K>r:^% •?>, ^^ ^o %^ o^^ '^^^ -..v% IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. C?.r :/ /A, 1.0 I.I •- IIIIIM 12.5 IIM IIIII2.2 illM a; 10 2.0 1.8 " 1.25 1.4 1.6 ^ 6" — ►• Photographic Sciences Corporation s. iP V 4 :\ ^ t>. XV" % \p \ ^^vir^ 6^ ri' i^ 23 WEST MA':>J STREET WEBSTER, N.V. 14580 (716) 872-4503 iLo Ml .S" /£>. S £?/ C/u m CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institui Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/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 microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de ^ie 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 m6thode normale de filmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. [Zl Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagee D Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es n Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul^e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque r~~V Pages restored and/or laminated/ [^ Pages restaur6es et/ou pelliculees Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colorees, tachet^es ou piquees □ Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couieur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planclies et/ou illustrations en couleur D Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents □Pages detached/ Pages detachees I V Showthrough/ l_i_l Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Qualite inegale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire D n Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re*iure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distort on le long de la marge intdrieure Blank laaves added du ing restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmees. □ Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., 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 filmdes d nouveau de facon i obtenir la meilleure image possible. D Additional comments:/ Commentatres suppl^mentaires; This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X y 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: l^ational Library of Canada L'exemplaire fiimd fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Bibliothdque nationale du 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. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nbitet^ de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filme'^^ 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 filmds en commengant par la premidre 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 dornidre image de cheque 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 d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour gtre reproduit en un seul clichd, il est film6 d partir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. 1 ■» i t ' » 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 mmmmm M LOYALTY, flRISTOCRflCY AND JINGOISM. Delivered before the Young Men's Liberal Cluby Toronto* BY GOLDWIN SMITH, D.C.L. '1 ^^Vfftd0X HUNTER, ROSE & COMPANY, AND WILLIAMSOl^ & CO. 1891. Wm&t tWENTY-nW OENTa , i' ; - -4'-". ;-^.\ t-^ lij^g^ i>"- "TmgamMBnDow L Dei LeVALTY, ARISreGRAGY AND JINGOISM. Delivered before the Young MerCs Liberal Club, Toronto, BY GOLDWIN SMITH, D.C.L. Toronto: HUNTER, ROSE & COMPANY AND WILLIAMSON & CO. 189L il The following Lectures were delivered before the Youn<)YAT;rY. 18 the Cyi-own or a particle from its power or (li«^nity. It would har«lly 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 Continental competition. Therefore he who proposes it is a traitor. The commercial unity of the Empire is at an end. It was formally declared to be at an end when an Austral- ian 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 cir- cumstances of its own case. The commercial circum- stances 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 14 T/)YALTY. the necessities of our own case. Offer us free trade with the whole world, the mother country included, 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 with the United States, and by entering into a tariff arrangement with the United States, we should compromise the fiscal independence of the country. Of course you (^annot make a treaty with- out surrendering to that extent, and so long as the treaty lasts, your independence of action. But if the treaty is fail", where is the dishonour ? Was there any dishonour in the Elgin Treaty ? Was there any dis- honour in the commercial treaty made by England with France ? It is idle to think that in commercial matters we can be entirely independent of the United States. We must be beholden to them for our principal winter-ports. We must trust to their comity for the transmission of our goods in bond. Our railway system is bound up with theirs. W^hat we call our great national road, the road which was to be the pledge of our eternal separation from them, not only has branches running into their ter- ritory, but actually passes with its trunk line through the State of Maine. If there is any disloyalty in this matter it would appear to be in maintaining a fiscal policy which is constantly driving the flower of our population over the line, and saves Canada from annexation by annexing the Canadians. LOYALTY. Does anyone want to be told what is really disloyal ? It is disloyal ti» assemble the representatives of a partic- ular commercial interest before the elections and vir- tually sell to them the policy of the country. It is disloyal to seek by corrupt means the support of particu- lar nationalities, churches, political orders, or sectional 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 constitu- encies. It is disloyal to make concessions to public contractors which are to be repaid by contribu- tions to an election fund. It is disloyal to corrupt the public press, and thus to poison the wells of public in- struction and public sentiment. It is disloyal to tamper with the article of the Constitution respecting the time of general elections by thimblerigging dissolutions 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 corruption is disloyalty. All J, ii-i m 1(1 LOYALTY. .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 on a cushion, it is disloyalty to the Commonwealth. " Loyalty " still has a meaning though the feudal relation between lord and vassal has passed away. It means thorough-going and self-sacrificing devotion to a principle, a cause or the community. All that is contrary to such devotion or tends to its disparagement, is still disloyal. 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 disloyalty 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 country is a nest of conspirators. Everybody who goes to Washington 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 Washington every Spring on my way with my wife to a Southern watering-place, and at no other time, mainly for the pur- pose of seeing personal friends, the chief of whom was the late Mr. Bancroft. I have been charged by the same I J LOVAl/rv. 17 organ witli beirij^ a party to bringing American money into the country for the purpose of influencing the elec- tions, the evidence being that my friend, Mr. Hallam, to whom I never said a sjdlable on the subject of polit- ical relations, had proposed to i-aise a fund for the diffu- sion of knowledge about the tariff question,* Treason is a great crime. If 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 stand- ing as yourself, with treason anmpany and helping, honouiably enough, to send Canadians to the States. The other day I.was my- self reviled in the most unmeasured language for my supposed American proclivities. Soon afterwards I heard tliat 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 our 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 determines for us what is genuine loyalty. That course of action which leads to the happy development of man on our own con- 1 " 4. 22 LOYALTY. tinont is for us loyal. To say that loyalty consists in keeping this community always in dependence on a com- munity three thousand miles off and condemning 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 assigns us not only the more practicable but the nobler part. II' It is irrational to rail against British aristocracv. British aristocracy is an historical institution ; it had its day of usefulness 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, Hunkeyism, title-hunting, and sycophantic Resolutions. It draws away the hearts of wealthy and ambitious Can- adians from their own country to Downing Street and Mayfair. 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 triumph of democracy on this continent is to put her to service which loyalty to her and to humanity as well as good sense abhors. Let British aristocracy, I repeat, do the best it can and live as Idng as it can in Great Britain : it has no business here. It is said, I believe truly, though it was not re- ported 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. l.OYALTY 28 lie canied true loyalty with hiin and left something that was not loyal or true behind. Let British aristoc- racy withdraw with gracs from a world for which it has done nothing and which has never belonged to it The Governor-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 niock prerogative to help in loading the dice for a gambling politician ? There might be danger and there might be disloyalty in touching this question if there were on the part of Americans any disposition to aggression. But there is none. If the Americans meditated aiinexation by force, why did they not attack us when they had a vast and victorious army ? If they meditate annexation by pres- sure, why do they allow us bonding privileges and the use of their winter ports ? The McKinley Bill was eager- ly hailed by Separatists here as an act of American hos- tility. Its object was simply to rivet and extend protec- tion, 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 sus- n Ii1 < !i:> h I 24 LOYAI/rV. picions 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. Those who say that the country is suffering from a bad fiscal policy and from the corruption of government are branded as disloyal. They are charged with decrying Canada by telling this unpleasant truth. Truth, pleasant or unpleasant, can never be disloyal. Hut let the accus- ers look back to their own lecord before LS78, when the opposite party was in ])ower. What pictures of national distress and luin were then painted ! What pessimism was uttered and penned ! What jeremiads rung in our ears ! Souj) kitchens, some thought, were opened not so much for the relief of distress as to present in the most vivid and harrowing 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 railway monopoly was keeping back the North-west. What do they say about that now ? Is it loyal to turn our Public Schools into seedplots of international enmity by implanting hatred of the Ameri- cans in the breasts of children ? The Public Schools are maintained by all for the benefit of all, and it is an abuse of trust to use them for party purposes. Nor does it seem very chivalrous to be inveigling children instead ; :i LOVALTY. 25 •of a|)i)ealiiig to men. Celebrations of victories gained in liyegonc (luaiiels over people who are now your frieiuls are perhaps not the sort of things to which the bravest are the most prone. Wellington and the men who had fought with liiin at Waterloo used to dine together on that (lay. This was very well, especially as those victor- ious veterans did not crow or bluster. But it foims no precedent for boastful demonstrations by us, who did not fight at Queenston Heights or Lundy's Lane. And when this war spirit is got up, whom aie 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 Canadian of my acquain- tance ; '' why, my four sons live there ! " Is it loyal to threaten us with settling questions on horseback, in other words, with railitaiy coercion ? The Etiglish people would not endure such threats from the commanders of the army which won the Alma and In- kerman. I heard one of these tirades read out at a Commercial Union meeting by a tall farmer, who when he had done said, " Now we want no nonsense " — where- at a number of other tall farmers with deep voices cried, li ! li i I I i }ii 26 LOYALTV. " Hoar ! hear ! " I'here is force enough, let us hope, 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 Im- perialists who exhort us to maintain a standing army 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 political 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 defending her against unjust in- vasion, 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 I 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 monu- ment 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 LOYALTY 27 liearts ; be ready to make all saeiitices to it vvliich a reasonable patriotism demands; be straigbttbrvvard and aboveboard in all our dealings witb public questions, and never, out of fear of unpopularity or abuse, shrink from the honest expression of opinion and the courageous advocacy of whatever we conscientiously believe to bo good for the community. So long as we do this, depend upon it, we are loyal. ii ■! 28 L()YAi;i'V. NOTE. li I ii' \W There ap|)eared some time ago in the New York Tribune an extremely personal criticism, extending over nearly three columns, on my life and character, by Mr. E. L. Godkin, the New York journalist, an Iiislinian and Home Ruler. The ostensible occasion was the setjuel of a journalistic passage-of-arms. The article was inaceu- rate in its representations, depicting me among other things as a man who had been all his life restlesslv dab- bling in political journalism, the truth being that 1 had no connection, except of the most casual kind, with any political journal between 1858, when I letired from the staff of the Saturday Review on my appointment to the professorship of Modern History at Oxfoid, and 1872, when at the instance of friends I became, for a short time, a contributor to the Toronto Nat'ion. i was also represented as having proposed the suspension of Tiial by Jury in Ireland, when, in fact, I had done nothing of the kind. I, however, allowed the attack to pass without notice, not being inclined to engage in an autobiographical discussion in the New York Prej-s, while I felt sure that American readers would have too much sense to accept any man's portrait as painted by a manifest enemy. The main charge, however, was that of "diabolical" behaviour and language with reference to the Irish question, notably in relation to a lecture de- livered by me at Brighton, England, as Mr. Godkin sup- poses in 1881, in opposition to Mr. Gladstone's Irish Land Bill, but really delivered in 1882, after the passage of that Bill, of which, as well as of Disestablishment, I spoke in the lecture with gratitude, though I could not help feeling misgiving. The spirit of this " diabolical " production will be seen from the concluding paragraph, in which it is summed up : — " He not weary of well-doing. Remeinber, in half a oontuiy of " j'ii;ialic goveiiuneut, how niuuh has heen ettected, what a mountain LovAi/rv. 20 • ot iilm.sfs, restrict ions, nionnpolies, wrongs, ami fil»«nnlitieM has l)coii ' olpared away. In face of wliat difHtiulties has this licen achieved ! ■ what prophecies of rniu have all along heen uttered hy reaction or •timidity, and how one after anothei- have those prophecies been • belied I In the case of Kngland and Scotland, the fruits of a Liberal •policy are visible in a wealthier, a hap])ier, a better, a more united, • and a more loyal i)eople. In the case of Ireland they are not so clearly • visilde ; yet they aie there. The Ireland of 1SS"2, though not what • we should wish lier to l)e, is a very diHerent Ireland from that of the • last century, or of the first (|uarter of tlie present. Catholic exclu- ' sion, tiie penal code, the State Church of the minority are gone ; in •their jdacc reign (dective government, religious lil»erty, e(|uality • liefore the law. A system of ])ublic education, founded on perfect • toleration of all creeds, au'! T.(>Y.\T/rV. 31 is (Hie thing never to have been nmnied, iiimthei- to he divoirid. Kof some time, at all events, tlie relation would l)e one not of mere inias of their order, and went over to the (Jrown. The Lords did not protest against the tyranny *ot* Charles II. in his later days; nor did they protest against the murderous cruelties of James II., or even against his political usurpations, till their own interests were manifestly threatened. Not a voice was raised in the House of Lords, as far as we know, againsit the Bloody Assize or the murder of Alice Lisle. There was antagonism between aristocracy and Stuart absolutism, as well as Vjetween lay privilege and priestly ambition, besides the fear, still present, of an attempt on the part of the ecclesiastics to disturb the great Houses in the possession of the Church lands. After the final overthrow of the Stuarts, the German dynasty being weak and the system of lotten boroughs, which gave the Lords the nomination of a great part of the House of Commons, having been left untouched at the Revolution, the aristocracy was in power. What fol- lowed ? A reign of corruption more profound and shame- less than there ever was seen in the United States. It is not suspected, I believe, that any treaty has been carried through the American Senate like the Treaty of Paris by bribery. English politics were a mere struggle between different aristocratic cliques for a vast mass of public pelf. Chatham rose above all this, but Chatham was the man of the people. The head of the aristocracy AnisToruArv. 47 was Newcastle, of all jobbers and wirepullers the most contemptible. Aristocratic morals were on a par with aristocratic politics, and the contagion of both spread among the people. That the House of Lords has acted as the sober second- thought of the nation, correcting the rashness of the pop- ular House, is a mere fiction. Why, indeed, should a young Lord be less rash than an old (commoner ? The House of Lords has done nothing but block all change, as far as it dared, in the interest of privilege. It blocked not only Parliamentary reform, but religious justice, the freedom of the press, personal liberty, and even measures of mere humanity, such as the reform of the criminal law and the abolition of the slave trade. It blocked Parlia- mentary refoiin till the nation was brought to the verge of revolution, when it succumbed to fear. Had it pos- sessed wisdom and courage it might have usefully modi- fied the change. The House of Lords has never initiated a reform or improvement of firstrate importance. Its leg- islative barrenness is almost as notable as that of our Senate. True, the great Whig Houses took the lead in the struggle for Parliamentary reform. They had been out of power for half-a-century, and had contracted a strong spirit of opposition, which indeed they car. ; r to an unpatriotic excess in their anti-national sympathy with Napoleon. But it was not in the cause of Parlia- mentary reform that they had forfeited place ; it was ( 48 AI{IST(»CI{A<'Y. |: r 11 rtunately will be till society undergoes a transmutation which is not likely to come in our time, whatever social possibilities there mav be in the womb of the future. The social orofanism, like everything else in the universe, so far as we can see, is full of imperfections. But we need not make matters worse by drawing artificial lines. Hereditary rank does draw such lines. It has exercised a bad influence in this way on the whole frame of society in aristociatic coun- tries. Kxclusiveness runs all down the social grade, and the farmer's wife is "my lady" to the wife of the hired man. Respect for rank, we are always told, is inherent in man. Surely not respect for rank wholly unconnected with merit or service. Surel}' not respect for the rank of a fool or a profligate. This has been engrafted on human nature by the aristocratic system and has now struck pretty deep roots, but it is no more a part of human nature than any other folly or baseness, 'fhere is a well- known story of a man who bet that he would slap a per- fect stranger on the back in Pall Mall without oftending him, and won his bet by telling the* stranger, when he turned upon him in a fury, that he had taken him for a ARISTOCRACY. 55 nobleman of his ac(|uaintance whom he wonderfully re- sembled. The sentiment typified by this story, though common, we may hope is not ineradicable. It is true that American Republicans often show it in an extreme form ; but are they not always ashamed of it ? The love of titles is natural enough ? But once more, against titles there is nothing to be said, so long as they denote genuine service of any kind to the community. It is not likely that those who care most for them, or for sTny external distinction, will be the most high-minded and truly noble of mankind. The authority by which they are awarded never can be like that of which the voice is heard in a man's own breast. Still the love of them is natural and they have their use. We have only to take care that they are not multiplied to an absurd extent, that we have not more honourables than men without that handle to their names, more colonels than civilians, more Grand Arches than simple mortals, more bashaws with three tails than people without any tails at all. Feudal titles are one of the social influences which combine to give a false direction to what, if the phrase is not pedantic, may be called our political u'sthetics. So long as we have bodily senses and our minds are im- pressed through them, it will really be of consequence that the outward form and vesture of government should be truly symbolic of its character ; that it shouid have a majesty, however democratic and simple, of its own. We ifl 'ft M r.ri nr AniSTOCUACV. miss thai niaik wlien we try to leproducu tlie antique })ouip of an old feudal monarchy without its genuirM! magnilicence, and without the historical associations by which its obsoleteness is redeemed. You will know what 1 mean if you will recall to mind the account which was <,Mven us of the opening of Parliament the other day. Plainly, the ceremony was a travesty of the opening of Parliament at Westminster, with its military parade, its great oHicers oi' State glittering witli decorations, and its peeresses in full dress hlling the gallery. The open- inji of tlie i;reat council of the nation ouirht to be a solemn act, but that is not the wav^ to make it solemn. Knighthood, as we began by saying, not being heredi- tary, is not properly aristocratic. King William IV. was fond of making after-dinner speeches. On one occasion lie found himself seated between a Duke of Royal des- cent and a tradesman who had been kniij:hted as Lord Mayor. This gave him an opportunity of pointing out that in England everything was open to nierit. " On my right," he said, '* sits the Duke of Buckingham, with the blood of the Plantagenets in his veins ; on my left sits Sir Somebody Something raised from the very dregs of the people." But though not sti'ictly aristocratic, knight- hood is feudal, as the fees |»aid to the herald ofHce testify to the knight's cost. It carries with it aristocratic as well as military associations. Surely a niore appropriate deco- ration might be conferred on a portly financier, a veteran i^i AiMsrofUArv. at politician, or a venerable man of scierre, than that wliieh was borne by Sir (Jalahad an«l the Kniglitsof the Round Table, Some of the leading- men of letters and science in England are understood to have declined the honour. Perhaps the effort of self-denial was not great, since their beneficent eminence would have shared the distinction with almost domestic services performed to the court. But a feeling of the inappropriateness of the title proba- bly mingled with the well-founded conviction that their merit stood in need of no title at all. Amonir ourselves men worthy of all distinction in dirt'erent lines, men whom this community would itself have delighted to honour, have accepte{} JINGOISM. were abroad in the United States at the time of the Civil War, no shadow, as far as I remember, fell on the charac- ters of the West Point men. We have learned to talk with horror of a government of musketeers and pikemen. Is it certain that the Commonwealth would be worse off in the hands of musketeers and pikemen, like those of Cromwell, the flower of the citizens in arms for a great cause, than it is in the hands of the political bosses and wirepullers who rule it now ? Englishmen of my age have heard not only the stories of Inkerman and Sobraon but those of the Peninsula and Waterloo from the lips of men who fought there. There was no swagger or fanfaronade about those men. They did not even betray a love of war. Lord Hardinge used always to speak of war with horror, like Marlborough.who after Malplaquet, piayed that he might never be in an- other battle. Yet Lord Hardinge was the Governor- Gen- eral of India who doffed his viceroyalty to serve against the Sikhs at Sobraon. Returning fi'om famous fields, the British soldier marches to his barracks with the simpli- city of veterans amidst public emotion rather deep than loud. Simplicity is the garb of genuineness. Strange to say, it is not in the old military countries but in these industrial and intellectual communities of ours that the passion for martial show most prevails. Is it that we want to avoid being set down as shopkeepers, or that there is something feminine in industrial character which •w^ JINGOISM. 67 disposes it to "flirt with scarlet and coquet with steel ? " The Volunteer movement in England was no mere pastime. It was a serious effort called forth by a danger which lowered from the dark councils of the French Emperor, and of the reality of which there has since been conclusive proof. The cause of our delight in the pageantry, perhaps, is simply our ignorance of the grim realities of war. All honour once more to the character of the true sol- dier, and above all when he is fighting in defence of his country. Country is a circle of affection intermediate between the family and mankind, with which few are 3^et cosmopolitan enough to suppose that we can dispense. But we should all sny, I suppose, that the love of country must be kept within the limits of morality. American Jingoes, at the time of the aggression on Mexico, said that * they were for the country right or wrong.' That was a doctrine of devils. It was also a doctrine of fools ; for the nation which acted on it would soon have the world for its enemy, and would find that, though morality is not so strong as we could wish, it is stronger than any robber-horde. Somebody argued the other day that a nation which hurt other nations in promoting its own in- terests wjis no more to be blamed than the hunter who killed game for his dinner. But we are becoming awake to the fact that a nation cannot hurt other nations with- out hurting itself, the nations being, like men, a com- ■li' W. cs .TINGOISM. iiiunity and ineiiibers one of another. Among the plea* .santest memories of my life I reckon my intercourse with Joseph Maz/ini. Mazzini passionately loved his coun- try, if ever man did, and he kindled in the breasts of Ita- lian youth the fire of patriotism which set his Italy free. But he was not a Jingo any more than he was a Jacobin. He was a man of deeply religious nature, and his aspira- tions were thoroughly moral. With lifelong devotion he served the nation, but he regarded the nation itself as the servant and organ of humanity. I have always look- ed upon the spirit which he infused as the main cause of the comparatively calm and moderate character of Italian revolution. Such a patriotism will dis[)lay itself in noble ways. It will be seen in working, not in blustering, for the country, in honestly telling her the truth at what- ever cost, not in offering to her the poisonous sacrifice of lies. You brag and gasconade, and you traduce your fellow-citizens for not bragging and gasconading like you. Then comes the Census, and brag and gasconade are in the dust. Put up monuments to the heroes of Queenstou Heights and Lundy's Lane — again we say we gladly will. The heroes of Queenston indeed have already a monument not less creditable to Canadian taste than were their deeds to Canadian Valour. But we will gladly set up a monument to the heroes of Lundy's Lane. Only let it be like that monument at Quebec, T JINTjOISM. 60 a sign at once of gratitude and of reconciliation, not of the meanness of unslaked hatred. We cannot by any demonstrations appropriate to ourselves the glory of those who fought at Queenston Heights or Lundy's Lane, and why should we forever hug the quarrel which by those who did fight, if they were generous as well as brave, would probably have been long since lai^^. aside. The soldiers of the North and South fought at Gettys- burg not less desperately than the English on the north and I. jse on the south of the Line fought at Lundy's Lane, yet they could meet again the other day as breth- ren on the field of the battle. Let us erect a monument to all the brave who fell at Lundy's Lane, and invite the Americans to the unveiling. The heir of many a Can- adian who fought on that field is now on the American side of the Line. ^ It is well, moioover, that we, an industrial and we hope moral and enlightened community, should remem- ber that death on the field of battle is not the only honourable death, and that many a life besidijs that of the soldier is sacrificed, though without blare of trumpet or pomp of war, at the call of public duty. Why not put up monuments to the physician or the hospital nurse who dies in braving contagion, to the fireman who perishes in rescuing j^eoplc from a fire, to the captain of a vessel or the driver of an engine who loses his own life in saving those of the passengers in his ship or ii If' I 70 JINGOISM. I i\ i train ? Perhaps lives are sometimes offered up to the common weal less visibly yet not less really than even these. Put up monuments by all means at Queenston Heights and Lundy's Lane, but do not bid us celebrate Ridge- way. Queenston Heights and Lundy's Lane were battles and victories, though our victory at Lundy's Lane was hardly won. Ridgeway was neither a battle nor a victory. It was a miserable affair all round. Nor was it an American attack on Canada : it was an attack of Irish Fenians on a dependency of Great Britain. The American Government might have stopped it more promptly, considering that through the whole of the Civil War Canada had scrupulously done her interna- tional duty ; but some allowance must be made for the irritation caused among people struggling for national existence by the hostile bearing of a powerful party in England and by the taunts of the British press. It was right that those who had fallen in the service of the country should receive honourable burial. But surely over those graves the grass might be allowed to grow. When after the lapse of a quarter of a century such a memory is laboriously revived, who can doubt the motive and who can respect it ? Once more we must earnestly protest against the at- tempt to use the public schools as nurseries of party pa^ssion, which has been repeated since my tirst lecture, .nx(;()isM. 71 Such a course is not only uncivic, it is unpatriotic, for patriotism can never run counter to public right. It is even unmanly : the mind of a child is defenceless : if we want to propagate our opinions or sentiments let us seek entrance for them into the minds of men. The object cannot be doubtful. For why should the anniversaries of victories gained in war with the Americans be picked out as the occasion for stirring up the patriotism of our children ? Are there no other victories in British his- tory ? Why should the list be confined to the victories of war at all ? For an industrial nation, has not peace her victories as well as war ? If a party use is to be made of the public schools, ratepayers will be looking not only to the elections of Mayor and Aldermen, but to those of school trustees, which at present most of them allow to go by defauhV Hoisting of Hags, chanting of martial songs, celebration of battle anniversaries, erec- tion of military monuments, decoration of patriotic graves, arming and reviewing of the very children in our public schools — if Jingoism finds itself in need of all these stimulants, we shall begin to think that it must be sick. I What do our Jingoes want ? L)o they really wish to provoke a war with the United States 'i From their lan- guage and that of the leaders of their party at elections, we might think they did. Have they measured the chances of such a war, even supposing each of them to 72 .UNfJOISM. he a Paladin ? Have they counted its cost ? Their thoughts are full of the glories of 1812. Have they con- sidered how much the invader's resources and his power of bringing them to bear have increased since that time ? Do they fancy that Canada is still a fortress of forests ? Have they provided for the defence of the great and un- fortified cities which she had not in 1812, but now has on her frontier open to the enemy's attack ? They reckon on the protection of the British army and Meet! Does it not occur to them that the British army and fleet may at the time have enough to do in protecting the British shores? Suppose the British ironclads could bombard American cities, do they think that the de- strviction of American cities would make up for the wreck of C^anadian industry and the desolation of C^ana- dian homes? Have they even studied the history of the War of 1812, marked how, as the struggle went on, the Americans learned discipline, and noted how different was their fighting at Lundy's Lane from what it had been at Detroit or Chateauguay ? Above all, let us ask again, who are to be the enemy ? Those million and a half of Canadians and their children who are already on the South of the Line and whose numbers are swelled every year by the very flower of Canadian youth — are they to be fired on ^ their own fathers and brothers ? French Canada, through the immense migration into the adjoining States, is now actually astride the Line — will the Northern half of it take arms against the JINGOISM. ■:i led are rs? nto ine the Southern half ? Will it do this if France is on the ene- my's side ? We talk proudly of our flag, the symbol of our nationality ; but the flag of Quebec is the tricolor. In challenging the United States, our Jingoes always assume that they have Great Britain behind them. But they forget that in Great Britain there no longer reigns an aristocracy able and willing to make war with the blood and earnings of the people. The people ha^'e now something to say to the question, and who that knows anything of their present temper can imagine that they would be ready, for any Canadian question, to go to war with the United States ? Their feelings towards us are as kindly as possible, but their interest in us is compara- tively slight, especially since we have definitely re- nounced the commercial unity of the Kmpire, and laid protective duties on British goods. There are two oi* three English politicians who make Canada their speci- alty, and are credited with understanding our aflairs and running us. But the British people, as a mass, hardly ever turn their eyes this way. It seems that nothing can conjure the spectre of American aggression. We were once more told the other day that we were lying under the colossal shadow of a rapacious neighbour, whose greedy maw was gaping to devour us. Colossal our neighbour and his shadow may be, but where are the signs of his rapacity ? Ho has an army of twenty-flve thousand nienj mainly employed in 74 .HNOOISM. lighting Indiiins. At the close of the Civil War the Am- ericans had a vast and victorious army ; they had also a great fleet ; yet they showed no disposition to attack us. Let me say once more that I have been going among the Americans now for more than twenty years; I have held intercourse with people of all classes, parties, professions, characters and ages, including the youth of a University who are sure to speak as they feel. I never heard the slightest expression of a wish to aggress on Canada, or to force her into the Union. The motives for annexa- tion which existed in the days of Slavery now exist no more. The fire-eating and aggressive spirit which Slav- ery bred, and which found utterance in the Ostend mani- festo, departed with the institution which was its source. I do not doubt that by the Americans generally Canada would be welcomed if she came of her own accord. The union of this Continent is a natural aspiration, and surely one at least as rational, as moral and as benefi- cent, as those cravings of ambition which set the Powers of the Old World by the ears. But among the politi- cians there would be a strong minority against admis- sion, because they are afi-aid that it would disturb their party con)binations. I have heard some of them avow this in the plainest terms. Protectionism, moreover, is as narrow and selfish on that side as on ours, and would see the aspirations of this Continent or of mankind de- feated rather than pull down a tariff wall. American councils are riot dark, like those of a despot, that we JixnoisM. 75 .should be afraid of secret plots being hatched against us at Washington. American councils are as open as our own. If there were any design against us we should be sure to be apprised of it at the next political picnic. The McKinley Act, we are persistently told, is di- rected against us, and intended to coerce us into the resignation of our independence. My friend, Sir George Baden-Powell, repeats that cry. Is the Act directed against us more than against England, France, Germany, or any of the other nations which suffer by it and are protesting against it? If it was a stroke of policy for the fulfilment of a national ambition, why did the nation condemn it by an overwhelming vote at the polls ? Why in that campaign did we never hear the Act defended as a well-concerted measure of aggrandizement? Can- not our Jingoes, who are mostly Protectionists, believe in the existence among our neighbours also of a Protec- tionism inspired by no loftier or subtler motive than commercial greed ? Why do they abuse the McKinley Act at all ? It is a splendid illustration of their own principles. They ought to hail it as a fresh and glorious proof that the blessed light of Mono{)oly is spreading over the world and chasing away the dark shadows of commercial and industrial freedom. If our Jingoes do not mean war, what is the use of stirring up hatred ? Whatever our political relations, either to the United States or to Great Britain, may be ■f) .IFN(Jf)ISM. destined to be, it is certain that we mast share this con- tinent with the Americans, that our interests must be bound up in a lumdred ways with those of our powerful neififhbours, and that on our being on good terms with them our security and prosperity must largely depend. Say as positively as you please that you are opposed to political union, the Americans will not resent your desire to remain independent. The love of independence in it- self commands their respect. But why persist in saying things which they may resent, and which may lead to a fatal quarrel ? England, amidst all her perils and em- barrassments in Europe and Asia, is trying to settle for us the Fisheries and the Behring Sea ({uestions at Wash- ington. This is the time which a Canadian Government and its party choose to make our platforms ring, and to cover our walls .at election time, with groundless denun- ciations of American ambition and gross insults to the American name and flag. England herself meantime is courting American friendship, doing her l)est to efface the memories of the Alabama, and all that was untoward at that time, putting up the bust of Longfellow in Westmin- ster Abbey, celebrating memorial services for Grant and Garfield, and strewing flowers on Lowell's grave. My friend, Mr. O. A. Rowland, has shown in a very interesting way how Shelburne, the most enlightened statesman of his day, tried, after the severance of the American Colo- nies from the mother country, to bury the quarrel, and to get back to something like the family footing ; and .iixrsoisM. 77 Sliollturiio llU( I for liis colleuguo Pitt, wliom iiol» ody will accuse of 1j luk of patriotism or of national pi •iUe. We are too Bnti.sli for tlie British themselves. If Americanophobia were not too long a word, if it were as easily pronounced as hydrophobia, perhaps it might have been the title of this Address, For Ameri- canophobia is practically the shape which all our Jingo- ism takes. No Englishman — and he who addresses you is an Englishman to the core — can speak with hearty good will or admiration of the Americans so long as they cherish traditional feeling against the Old C.ountry. It is a mean tradition, unworthy of a great people. It is in fact the old Colonial servility turned upside down. Nor does it gain in dignity by being as it now is, in part at least, a homage to a foreign vote and in part the inspiration of Protectionism seeking its own ends. We must admit, on the other hand, that it was naturally aggravated by the conduct and language of the Jingo party, both in Great Britain and here, at the time of the Civil War. We must also admit that it is partly explained by the political relations. Suppose Scotland were a dependency of the United States and an outpost of American democracy. Suppose the demo- crats of Scotland were always playing up to the ambition and the antipathies of their mother country by boasting that they would prevent the extension of the power of Great Britain over those islands and wrest a great cantle 7s .TiXf;o[s>f. from the realm of monarchical ami aiistocratic institu- tions. Suppose Presidential elections in Scotland were to be fought upon tliv^ line of antagonism to the neigh- bouring kingdom, with violent ebullitions of anti-Erit- ish feeling, is it not likely that there would be a good deal of anti-American feeling in Great Britain ? After all, in the hearts of all the better America-ns the senti- ment is dying, and its death will be hastened by the International Copyright law, because hitherto the unfair competition to which American writers wore exposed with pirated English works has helped uo embitter them against England. Still no Englishman who reads what American journals and authors say of his country will be inclined to do the Americans more than justice. But to refuse to do them justice would be injustice to ourselves; we should thereby commit ourselves to a course of policy false and suicidal as well as unkind. Those who Hing about the charges of pessimism perhaps do not attach much meaning to the word, otherwise we nnght ask them whether anything can be more pessimis- tic than the assumption that one moiety of this English- speaking continent is always to be on bad terms with the other. Does not the refusal to believe in friendship with the rest of our race deserve the gloomy epithet as much as the refusal to believe that the country can be the hiflfh road to prosperitv under a svstem of monu- systc poly and corruption .IIXOOISM. 79 Twenty-seven years have passerl since I first made ac- quaintance with the United States. It was at the time of the Civil War. I came out to bear to the North the sympathies of friends in England opposed to slavery, to see for them how the struggle was really going, and on my own account to witness a great political spectacle. I have always thought that the two most trying tests of national character are plague and civil wai-. The first thing that strucic me was the absence or' anything to tell one that a civil war was raging. It is true that this was an unusual ca»se, the nation having split into halves and the fighting being confined to the Southern rej^ion. Still the national peril was extreme, the excitement was intense, and it was remarkable that socijvl, industrial and commercial life should be going on so calmly as it was. Civil law prevailed, personal liberty was enjoyed, the press was free, and criticized without reseive the acts of the government and the conerty of speech oi' of the sufiVage. Fiercely as the pas-ions of the majority were roused, the minority was aliowed to hold its public meetings, to celebrate its torchlight ))rocessi<)ns, to hang out its ban- ners across the public way. On the election day order was hardly any where distuil>ed. The next thing tliat struck me was the union of classes. The ^ame patriot- ism seemed to pervade them all. We had oeen t-ld that the rich, being politically ostracised, were disaficcted to so JINGOISM. tliu Republic; but this many of tbcni afc all events by tlieir devotion to lier cause, tlieir self-saeritice, and tbe cheerfulness with which they bore the public burdens, belied. The third thing that struck me was the unity of the different States. We had been led to believe in Endand that the East was dratjiiinu: on the unwillinfj West; but I was soon able to report that this was utterly untrue and that even if the East were willing to stop the W^est would not. In ih*^ fourth place, I was agree- ably surprined by the absence, in word and deed, of the inhumanity by which civil war is generally stained. I saw the prison camps and satisfied myself that the in- mates were suffering no hardship not inseparable from their condition of [.risoners of war. I saw a prison hos- pital in which the patients were as carefully treated as they could be in uv.y liospital, and the tal)le was spread for the convalescents on Thanksgiving Day with all the good things of the season. This was when the North wjis ringing with the reports of the cruel treatment of its soldiers in Confederate prison camps. Scarcely ever did I hear even an utterance of truculent sentiment against the South. The people generally said that they were fighting to assert the law, and that if the South would submit to the law they did not wish to do it any further harm. No vengeance was taken b}'^ the victors ; not a drop of blood was shed on the political seaffbld; no penalties v/ere inflicted beyond civil disabilities, and even these were speedily removed. Kurope, looking to the JIXCoisM. 81 in history of previous civil wars, believed that an overthrow of the Constitution by the army and a military usurpa- tion would be the end. The result was a glorious con- tradiction of that belief. Great powers were necessarily thrown into the hands of President Lincoln, but he never betra3'ed the slightest inclination to abuse or even to en- large them ; and when a general, Hushed with victory, allowed himself to be betrayed into an encroachment on the authority of the civil government, his soldiers, though they adored him, showed that they would not follow him beyord the line of his duty. The Constitution came through the Civil War unchanged,, or changed only in the direction of liberty. Respect for law, which is the s)if ot-anchor of republics, could in that republic scarcely be wanting. Political evils and dangers in the United States, of course there are. There is corruption in American poli- tics. I do not believe now that anybody at Washington can be bought. But there is corruption in some State Legislatures. At Washington there is still the jiurcliase of powerful votes, such as that of the protected manufac- tures or that of the Grand Army at the expense of the public policy and the interest of the taxpayer. But is corruption, or the purchase of the votes of protected manufacturers and other interests by sinister concessions, confined to'the ITnite would be thought venial, and a bare sus- picion of something of the kind cost a popular and powerful candidate his election to the Presidency. The elective system of government is everywhere on its trial. Nowhei-e has it yet been proved that the system can be carried on without party ; that party, when there is no great issue of principle, can be prevented from becoming faction ; or that a faction can be held together by any means but coirnption. The same experiment is being made in the United States, in Canaroblein of these days. Somebody is very fond of throwing in my teeth somc- thinijf wliich 1 wrote about the evils and perils of Presi- J JTXGOrSM. 83 IS no )cing iHicn- ;vovy- il.tful trust, )vein- is the somc- P resi- dential elections. I have not a word to retract. Presi- dential elections, as now conducted, are an excrescence on the American Constitution, the framers of which in- tended the election to be made, not by popular suffrage with a furious conflict between parties, but by a college of select citizens in a tranquil and deliberate way ; though it is strange that men so sagacious should not have foreseen what the practical working of their ma- chinery would be. These contests, which evoke almost the passions of a civil war, will have to be discontinued or mitigated if the Republic is to endure : perhaps if Canada ever joins the Union the opportunity of consti- tutional revision may be embraced, and some improve- ment in Presidential elections may be made. But those who bid us compare with the turbulence of a Presiden- tial election in the United States the tranquil appoint- ment of a Governor-General of Canada are looking for the point of comparison in the wrong place. The Govei- nor-General does not answer to the President. When there is a crisis in American politics the President is always at Washington. When there is a crisis in Cana- dian politics the Governor-General goes fishing. What answers to the Presidency here is the Premiership, and the counterpart of a Presidential election is not the appointment of a Governor-General Init the General Elec- tion, at which the (question who shall Ki; Premier is virtu- ally decided. We have just had one of these general elections, and I would ask, looking back on that election. 84 .7IN(i()ISM. on the manner in which and the time at which it was brought on, the pretence put forth for the Dissolution, the real motive for it which now appears, the part which the Governor- General was made passively to play in palming a falsehood upon the nation, the issue on which the battle was fought, and which involved the treatment of half the citizens not as dissidents but as traitors, the means by which the Government gained its victory, in- cluding the bribery of provinces and constituencies with promises of public outlay — looking back on all this, I say, are you prepared to say that there is much differ- ence to our advantage between a Presidential election in the United States and a general election in this coun- try ? When was the American nation insulted by bring- ing one of its ambassadors from Europe to take the lead in a party conflict and ]>ly the engine of party corruption ? "When did public men of the highest standing in the United States, to fix an infamous charge on their oppo- nents, make use of documents filched from printing offices or of stolen haters ? If to tl>e men who do such things public monuments are raised, hoj\our will desire to rest In an unnoted grave. Observe, too, that the Im- perial government, from the political and moral tutelage of which Huch ben«'lits are supposed to be derived, ap- proved, in the person of Loreing the richest, fortunes .nVfjoisM. sj) ines are most overgrown. No .shoddy perliaps is so gorgcoii.s au that of New York. But has New York a iiioiioi)oly of shoddy ? Does not every rich city in a commercial country produce wealth unrefined by culture, unennobled by duty, which solicits admiration by its magnificence and provokes the smile of contempt. We hope that this will everywhere be worked ott* by civilization in time. Nowhere has it been worked ott' yet. Under the policy which at present prevails, we are constantly sending into the United States the flower of Canadian youth. Do these men become base and hate- ful when they cross the line ? The two sections of English-.speaking people are in a state of social fusion : that is the fact; and with fusion assimilation must come. Some men seem to fancy that they can make themselves English gentlemen by parading contempt for Yankees. Let them indulge the fancy and be happy. But the truth is that if you were taken with your eyes bandaged from Canadian to American society, you would hardly be conscious of the change. One cannot help thinking, when some of our Jingoes are reviling the Yankee, that if we are to quarrel with the United States for the dif- ference between them and the Yankee, it will be the smallest bone of contention that ever set two nations by the ears. All these imaginary or conventional antipathies, whether political or social, are apt to betray their un- IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 141 III 2.8 |30 "^ IM m |2.2 ■' m 1 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.6 1 , • ■ A" o ^^ ^/ 7 /A Photographic Sciences Corporation -^v ^^v .4\^ ^ :\ \ <«^ 6^ % V 33 WEST MAIN STRIET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 r/>> V- I v^ m^.. s >" ' WJ.-, % M-, t ^ %^ mm 90 JINGOISM. 1 f '. reality as soon as the touchstone of intere t is apphed. How many Jingoes are there who would refuse a good berth on the other side of the line ? Some of the most violent abuse of the Continental Policy and party here comes from Canadian Jingoes settled in the United States. Yet these patriots have not scrupled where their own interest was concerned to embrace a policy eminently Continental. Our book-stores and libraries are full of American literature. Our magazine literature is chiefly American. Not only our intellectual tastes but our moral and social character will be in some danger if we are always im- bibing the eflfusions of depravity and baseness. It is not likely, gentlemen, that I shall ever again ad- dress you or any other audience on the subject of Cana- dian politics. A political student when to the best of his power he has laid a question in all its bearings before the community has done all that it pertains to him to do and must leave the rest to the practical politician. Be- sides, the sand in my hour-glass is low, and before it quite runs out, there are a few things gathered during a student's life which I should like, if I can, to put in shape. I see it is said again that nothing which I write can take hold because I have never shared the national aspirations. There are plenty of other reasons why what I write should not take hold, but as I showed in my first lecture, it is not true that I have never shared .rtNGolsM 01 the National aspiiafciotjs. Aspirations for perpetual de- pendence and colonial peerages with which some bosoms seem to swell, I have not shared ; national aspirations I have. If you had time to waste in looking back to the old files of the two great party organs of former days, you will find frequent amenities bestowed on me for sympathizing with what was then called "Canada First." I was singled out for attack, because to attack a new- comer was much safer than to attack some who, though much more prominent, had followings and connections here. As J have said before, I never belonged to the Canada First Association. Membership of a political organization would hardly have become one who had only just settled in this country. But I did very heart- ily sympathize with the desire of making Canada a nation, which was the vision of my lamented friend Mr. W. A. Foster and the generous youth of Canada at that day; and I gave the movement such assistance as I could with my pen. The movement, however, at that time failed : its flag was suddenly allowed to fall : the star which had risen in the East and which it had fol- lowed ceased to shine. Then I, like others, had to re- view the situation. A community could not become a nation or acquire the national attributes of force, spirit and dignity without independence. So far the hearts of Canada First had pointed true. But otherwise, was their vision capable of realization ? There can be no use in pursuing! what is not practicable, however noble or 92 .TINGOISM. hi n -.^ M 7 ■ ' u 1 ' I* f ''A I In. however fondly cherished our idea may be. Was there any real hope of blending into a nation these Provinces geographically so disjointed, and so destitute of any bond of commercial union among themselves., while each of them separately is so powerfully attracted by commer- cial interest to the great English-ispeaking community on the South of it ? Was there any real hope of fusing French with British Canada, or if they could not be fused, of bringing about a national union between them? These questions cannot be settled by our wishes or de- cided on horseback. I found myself compelled to answer both of them in the negative. From that time it has been my conviction that the end would be a return of the whole English-speaking race upon this continent to the union which the American Revolution broke, that to prepare for this was the task of Canadian- statesmanship, and that to spend millions upon millions in vainly struggling to avert it was to waste the earnings of our people. All that has happened since has confirm- ed me in this belief. The difficulty of holding the Con- federation together and keeping it apart from the rest of the continent, otherwise than by corruption, has seemed to me half to excuse the system of Sir John Macdonald, oalamitous as the consequences of that system have been not only to the finances and the material prosperity, but to the character of our people. Nor, noble as may be the dream of a separate nationality, does it appear to me that our lot will be mean if we are destined to play our JINGOISM. 93 full part in the development of civilization on this broad continent, which we hope is to be the scene of an im- proved and a happier humanity. Let us have hearts for the romantic and heroic past ; let us have hearts also for the grand realities of life. There would surely be noth- ing shameful in a compact like that by which Scotland united her illustrious fortunes with the illustrious for- tunes of her partner in Great Britain. There can never be a reason why we should break with our history or discard anything that is valuable in our traditions and, it may be, in our special chai'acter as colonists of Brit'^in who have preserved the tie. In a vast Federal i) nion there will always be many mansions for character, and Ontario as well as Massachusetts or Virginia may keep her own. To help in making Ontario keep her own character in the literary sphere and in building up her intellectual life, has been my Jingoism, Jingoism of a very mild type it must be owned. Of course I under- stand and respect : not only do I understand and respect, but I heartily share reluctance to leave the side of the mother countr3^ But we should not in any real sense leave her side by mere political separation : probably we should draw back to her side this English-speaking con- tinent, which it is the tendency of political complications to estrange. To be run politically by a backstairs clique in Downing Street, or by operators in the London railway share market, is not to be at the side of the mother country. England sways us far more by her 94 JTNTJOrSM. books than through her Governors. The interest of the British people is one with that of the Canadian people^ as the British people begin to see. Their consent to any changes is, by me at least, always supposed. Of the; Imperial Federationists I never said a harsh word. I sincerely respect their aspirations. But there are at least three parties among them, that of the Parliamentary Federationists, that of the War Federationists, and that of the Commercial Federationists, each of them at variance with the others, while, after twenty years of eloquent exposition not one of them has yet ventured on any practical step for the fulfilment of its idea. Let them put the question to one legislature, Imperial or Colonial, and let us see what the answer will be. I know too well that these opinions are distasteful to many. They are distasteful perhaps to many of my present audience whose thoughts and efforts point a different way. That they are gross and unsentimental, because union with our Continent would bring an in- crease of the material prosperity to our people, I cannot admit. Political and military sentiment are excellent in their way and within reasonable limits, but there is a sentiment also attached to material wellbeing; it is the sentiment which waits on well-rewarded industry and has its seat in happy and smiling homes. What is the object of all our political arrangements if it is not to give us happiness in our homes? Empire which is not hap- piness, even though it may be world-wide, is not great- JINGOISM. 95 ,o give bap- Feat- s' ness. However, be my opinions right or wrong, my con- victions have been deliberately formed and are sincere. A political student is neither bound nor excused by the exigencies of statecraft. He can serve the community only by speaking, to the best of his power, the truth and the whole truth. While I, gentlemen, am leaving the scene, you are en- tering on public life.. I would with my parting words conjure you at all events to look facts steadily in the face, and make up your mind one way or the other. You can afford to drift no longer. Whether your high- est aim be to live and die British subjects, or to live and die members of an Imperial Federation, or to live and die Canadian freemen and citizens of this Continent, firmly embrace the policy which will lead you to that mark. Your people will not be content always to have poorer chances and to be worse off than their neighbours. They are beginning to signify this in more wayr: than one, above all by the melancholy token of the Exodus. Both Lord Durham and Lord Elgin told you that it vvould be so. Both of them said that commercial reci- procity and equality with the United States were in- dispensable. Blindness to the future often styles itself practical wisdom, but the title is usurped and in no case, more usurped than in ours. The Census tells us, with a clear, sad voice, what, if we take no thought for the; future, the future is likely to he. For the few who* profit by the s^'stcm there may? be large fortunes and 96 JINOJOTSM. 'e?i; baronial mansions in England, where they will win titles and social consequence by making Canada move, or pretending to make her move, in conformity with the interest of an aristocratic party in Great Britain. For the people at large there will be the inevitable fate of a country kept by artificial separation and restriction below the level of its Continent in commercial prosper- ity and in ihe rewards held out to industry. There will be a perpetual exodus of the flower of our population to the more prosperous and hopeful field ; Manitoba and the North-West, excluded from the commercial pale of their continent and barred against the inflow of its migra- tory population, will continue to lag in the Census and in the records of material prosperity behind the neighbour- ing States. This loss of our active spirits will be at- tended with a political deadness, such as we already see accompanying commercial depression in those mari- time provinces with which under an evil star Ontario has become politically bound up. With the neediness of the constituencies venality and servility will increase, and the grip of corruption will thus become stronger than ever. So things may go on for a long time, the very impoverishment and depletion which the system causes being the evil securities for its continuance. But at last the inevitable will come. It will come, and when it does come it will not be that equal and honour- able Union of which alone a patriotic Canadian can bear to think ; it will be Annexation indeed. \ "V « m " Mr. Ooldwin Smith haa here a mibjeot peoaliwly adapted to hia gf-niiu. None will read it without profit and entertaimnent."— 7%e London Times. Canada and the Canadian Question. " It will be admitted that this book forms the best and certainly the dearest, most succinct and most interesting account of Canada and Canadian affikirs that has yet been laid before the British public. The style of the author throws a charm over parts of the subject which, with less skilful literary treatment, would be dry. The advantages of continental free trade are powerfully set forth in the closing chapter."— The Toronto Globe. Ag indicating Mr. Gddwin 8mUh'» 9tandpoint, the following extract, from a letter of his. in the London DaUy News may be quoted : ♦ • Bred in England, domiciled in Canada, having resided for some time in the United States, and having many family connepti ts^V^ ""•((IIIIIIIIHIlHI M'-^i •=,}',. I. ^ tJ Sk^iSl^SSU^tLni^S&i ^., '-„/. ff-ianftjAafc^a "■'ic*U!nesSw-i».-«»ti2„ ( < < •A- .aeLHty^