IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 r IM |||||22 
 
 ^ "^ 2.0 
 
 .8 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 6" — 
 
 
 ► 
 
 ^ 
 
 <^ 
 
 n 
 
 % 
 
 '/y. 
 
 e. 
 
 ^J 
 
 ei 
 
 <pj 
 
 
 'V 
 
 '/ 
 
 /A 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 ^ 
 
 V 
 
 # 
 
 \\ 
 
 ^9) 
 
 V 
 
 6^ 
 
 ;v 
 
 ^^L 
 
 
 33 WE'.>T MAIN STREET 
 WEBST£R, NY 14S80 
 
 (716) £7'f-45C>3 
 
 II 
 

 L^:*/ 
 
 i/i 
 
 ^ 
 
 :<> 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilmd le mailleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mdthor'.e normale de filmage 
 sont indiquds ci-dessous. 
 
 □ Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 □ Covers damaged/ 
 Couvertura endommagee 
 
 □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couvr-ture restaur6e et/ou pellicul^e 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 □ Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or larrjnated/ 
 Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculees 
 
 □ Cover title missing/ 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6colorees, tachet^es ou piqudes 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes geographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ . 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relie avec d'autres documents 
 
 □Pages detached/ 
 Pages d^tachees 
 
 I "k^Showthrough/ 
 I I Transparence 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 Quality inegale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 □ 
 
 n 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows Oi distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reiivire serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortivin le long de la marge int6rieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes 
 lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas et6 filmdes. 
 
 □ Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 D 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, et.c, have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6X6 film^es d nouveau de facon i 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 □ Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplementaires: 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film^ au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 26X 
 
 SOX 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
:ails 
 
 du 
 
 )difier 
 
 une 
 
 nage 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grSce d la , 
 gdndrositd de: ( 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus gra.:d soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film6s en commandant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol —^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END "), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole —^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds i des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Stre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 irrata 
 to 
 
 pelure, 
 n i 
 
 D 
 
 32X 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
^% 
 
,f 
 
 IvOYAI^TY. 
 
 I J7^) 
 
 L 
 
 (^ J tyt 
 
 
 Delivered before the Young Men's Liberal Club, Toronto, on 
 
 February 2nd, i8gi. 
 
 ^. 
 
 
 r- 
 
 BY 
 
 GOLDWIN SMITH, D.C.L. 
 
 
 fKovottto : 
 PRINTED BY HUNTER, ROSE & COMPANY, 
 
 1891. 
 
mmumn 
 
LOYALTY, 
 
 OU have done me the honour, gentlemen of the Liberal 
 Club, to desire that I should read you an address on 
 the subject of "Loyalty." I gladly respond to your 
 request. But you will allow me to address you on this 
 occasion as liberal-minded men, not as Liberals in the 
 party sense of the term. I have been asked, as I am with 
 you in this struggle, why I do not join your party ? I re- 
 ply that I am with you and with anyone in a struggle such as 
 that on which you are now entering against Commercial Mono- 
 poly and Government by Corruption, and hope with other citizens 
 to do my best in the day of battle ; but when I am invited to join 
 a party my answer nmst be that I have always steadfastly set my 
 face towards national government, and that I and others, if there 
 are any, who think as I do, are more likely to be useful by beino- 
 true to our own principle, and saying what there is to be said for 
 it, than by compromising it in order to take a more active part 
 in politics. Then I am not sure about my qualification for ad- 
 mission. A Liberal in England I was held to be, and even a 
 thorough-going Liberal, though I always had a rooted abhorrence 
 of violence and revolution. But I am not sure that I should pass 
 muster with your organization. Perhaps as an Englishman I am 
 biassed, but so it is that I believe the integrity of the United 
 Kingdom to be essential to its greatness, and its greatness to be 
 essential to the balance and the progress of European civilization. 
 Therefore I could never take part in helping the enemies of British 
 unity for the purpose of conciliating the Irish vote. I pleaded, 
 
LOYALTY. 
 
 like John Bright, for justice to Ireland in days when the Irish 
 vote was not so much regarded, but I am afraid I should be a bad 
 hand at conciliating the Irish vote now. I think with sorrow ot 
 the thraldom into which the Anglo-Saxon communities have 
 fallen. Again, while I am absolutely free from the slightest 
 prejudice against the Roman Catholics, among whom have been 
 some of my dearest friends, it would be impossible for an old 
 European Liberal, a friend of Mazzini and Garibaldi, to enter into 
 an alliance with Jesuits and Papal Zouaves, or to refrain from 
 opposing priestly usurpation. I am conscious, too, that I am a 
 Liberal of the old school, one of those who wish Government to 
 mind its own business, who desire that at last man should have 
 a chance of self- development and who are no more inclined to 
 submit to the tyranny of majorities calling themselves the State 
 than to the tyranny of kings. Perhaps the best reason of all is 
 that at my time of life it is too late to put on new harness, and 
 a man can only go on his own way supporting what he thinks 
 right and opposing v/hat he thinks wrong. With those who are 
 fighting against Monopoly and Corruption no good citizen can 
 hesitate to take part. 
 
 But to the question. It is not wonderful that you wish just 
 now to get all the information you can about loyalty. The air 
 is full of loud professions of it, and still louder denunciations of 
 disloyalty. The suspicion of disloyalty evidently entails serious 
 consequences, extending in certain contingencies to being sabred 
 by some loyal warrior on the street. What is, perhaps, of more 
 practical importance is that the cry, by its effect on nervous per- 
 sons, is likely to prevent the fair consideration of questions vital 
 to the welfare of our people. 
 
 There certainly is something peculiar about this virtue. There 
 is a species of it at all events which very happily coincides with 
 self-interest. The loyal are sometimes like the Puritan Saints, 
 
LOYALTY. 5 
 
 who deemed it their religious duty to inherit the earth. Conquerors 
 and oppressors, for instance, always call submission loyalty and 
 patriotism treason. Again, loyalty seems, unlike other virtues, to 
 find a home in breasts in which no other virtue can dwell. No 
 men ever were louder or more sincere in their professions of 
 loyalty than were Scroggs and Jeffreys at the time when they 
 were judicially murdering Russell and Sidney or going on the 
 Bloody Assize. The carpet-baggers who governed and swindled 
 the South after the Civil War in like manner overflowed with 
 loyalty, and whenever they were detected in some gross act of 
 corruption the defence was that they were always " truly loil." 
 In the BHtish Empire loyalty seems to have the peculiarity of 
 being eminently colonial. It is like the reverence for the Papacy, 
 the intensity of which was always found to vary in direct propor- 
 tion to the distance from Rome. At the Plirasoll banquet the other 
 night, after we had been regaled with the usual declamations on loy- 
 alty, a speaker remarked that Mr. Plimsoll might know he was not 
 in England, but in Canada, when he heard so much about loyalty, 
 of which nobody boasted in England. This remark was true as 
 well as neat. In England you never hear a word said on the sub- 
 ject. Everybody takes it for granted that you are not in a plot 
 to overturn the dynasty. Suppose a lady were to go about in 
 society assuring everybody that her hair and teeth were her own , 
 that her complexion was not paint, and that the lines of her figure 
 were those laid down by nature, would she not be apt to create 
 the suspicion which she was so anxious to avert ? 
 
 What is the original signification of the word ? LoyauU means 
 respect for law and fidelity to obligation. Shakespeare uses it for 
 fidelity to the marriage vow, to filial duty, to friendship, as well 
 as for fidelity to the kin*. Milton makes Comus offer the lady 
 the shelter of a " loyal" cottage, that is, a cottage true to the law 
 of hospitality. The term especially denoted fidelity to those 
 
6 
 
 LOYALTY. 
 
 feudal obligations which were the organic law of the time. Those 
 obligations were reciprocal ; it was not only the vassal that owed 
 duty to the lord ; the lord also owed duty to the vassal. 
 If the lord did not perform his duty the vassal renounced his 
 allegiance by a regular form, called defiance. De Montfort and 
 the j)atriot barons thus formally renounced their allegiance 
 to Henry III. Divine Right was not the creed of those days, nor 
 was there any blind and spaniel-like devotion to the person of 
 the king. The feudalists were rough, but they were not fools ; if 
 they had been they could not have founded European society and 
 the British Constitution. Edward I, the greatest of all feudal 
 monarchs, was no fetich, but a noble man living in free and frank 
 intercourse with his peers, foremost in battle and adventure, 
 claiming loyalty by a right truly divine. It is not till we come 
 to the Tudor despotism that the fetichism begins. Before Henry 
 VIII, a bloated monster of selfishness and vice, steeped in uxori- 
 cide and judicial murder, his slaves grovel in the dust. They 
 compare him to the sun in its glory and almost to God. Adulation 
 well nigh equally extravagant is paid to his daughter, though in 
 this case the baseness is redeemed by the generous illusion which 
 saw the nation impersonated in its queen. Shakespeare, how- 
 ever, you will see, though thoroughly monarchical, is never slavish. 
 But it is with tKe Stuarts that Divine Right appears as the cour- 
 tiers' creed, and that loyalty arrogates the character of a distinct 
 virtue. Bishops tell James I when he insults the Puritans that 
 he speaks by the inspiration of God, and divines preach before 
 Charles I the doctrine that there can be no such thing as justice 
 between the king and the subject any more than between God 
 and the creature. Now it is that the hearts of all who support 
 Stuart despotism, in the words of the Cavalier song, are " crowned 
 with loyal fires." We respect the tradition of the Cavaliers as we 
 respect any tradition of gallantry and misfortune. Some of those 
 men really sacrificed estate and life for what they sincerely 
 
believed to be the right, though there was also a hiiger ekMueiit 
 of what Carlyle calls "truculent flunkeyism." But nobody in 
 England would think of bowing his head to the .lescendants of 
 the Cavaliers or letting them settle the destinies of the nation. 
 The grass has grown over the graves of Edgehill and Naseby, 
 as it must grow at last over all graves. The other day, when on 
 a visit to England, I found myself in the house of a friend who 
 represented one of the Cavalier families. The relics of Charles 
 the Pilot's standard bearer at Edgehill hung on the walls, but the 
 family were leading Liberals. However, it was under the 
 Restoration, and especially at the evil close of Charles the Second's 
 reign, that the Loyalists became a regular party, supporting royal 
 usurpation and judicial murder, and being well paid for their de- 
 votion. North, himself a strong Tory, describes that party as 
 the men that went about drinking and hu5^zaing. One of the 
 loudest of them was Chief Justice Scroggs, of whom North says, 
 " that he was of a mean extract, having been a butcher's son who 
 wrought himself into business in the law," that he was " a great 
 voluptuary, being a companion of the high court rakes," and "had 
 a true libertine principle." " Scroggs," North tells us, " was pre- 
 ferred lor professing loyalty, but Gates, coming forward with a 
 swinging popularity, he took in and ranted on that side most im- 
 petuously." The same men, under the same romantic designation, 
 combined to support the tyranny of James II and to help him in 
 cutting the throat of national liberty. But when James II laid 
 his hand upon the rich possessions of the Church, the other side 
 of Loyalism was seen. We can understand the King's surprise 
 and partly sympathize with his disgust. However, Loyalism 
 soon recovered itself, and after calling in William of Oran<'-e to 
 deliver it, it began to show its fidelity to principle by plotting 
 against his Government and life. Presently it proceeded to sig- 
 nalize itself by betraying the nation at Utrecht, and afterwards 
 by a series of half-tipsy intrigues and pot-valiant swaggerings 
 
Y 
 
 b LOYALTY. 
 
 in the interest of the " King over the Water." A more despicable 
 party than the Jacobites, who seemed to themselves and in a 
 certain sense were, the very pink of loyalty, never appeared on 
 the scene of history. It is needless to say how Loyalism repaired 
 its golden fires under George III, how passionate was its devo- 
 tion to the person of that excellent monarch, especially when he 
 was out of his mind, and what services it rendered to the country 
 by bringing on the American war and vetoing Catholic Emanci- 
 pation. Places, pensions, bishoprics, deaneries, and sinecures 
 without number were its reward. 
 
 In Canada loyalty was at its zenith under the Family Compact. 
 But again it showed its peculiar character as a virtue. So long 
 as the Crown was on its side, gave it all the patronage and emol- 
 uments, and protected it against reform, it was passionately de- 
 voted to the Crown and the mother country. But when with 
 the growth of the Reform movement in England the Crown 
 changed its policy, a change came over the spirit of Colonial loy- 
 alism also. When two Family Compact officials were dismissed 
 for opposing the Liberal policy of the Governmtnt, Loyalist 
 organs began to proclaim that their attachment to the Empire 
 had received a fatal shock and that they would have to turn their 
 eyes elsewhere. Afterwards we know what an exhibition of loy- 
 alty ensued upon the passage of the Rebellion Losses bill. The 
 principle of the Loyalists upon that occasion, it must ^^ owned, 
 was severely tried ; but it did not prove equal to the trial. Fling- 
 mg rotten eggs and stones at the Governor-General was a singular 
 display of devotion to the Crown. We need not insinuate that 
 on that account loyalty was insincere. The African believes in 
 his idol though he whips it for not giving him what he wants. 
 
 In the days of old the idol of loyalty was, at all events, a sub- 
 stance, not a shadow, as it still is in countries really under mon- 
 juchical government, and in which the people look up, like children, 
 for the maintenance of order and almost for their daily bread to 
 
 W 
 
 
LOYALTY. 
 
 9 
 
 their paternal king. But how is it with us? Sunday after 
 Sunday we solemnly |>ray to God that Her Majesty and Her 
 Majesty's representative may be enabled to govern us well, 
 Let Her Majesty or Her Majesty's representative presume to do a 
 single act of government against the wishes of the Tory Prime 
 Minister ; let either of them veto a single job or bribe, and we 
 know what would be the result. Yet we profess to believe that 
 God is not to be mocked. This professed devotion to an empty 
 name is, however, not without its substantial uses. By loud 
 protestations of loyalty to the Crown, which he knows will 
 never cost him anything, a man absolves himself from loyalty 
 to the commonwealth. He feels himself perfectly at liberty 
 to cabal and conspire as much as he pleases aga rst the public 
 good in his own interest, or in that of some exclusive order or 
 sectional combination, because he is loyal to . Crown div< Jted of 
 all its po' r and to the name of r connection wit^ the mother 
 cour.tr}'- which he has practically re luced to a n\ore shadow. I 
 do not mean to speak disrespectfully of any feeling which is gen- 
 nine, however out of date, but there are not a few cases in wiiich 
 loyalty to the Crown is a fine name for disloyalty to the country, 
 and loyalty to British connection is a fine name for disloyalty to 
 Canada. ,* 
 
 The loyalty cry is now being raised, in default of any econom- 
 ical argument, to deter the country from accepting the benefits of 
 Reciprocity and to scare it into acquiescence in a policy of 
 which commercial atrophy and the exodus are the visible and in- 
 evitable results. Here we see how, with what curious exactness, 
 the Loyalists* virtue follows, through all their windings, the lines 
 of interest. To exclude British goods by protective duties is per- 
 r fectly loyal. It is perfectly loyal to wage what in fact is a tariff" 
 war against the mother country. But to discriminate against the 
 mother country is disloyal in the highest degree. The very 
 thought of it is enough almost to throw a loyal man into convul- 
 
 i.W«**««»««»o»c«»K*«»« 
 
 ia 
 
10 
 
 LOYALTY. 
 
 sions. Yet discrimination would have no disloyal object. It 
 would be not against England in particular but against all coun- 
 tries alike. It would evince no c-ange of feeling towards the 
 mother country, or towards the political connection. It would 
 not take a penny from the revenue of the Crown or a particle 
 from its power or dignity. It would hardly take away anything 
 from the commercial wealth of the British people. The enhanced 
 value of their Canadian investments which would result from 
 free trade would probably make up to them for the loss which a 
 few exporting houses would sustain. But the same measure 
 would expose the protected manufacturers of Canada to con- 
 tinental competition. 
 
 The commercial unity of the Empire is at an end. It was 
 formally declared to be at an end when an Australian colony 
 claimed the right to lay protective duties on British goods, and 
 the question having been considered by the Home Government 
 was decided in favour of the claim. Great Britain has withdrawn 
 all commercial privileges from the colonies, and by the same act 
 she has conceded to them the liberty of doing the best they can 
 commercially for themselves, each according to the circumstances 
 of its own case. The commercial circumstances of Canada are 
 those of a country placed alongside a great neighbour who is under 
 the protective system, and whose policy it is impossible for her 
 in regulating her own to ignore, as it is to ignore the physical 
 features of her continent. The commercial unity of the Empire 
 having been, I repeat, dissolved by the act of the mother country 
 herself, which deprived the colonies of their privileges, there can 
 be nothing disloyal in recognizing the necessities of our own case. 
 Offer us free trade with the whole world, the mother country in- 
 cluded, and there are some of us who will gladly accept it. Will 
 the loyal men of the Red Parlour do the same ? 
 
 We are disloyal, it is said, because we propose to enter into a 
 tariff arrangement wnth the United States, and by entering into a 
 
 'I 
 
 
 'i 
 
 •f 
 
LOYALTY. 11 
 
 i 
 
 tariff arrangement with the United States, we should compromise 
 
 the fiscal independence of the country. Of course you cannot 
 
 make a treaty without surrendering to that extent, and so long 
 
 I as the treaty lasts, your independence of action. But if the treaty 
 
 is fair, where is the dishonour ? Was there any dishonour in the 
 
 Elgin Treaty ? Was there any dishonour in the commercial treaty 
 
 made by England with France ? It is idle to think that in cora- 
 
 i raercial matters we can be entirely independent of the United" 
 
 I States. We must be beholden to them for our principal winter- 
 
 i ports. We must trust to their comity for the transmission , of 
 
 J our goods in bond. Our railway system is bound up with theirs. 
 
 j What we call our great national road, the road which was to be 
 
 J the pledge of our eternal separation from them, not only has 
 
 I branches running into their territory, but actually passes with its 
 
 :• trunk line through the State of Maine. If there is any disloyalty 
 
 I in this matter it would appear to be in maintaining a fiscal policy 
 
 ( which is constantly driving the flower of our population over the 
 
 I line, and saves Canada from annexation by annexing the 
 
 Vj Canadians. 
 
 j Does anyone want to be told what is really disloyal ? It is 
 
 disloyal to assemble the representatives of a particular commercial 
 
 ' interest before the elections and virtually sell to them the policy 
 
 of the country. It is disloyal to seek by corrupt means the sup- 
 
 y port of particular nationalities, churches, political orders, or sec- 
 
 ij " tional interests of any kind, against the broad interest of the 
 
 community. It is disloyal to sap the independence of provinces 
 and reduce them to servile pensioners on the Central Government 
 by systematically bribing them with "better terms" and federal 
 grants. It is disloyal to use the appointments to a branch of the 
 national legislature as inducements to partisans to spend money in 
 elections. It is disloyal to use public works, which ought to be 
 undertaken only for the general good, for the purpose of bribing 
 particular constituencies. It is disloyal to make concessions to 
 
 -{ 
 
12 
 
 LOYALTY. 
 
 public contractors which are to be repaid by contributions to an 
 election fund. It is disloyal to corrupt the public press, and thus 
 to poison the wells of public instruction and public sentiment. 
 It is disloyal to tamper with the article of the Constitution re- 
 specting the time of general elections by thimblerigging dissolu- 
 tions brought on to snap a national verdict. It is disloyal to 
 vitiate the national verdict by gerrymandering. It is disloyal to 
 surrender the national veto on provincial legislation, the very 
 palladium of nationality, out of fear of the Jesuit vote. All cor- 
 ruption is disloyalty. All sectionalism is disloyalty. All but 
 pure, straightforward and honourable conduct in the management 
 of public affairs is disloyalty. If it is not disloyalty to a crown 
 ou a cushion, it is disloyalty to the commonwealth. ^/ 
 
 The question of our political relations is not now before us. 
 We are dealing with the commercial question alone. But suppose 
 the political question were before us, would there be any disloy- 
 alty in dealing with it frankly and honestly ? I say frankly and 
 honestly. There is disloyalty in any sort of intrigue. But who 
 has intrigued ? According to the Government organs, the coun- 
 try is a nest of conspirators. Everybody who goes to Washing- 
 ton goes for the purpose of conspiracy, as though real conspirators 
 would not have the sense to keep their names out of the hotel 
 book. I have myself been charged in the Government organ 
 with going to Washington to sell the country. I go to Washing- 
 ton every spring on my way with my wife to a Southern water- 
 ing-place, and at no other time, mainly for the purpose of seeing 
 personal friends, the chief of whom was the late Mr. Bancroft. I 
 have been charged by the same organ with being a party to 
 bringing American money into the country for the purpose of 
 influencing the elections, the evidence being that my friend, Mr. 
 Hallam, to whom I never said a syllable on the subject of political 
 relations, had ])roposed to raise a fund for the diffusion of know- 
 ledge about the tariff question. Treason is a great crime. If 
 
LOYALTY. 
 
 13 
 
 anybody has been guilty of it let him be brought to justice. But 
 it is time that people should know that to charge your fellow- 
 citizens, men in as good standing as yourself, with treason and 
 with trying to sell the country, without any proof of the fact, is 
 a social offence. 
 
 There has just been a meeting of Imperial Federationists, 
 of whose aspiration I desire to speak with all respect. The 
 object of Imperial Federationists is to make a great change in our 
 political relations. They seek to reverse the process of decen- 
 tralization which, apparently, in obedience to the dictate of 
 nature, has been going on for so many years, to take from Canada 
 a part of her self-government, and to place her again under the 
 authority of a central power. They fancy, indeed, that they can 
 have an Imperial Federation without detracting from colonial 
 self-government. But how could this be when each of the colonies 
 would be subject certainly to military assessments, and probably 
 to fiscal control ; for it is hardly possible to imagine a federation 
 with a multiplicity of tariffs, some of them hostile to others, as 
 those of the protectionist colonies now are to the mother coun- 
 try ? What the plan of the Imperial Federationists is remains a 
 mystery. They tell us not to ask them for a cut-and-dried 
 scheme. We do not ask for a scheme either cut or dried, but 
 only for one that shall be intelligible and a possible subject of 
 discussion. Readjustment of postage-rates is not confederation. 
 However, it lies not in their mouths to say that a proposal of 
 change must be disloyal. If they are at liberty to advocate cen- 
 tralization, " Canada First " was equally at liberty to advocate 
 independence. " Canada First," in its day, was denounced as 
 disloyal. I well recollect when you were told that to speak of 
 Canada as a nation, was treason. We have got beyond that 
 point, I suppose, since the National Polic}'^ is now the height of 
 loyalty. "Canada First" was started by Mr. W. A. Foster's 
 pamphlet before I settled here and I never belonged to the 
 
14 
 
 LOYALTY. 
 
 National Association ; but I regarded the movement with cor- 
 dial sympathy, if only because it had drawn into it, as it seemed 
 to me, some of the best and most generous spirits of the country. 
 If there is any cjuestion of loyalty in the matter it might be 
 thought that they were the most loyal who desired for their 
 country a higher position than that of perpetual dependence. 
 Whether their aspirations were feasible is another question. 
 They hardly took into account the French difficulty, nor did they 
 or perhaps anybody at that time distinctly see what effect the 
 enormous extension of disjointed territory toward the West 
 would have on the geographical unity of the nation. But their 
 aspiration was high ; they were responding in fact to the appeal 
 which the authors of Confederation themselves had made to the 
 heart of the country, and never was the name of loyalty more 
 traduced than when they were called disloyal. 
 
 There are men living, high in public life and in the Conserva- 
 tive ranks, who signed a manifesto in favour, I do not say of an- 
 nexation, which is a false and hateful term, but of political union 
 with the United States. Nothing is more irrational or ungener- 
 ous than to taunt people with opinions which they once honestly 
 held and have since not less honestly renounced. It is not for 
 any such purpose that I refer to the Montreal manifesto. Bu 
 such a manifesto could not have been signed by such men if the 
 question were not one which might be entertained without dis- 
 loyalty, provided always that those who entertain it remain firm, 
 pending its solution, in their dutiful allegiance to their own coun- 
 try. For my own part, being not a politician, but a student, and re- 
 strained by no exigencies of statecraft, I never conceal my opinion. 
 I have always deplored the schism which divided our race a cen- 
 tury ago. I hold that there was wrong on both sides, and not less 
 on the side of the American Revolutionists than on that of the 
 British Government. I hope and steadfastly believe that some 
 day the schism will be healed, that there will be a moral reunion, 
 
LOVALTV. 
 
 15 
 
 7 
 
 whicli alone is possible, of the American colonies of Great Britain 
 with their mother country, and a complete reunion, with the 
 hearty sanction of the mother country, of the whole race upon 
 this continent. Great Britain will in time see that she has no real 
 interest here but amity and trade. The unity of the race, and 
 the immense advantages of a settlement which would shut out 
 war from this continent and make it an economical whole, will 
 prevail, I feel convinced, in the end over evil memories and the 
 efforts of those who cherish them. That the consummation will 
 come in my time is unlikely, though a Government of monopoly 
 and corruption is driving it on apace. At all events, I have no 
 more personal interest in it than in any astronomical event. Nor 
 would I wish to see it hastened by any means which would" im- 
 pair its perfect spontaneity. On the other hand, nobody who be- 
 lieves in ultimate union can wish to see the earnings of the people 
 wasted in desperate efforts to perpetuate separation. A hundred 
 millions of public money or money's worth, at least, have been 
 spent on this great national road by which the triumph of the 
 Separatist policy was to be secured forever. Not a Yankee was 
 to have a cent in the enterprise or to have anything to do with 
 it, and the road was to run entirely over our own territory, not 
 touching the accursed Yankee soil. The road has been built 
 , partly with Yankee money ; it has had a Yankee politician for its 
 vice-president ; it has now a Yankee — and an unmistakable Yan- 
 kee — for its president ; it runs through the Yankee State of 
 Maine, and connects our system with the Yankee system at more 
 points than one. It is, in fact, half a Yankee road. So much for 
 the wisdom and hopefulness of a fight against nature. 
 
 Whether Commercial Union would accelerate political union or 
 retard it, who can say ? The Elgin Treaty manifestly put off politi- 
 cal union by removing discontent. But railway union and social 
 union and the fusion of the populations by the exodus all mani- 
 festly tend to political union, and who thinks it disloyal to con- 
 
H^a 
 
 o 
 
 16 
 
 LOYALTY. 
 
 tribute to these ? If a man makes himself prominent in cultivat- 
 ing loyal antipathy to Americans, you are as likely as not to find 
 that he is in the service of an American railroad company and 
 helping, honourably enough, to send Canadians to the States. 
 The other day I was myself reviled in the most unmeasured lan- 
 guage for my supposed American proclivities. Soon afterwards I 
 heard that my assailant had accepted a call as a minister to the 
 other side of the line. 
 
 On this continent, not in Europe ; in the New World, not in 
 the Old ; the lot of Canada and of Canadians is cast. This fixes 
 cur general destiny, whatever special arrangements of a political 
 kind the future may have in store. This sets the mark of our 
 aspirations and traces the line of our public duty. This deter- 
 mines for us what is genuine loyalty. That course of action 
 which leads to the happy development of man on our own con- 
 tinent is for us loyal. To say that loyalty consists in keeping 
 this community always in dependence on a community three 
 thousand miles off and condemninof it to be without a life of its 
 own, is to set loyalty at fatal odds not only with nature but 
 with genuine sentiment. Nature sets us not only the more prac- 
 ticable but the nobler part. 
 
 It is irrational to rail against British aristocracy. British 
 aristocracy is an historical institution ; it had its day of useful- 
 ness in its own country ; and perhaps in its own country, if it 
 faces the crisis gallantly, it may do some good still. But it can 
 do no good here. It can breed and does breed nothing here but 
 false ambition, llunkeyism, title-hunting, and sycophantic Resolu- 
 tions. It draws away the hearts of wealthy and ambitious Cana- 
 dians from their own country to Downing Street and May Fair. 
 Let it retire to its own land. To sacrifice Canada to its policy 
 and make her a perpetual engine in its hands for preventing the 
 triuaiph of democracy on this continent is to put her to service 
 which loyalty to her and to hur anity as well as good 
 
 ■ 
 
LOYALTY. 
 
 17 
 
 sense abhors. Let British aristocracy, I repeat, do the best it can 
 and live as long as it can in Great Britain : it has no business 
 here. It is said, I believe truly, though it was not reported at 
 the time, that when the Mulock Resolution was put one very 
 eminent member of the Opposition uttered some manly words and 
 went out of the House. He carried true loyalty with him and 
 left something that was not loyal or true behind. Let British 
 aristocracy withdraw with grace from a world for which it has 
 done nothing and which has never belonged to it. The Gov- 
 ernor-Generalship surely would not be a great loss to it. How 
 can any man of mark or spirit wish to play the part of a figure- 
 head, or, worse still, by the exercise of his mock prerogative to 
 help in loading the dice for a gambling politician ? 
 
 There might be danger and there might be disloyalty in touch- 
 ing this question if there were on the part of Americans any dis- 
 position to aggression. But there is none. I have lived a good 
 deal in the States during the last twenty-five years, and have had 
 every opportunity of learning American sentiment ; I have a 
 number of family connections in the States ; I have resided at an 
 American University and held intercourse with the young men, 
 who are generally the frankest indicators of national feelino- ; I 
 was in the States at the time of the Civil War, and when the 
 people were most exasperated against England ; and I can truly 
 say that I never detected the slightest desire of aggression upon 
 Canadian independence. The desire of bringing Canada into the 
 Union at all has always appeared to me very weak, and not a few 
 of the politicians are averse to it, fearing a derangement of the 
 party balance. Most of tlie people with whom 1 have come into 
 contact have, like the American Press, shown almost a mortifying 
 indifference on the subject. If the Americans meditated annexa- 
 tion by force, why did they not attack us when they had a vast 
 and victorious army ? If they meditate annexation by pressure, 
 why do they allow us bonding privileges and the use of their 
 
18 
 
 LOVALTV. 
 
 winter-ports ? The McKinley Bill was eagerly hailed by Separa- 
 tists here as an act of American hostility. Its object was simply 
 to rivet and extend protection, at the same time catching the 
 farmer's vote, for which politicians fish there with the same bait 
 with which Sir John Macdonald fishes here. Of course as there 
 are paper tigers on our side of the line, there are tail-twisters on 
 the other side. , One of the most valiant of them, in the person of 
 Senator Ingalls, has just bitten the dust. The tail-twisters have 
 as much influence there as the paper tigers have here, and no 
 more. These suspicions when unjustified are undignified. They 
 expose us to ridicule, while they prevent us from seeing in its true 
 light and settling wisely the great question of our own future. 
 
 Again, it would be dislo3^alty ever to think of anything less 
 than an equal and honourable union, such as that between Eng- 
 land and Scotland. But who does think of anj'thing less ? Nor 
 need there be any alteration of character, any obliteration of 
 memories, any sacrifice of cherished associations. Canada in the 
 Union might be Canada stiU, as Scotland in the Union is Scot- 
 land still. I have done my best, for one, to help those who were 
 trying to make Toronto an independent centre of literature, feel- 
 ing that whatH'/er course political events might take, such a 
 centre would retain its /alue. By building up the greatness and 
 the moral independence of the community, we surely give more 
 substantial proof of loyalty than we should give by any amount 
 of frothy and rancorous declamation. 
 
 Those who say that the country is suffering from a bad fiscal 
 policy and from the corruption of government are branded as dis- 
 loyal. They are charged with decrying Canada by telling this 
 unpleasant truth. Truth, ])leasant or unpleasant, can never be 
 disloyal. But let the accusers look back to their own record be- 
 fore 1878, when the opposite party was in power. What pictures 
 of national distress and ruin were then painted ! What pessi- 
 mism was uttered and penned ! What jeremiads rung in our 
 
 
 >«WW«»W!KB»n^- 
 
LOVALTV. 
 
 19 
 
 
 ears ! Soup kitchens, some thought, were opened, not so much for 
 the relief of distress as to present in the most vivid and liarrow- 
 ing manner the state to which Liberal policy had reduced the 
 people. Is it the rising flood of prosperity that is sending so 
 many Canadians over the line ? It was disloyal to say that rail- 
 way monopoly was keeping back tiie North-west. What do they 
 say about that now ? 
 
 Is it loyal to turn our Public Schools into seed plots of inter- 
 national enmity by imj}lantirig hatred of the Americans in the 
 breasts of children ? The Public Schools are maintained by all 
 for the benefit of all, and it is a gross abuse of trust to use them 
 for party purposes. Nor does it seem very chivalrous to be in- 
 veigling children instead of appealing to men. Celebrations of 
 victories gained in byegone quarrels over people who are now 
 your friends are perhaps not the sort of things to which the 
 bravest are the most prone. Wellington and the men who had 
 fought with him at Waterloo used to dine together on that day. 
 This was very well, especially as those victorious veterans did 
 not crow or bluster. But it forms no precedent for swaggering 
 demonstrations by us, who did not fight at Queenston Heights or 
 Lundy's Lane. And when this war spirit is got up, whom are 
 we to fight ? The one million of Canadians and their half-million 
 of children now settled on the other side of the line ? All the 
 British immigrants who have been pouring into the United 
 States during the last generation ? Literally, when we take 
 away from the population of Canada the French and other 
 nationalities, there would be as many men of British blood on the 
 enemy's side as on ours. " Bombard New York ! " said a Cana- 
 dian of my acquaintance ; " why, my four sons live there !" 
 
 Is it loyal to threaten us with settling questions on horseback 
 in other words, with military coercion ? The English people 
 would not endure such threats from the commanders of the army 
 which won the Alma and Inkerman. I heard one of these 
 
 iiMH 
 
 MMliii 
 
20 
 
 LOYALTY. 
 
 tirades read out at a Commercial Union meeting by a tall farmer, 
 who when he had done said, " Now we want no nonsenae " — 
 whereat a number of other tall farmers with deep voices cried, 
 " Hear ! hear ! " I suspect there is force enough in the country to 
 vindicate its own freedom of deliberation and its power of self- 
 disposal. The only effect of menaces such as are sometimes heard 
 will be to make our people more deaf than ever to the appeals of 
 British Imperialists who exhort us to maintain a standing array 
 as a safeguard for our independence. Our independence is safe 
 enough from any hostile aggression, and our liberty is safer in our 
 own hands than in those of warriors who propose to decide politi- 
 cal questions for us on horseback. 
 
 Loyalists appeal to the memories of those who fought and fell 
 at Queenston Heights and Lundy's Lane. We also appeal to 
 those memories. Honour to the brave who gave their lives for 
 Canada ! As they did their duty to their country then by de- 
 fending her against unjust invasion, they would now, if they were 
 alive, be doing their duty to her by helping to rescue her from 
 monopoly and corruption. Honour, once more, to the truly brave ! 
 Let us build their monuments by all means. We are all as ready 
 as any Loyalist to contribute, if only we may be allowed to make 
 the memorial, like the joint monument to Wolfe and Montcalm at 
 Quebec, a noble and chivalrous tribute to heroism, not an ignoble 
 record of a bygone feud, and to grave on it words expressive not 
 of perpetual enmity, but of the reconciliation of our race. 
 
 Let us be true to the country, keep her interest above all other 
 interests, personal, partisan, or sectional, in our hearts ; be ready to 
 make all sacrifices to it which a reasonable patriotism demands ; 
 be straightforward and aboveboard in all our dealings with public 
 questions, and never, out of fear of unpopularity or abuse, shrink 
 from the honest expression of opinion and the courageous advo- 
 cacy of whatever we conscientiously believe to be good for the 
 community. So long as we do this, depend upon it we are loyal. 
 
 1 
 
 84§|i 
 
 ->C»»- 
 
 a 
 
 12 
 
I 1 •mrm^'mmm^mmmim^mimmmmiimmmil