalism was now in the ascendant and

IN

had carried parliamentary reform. As its envoy, and

in its mantle, Lord Durham, the son-in-law of Lord Grey, the Radical aristocrat, the draftsman of the Reform Bill, came out as governor and high commissioner to report on the disease and prescribe the remedy. He overrated his position and his authority, moved about, Radical though he was, in regal state, assumed the power of banishing rebels without process of law, fell into the clutches of Brougham, with whom he was at feud, was censured and resigned. But he had brought with him Charles Buller, an expert in colonial questions, with the help of whose pen and that of Gobbon Wakefield, he framed a report which by its great ability and momentous effects forms an epoch in colonial history.

The Durham report recommends the union of the two

Provinces and the concession of responsible government, that is, of a government like the British cabinet, virtually designated by the representatives of the people and holding office by the title of their confidence. "To conduct their government," says Durham of the Canadian people, "harmoniously, in accordance with its established principles, is now the business of its rulers; and I know not how it is possible to secure that harmony in any other way, than by administering the government on those principles which have been found perfectly efficacious in Great Britain.

"I would not impair a single prerogative of the Crown; on the contrary, I believe that the interests of the people of these colonies require the protection of prerogatives, which have not hitherto been exercised. But the Crown must, on the other hand, submit to the necessary consequences of representative institutions; and if it has to carry on the government in unison with a representative body, it must consent to carry it on by means of those in whom that representative body has confidence." What Durham meant by his saving words about the prerogative is not clear; nor has he explained how supreme power could be given to the colonial Parliament without taking away prerogative from the Crown. No effect, at all events, has ever been given to those words.

“We can venture," said the Tory periodical of that day in a notice of the report, " to answer, that every uncontradicted assertion of that volume will be made the excuse of future rebellions, every unquestioned principle will be hereafter perverted into a gospel of treason, and if that rank and infectious report does not receive the high, marked, and energetic discountenance and indignation of the imperial Crown and Par liament, British America is lost."

If resignation of authority is loss of dominion, the prediction of the writer in the "Quarterly " that British America would be lost, can hardly be said, from the Tory point of view, to have proved substantially unfounded.

The avowed object of union was the extinction of French nationality, which the authors of the report hoped would be brought about without violence by the political subjection of the weaker element to the influence of the stronger.

"I entertain," says Durham, "no doubts as to the national character which must be given to Lower Canada; it must be that of the British Empire; that of the majority of the population of British America; that of the great race which must, in the lapse of no long period of time, be predominant over the whole North American continent. Without effecting the change so rapidly or so roughly as to shock the feelings and trample on the welfare of the existing generation, it must henceforth be the first and steady purpose of the British government to establish an English population, with English laws and language, in this Province, and to trust its government to none but a decidedly English legislature."

Union was accepted in Upper Canada. On the French Province, by which it would certainly have been rejected, it was imposed, the constitution there having been suspended. For the united Provinces the constitution was in form the same as it had been for each of the Provinces separately, with the governor and his executive council, a legislative council appointed by the governor and a legislative assembly elected by the people; but with "responsible government," the understanding henceforth being in Canada as in Great Britain that the governor should accept as the members of his executive council and the framers of his poliey the leaders of the majority in Parliament. The upper House was after

ward made, like the lower, elective with the constituencies wider than those for the lower House. The same number of members in the legislative assembly was assigned to each of the two Provinces, though the population of Quebec was at this time far the larger of the two.

The constitution thus granted to the colony was in reality far more democratic than that of the mother country, where, besides a court actually present and a hereditary upper House, there were the influences of a great land-owning gentry and other social forces of a conservative kind, as well as deep-seated tradition, to control the political action of the people.

Not without a pang or without a struggle did the colonial office or the governors finally acquiesce in responsible government and the virtual independence of the colony. Poulett Thomson, afterward Lord Sydenham, sent out as governor by the Melbourne ministry, showed some inclination to revert to the old paths, shape his own policy, and hold himself responsible to the colonial office rather than to the Canadian people; but he was a shrewd politician and took care to steer clear of rocks. His successor, Bagot, though a Conservative and appointed by a Conservative government, surprised everybody by discreet and somewhat epicurean pliancy to the exigencies of his political position. He reigned in peace.

But Metcalfe, who followed him, had been trained in the despotic government of India. Backed by the Conservative government which had sent him out, he made strenuous efforts to recover something of the old power of a governor, to shape his own course, and make his appointments himself, not at the dictation of responsible ministers. The result was a furious storm. Fiery invectives were interchanged in

Parliament and in the press. At elections stones and brickbats flew. Canada was for several months without a governThe fatal illness of the governor terminated the

ment. strife.

Lord Elgin, when he became governor, heartily embraced the principle of responsible government, and upon the demise of the ministry sent at once for the leader of the opposition. He flattered himself that he was able to do more under that system than he could have done if invested with personal authority. That he could have done a good deal under any system by his moral influence was most likely, for he was one of the most characteristic and best specimens of imperial statesmanship. But moral influence is not constitutional power. About the last relie of the political world before responsibility was Dominick Daly, who deemed it his duty to stay in office, any changes in the ministry and principles of government notwithstanding.

The other North American colonies, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, went through a similar course of contest for supreme power between the governor with the council nominated by him and the elective assembly, ending in the same way. On them also the boon of responsible government was conferred. In the case of Prince Edward Island the political problem had been complicated by an agrarian struggle with the body of grantees among whom the crown in its feudal character of supreme land-owner, had parcelled out the island.

Liberalism now gained the upper hand in the united Canada and ultimately carried its various points. Exiled rebels returned. William Lyon Mackenzie himself was, in time, again elected to Parliament, and Rolph, another fugitive, was admitted to the government. The clergy re