YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

1937

Getting Into Parliament
and After

BY

THE HONOURABLE
SIR GEORGE W. ROSS, Kt., LL.D.

TORONTO
WILLIAM BRIGGS
1913

Copyright. Canada, 1913. by
WILLIAM BRIGGS

Ca24-.3f-

TO
©ifj? lEUrtora of ilpHt MxiihUztx
BY WHOSE
SUPPORT AND CONFIDENCE
I WAS HONOURED POR THIRTY-FIVE YEARS
QIi](iB TSalume IS
DEDICATED

' The bridegroom may forget the bride
Was made his wedded wife yestreen;
The monarch may forget the' crown
That on his head an hour has been.
The ralther may forget the bairn
That smiles so sweetly on her knee;
But I'll remember thee, Glencalrn,
And a' that thou hast done for me."
— Burns.

PREFACE

This book was written during the Parliamentary
recess of 1911, but owing to the writer's illness its
publication was unavoidably delayed. Chapters
XVI and XXI have been added, but no substantial
change has been made in the original text of the
other chapters. My readers will kindly observe that
I have not followed the course of party politics in
the House of Commons beyond my retirement in
1883, except so far as was necessary to complete a
character sketch of the leaders on the stage at that
time, or of their probable successors. My refer
ences to Provincial politics, for obvious reasons,
close with the change of Government in 1905.
G. W. E.
3 Elmsley Place,
Toronto, 1913.

CONTENTS

Chapter I. page
Politics in the Germ - - . 1
Chapter II..
First Election under Confederation- - - - - 17
Chapter III.
With Alexander Mackenzie in West Middlesex - - - 29
Chapter IV.
My First Election to the House of Commons - - - - 36
Chapter V.
Initiation Day in the House of Commons - . . 46
Chapter VI.
Opening of Parliament — 1873 - - - - 59
Chapter VII.
To the Eight of the Speaker ... - - 74
Chapter VIII.
The Mackenzie Govemment ¦ - - - 90
Chapter IX.
Five Years in Opposition - - - 109
Chapter" X.
Political Leaders - - ..... 124
Chapter XI.
Mr. Blake and the Old Brigade  140
vii

CONTENTS Chapter XII. pagb
How and Where Leaders are Made- .... - 154
CHAPTER XIII.
My Last Session at Ottawa ------ 171
CHAPTER XIV.
The Ontario Legislature  ---181
CHAPTER XV.
Minister of Education -------- 199
Chapter XVI.
Premier of Ontario - ..... 208
Chapter XVIL
The Senate - -  222
Chapter XVIIL
Electioneering as a Fine Art - - - - 244
CHAPTER XIX.
The Political Platform - - - - 257
CHAPTER XX.
Speech-Making ---.------278 Chapter XXI.
The French-Canadian in Politics - - - - 286
Appendices.
Appendix L— Work Accomplished by the Education Depart
ment- - - - - 309
Appendix n, — ShaU Canada always be a Dependency of the
Empire? - - - - - - 314
Appendix IIL— The Day and a' Wha Honor 't - - - 332
viii

1875

Getting Into Parliament and After

CHAPTEE I.
POLITICS IN THE GERM.
My interest in Canadian politics was flrst awak
ened by the stirring events which preceded the
Federal Act of 1867. During the ten years pre
ceding that notable epoch in our history I was
engaged in teaching a public school in my native
county of Middlesex. In the isolation of the little
red schoolhouse the teacher is comparatively free
from the intrusion of the great world outside. His
own little world, with its throbbing hearts and,
peradventure, aching hands, fills up pretty fully
the limited orbit of his life. And as to politics he
is apt to say with Hamlet, " What is Hecuba to
me and what am I to Hecuba?" Besides, the dis
trict in which my lot was cast was not the camping-
ground of the political spellbinder. The electors
were so decidedly Liberal that a Tory missionary
could make no converts and a Liberal missionary
would find nobody to convert. The political per
vert and backslider were negligible quantities. It
was a case of a-x=o.
Up to 1867 I heard but three political speeches.
The first was in 1857 by the late Mr. Archibald
McKellar (he was not the Honourable then) in
2 1

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
which he scored the Tories for their extravagance,
corruption and maladministration and their sub
serviency to the bigoted French-Canadians. The
speech was received with great applause, for rea
sons which I did not quite perceive, so meagre was
my knowledge of Canadian politics. I remember
well the sprightly, humorous manner of the happy-
looking rotund orator and the fervid appeal which
he made to the electors to smite the enemy " hip
and thigh " at the approaching election.
The second speech I heard was in 1862. It was
delivered by Mr. John Wilson, of London, after
wards Judge Wilson. The occasion was an elec
tion to the Legislative Council of the old Parlia
ment of Canada — a body corresponding to the
Senate of the Dominion. The contest was between
Alex. Vidal, the Conservative candidate, and F. W.
Davis, Liberal, both from the town of Sarnia. It
was the first election for the Legislative Council
for the district after the elective system was sub
stituted for the nominative for the Upper House.
Mr. Wilson was a speaker of excellent address,
manly in his appearance, and very genial and
respectful to his audience. He discussed the
advantages of popular election to the Upper House,
and the necessity, under responsible government,
of direct control by the electors over their repre
sentatives in both Houses of Parliament. I remem
ber the address as being exceedingly moderate in
tone, without any appeal to party prejudices or any
attempt to disparage political opponents.
The third political address, or rather the third
address on public issues, was by the Hon. Thomas
D'Arcy McGee in the City Hall in London in 1865.
2)

POLITICS IN THE GEEM
His subject was " The Future of British North
America." Confederation was then in the air. I
had not grasped fully what it signified, but my
interest was aroused enough to borrow a horse
and saddle from a neighbour. After a ride of
fifteen miles on a summer evening I found myself
in front of one of the great orators of the day. I
had never heard or seen Mr. McGee before that
day — or since. I am not sure that I had even read
any of his speeches, unless it might have been in
the condensed reports of the debates in Parlia
ment. I had no preconception of oratory as a fine
art or what were its essential elements. I had a
vague idea, however, that there was something in
it beyond the reach of ordinary mortals, which, if
not exactly supernatural, had a spark of divine
power or a sanctity peculiarly the gift of the gods.
But whatever it was, I was there to see and learn
for myself. My first reflection as McGee rose to
speak was that oratory was not necessarily asso
ciated with personal attractiveness. Mr. McGee,
I observed, was not a handsome man. His face
was flat and heavy — a face which no one would
turn around to look at a second time. My second
reflection was that physical action in oratory was
not essential for effect. During the whole course
of his two hours' address he stood flxed to one spot
on the platform, with his hands clasped behind his
back. Only once did he unlock them, and that was
when, carried away by the enthusiasm of a quota
tion from Tennyson's " Brook," he repeated in
thrilling tones the words, " Men may come and
men may go, but I go on forever." This he applied
to the British Empire. It was a glorious climax
3

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
to his argument, felt and remembered to this day.
The mellow richness of Mr. McGee's voice, and the
rhythm and cadence of the Queen's English as it
flowed from his lips, greatly impressed me. I
noted also the flnish of his sentences, coupled with
a poetical glow which awakened emotions and
feelings never before touched by the human voice.
Of course argument and fact and history were there,
all beautifully blended. But it was not by these
I was affected so much as by the white heat of the
mental crucible from which they issued, and the
cadence— never monotonous — of the lofty rhetoric
with which they were adorned. It was a noble
speech, I thought — the product of an exalted being
— a revelation of the power of articulate language
and passion and poetry all combined. Next morn
ing as I returned to deliver the horse, whose contri
bution to my enjoyment was greatly appreciated,
I reflected upon the unlimited power of the human
mind when aided by the gift of genius. I never
heard McGee again, but in reading his speeches
even now I see him as in a mirage, standing before
me, rolling out his beautiful sentences with the
same grace and afiluence of language and voice as
he did in the " leafy month of June," A.D. 1865, in
the City Hall at London. Three years later, as
proprietor of a newspaper, it was my painful duty
to announce by an "extra" his assassination in
the city of Ottawa as he was entering his lodgings
after a late sitting of Parliament.
Although not a pupil of the political platform, I
was nevertheless a regular reader of the political
press. Every Saturday's mail brought me the
Weekly Globe, the Montreal Witness, and the Lon-
4

POLITICS IN THE GEEM
don Advertiser. From these I derived all, or nearly
all, my knowledge of public affairs. In the school
room we had a textbook on Canadian history
from which myself and pupils gathered certain
knowledge as to the discovery of Canada, the
names of its Governors from the days of Cham
plain, its constitutional changes, etc., but these
facts to me had no connection with the politics of
the day. It seemed easy to understand why the
Clergy Eeserves were abolished and why we had
entered into a Eeciprocity Treaty with the United
States, but why the press was editorially a slaugh
ter-house of personal and political opponents, for
resisting this or that public measure, was some
thing I did not then understand. Like old Kaspar,
" But what they killed each other for
I could not well make out."
I said my political teachers were the weekly news
papers; dailies then were a luxury beyond the
reach of a schoolmaster on a salary of |300
per annum. The Montreal Witness was the most
moderate in its criticisms of political opponents.
The Globe had all the intensity of its great editor,
George Brown, and its perusal was a. " liberal edu
cation " in the double sense of the term. The news
of the world, the doings in Great Britain, speeches
in the House of Commons, in the Congress at Wash
ington, the progress of the Civil War in the United
States, the massive and melancholy flgure of Abra
ham Lincoln seen through the smoke of battle at
Antietam and Gettysburg, his manumission of four
millions of Africans from the brand and bondage
of slavery, his assassination and the nation's sor-
5

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
row, all came before me in the intervals of peda
gogic activity, and I gradually became an inter
ested citizen of the world's great forces, whose con
trol was as mysterious to me as the shimmering of
the stars. The power of the press is said to con
sist in its influence in shaping public opinion on
questions of statecraft and theology beyond the
personal touch of the platform and the pulpit.
This view is doubtless correct as far as it goes, but
its service in giving its readers a wider outlook of
the world, in correcting misconceptions regarding
forms of government, in destroying the egotism of
national and religious preconceptions, in its simple
and uncriticized statements of general events, in
its collection of what might broadly be called
" unvarnished news," is quite as educative as its
editorial thunder or its political diatribes.
But, whether right or wrong in its criticism of
men and events, who in those early days of credu
lous adolescence could doubt the journalist? What
the papers said must be true. It was no hearsay.
There it was in cold print. To doubt would be
treason; and so the newspaper was all but
infallible as an exponent of politics, education and
religion, and the " noncontents " were a band of
prejudiced and ill-informed citizens who had no
standing-room in a well-regulated community. To
be fed on such weekly rations of food, often highly
seasoned and perhaps more stimulating than nutri
tious, had but one effect: — to make me a Liberal
with strong prejudices and a certain " cocksure-
ness " that Liberal doctrines were as sound as the
theorems of Euclid, Q. E. D.
6

POLITICS IN THE GEEM
Moreover, my personal associations in the school
district were largely Liberal. My trustees were
Liberals, and they were " noble Eomans," all of
them. The religious element, whether Baptist,
Methodist or Presbyterian (there were no Angli
cans or Eoman Catholics in the district) was also
Liberal. What a paradise for the young recruit!
How could he make a mistake if he joined a pro
cession in which everybody marched one way with
out misgivings as to route or destination? I was
fed from the master's table; how could I question
the quality of the cuisine?
And here I may be allowed a brief digression.
As an incident of my vocation, I associated myself
with a division of the " Sons of Temperance,"
which held weekly meetings for propagating tem
perance principles and wresting, if possible, the
victims of alcoholic stimulants from the bondage
of strong drink. The membership of the division
covered a larger area than my school district, and
so brought me into a larger constituency. The
business of the division was conducted according
to well-defined rules of procedure and debate, which
gave it an air of dignity and self-restraint not
unlike a parliament in miniature. The ceremony
of initiation, the reports of committees, the pre
scribed duties of different officers, the deference
to the presiding officer, and the usual incidents
of a self-governing brotherhood, were all instruc
tive, and to a teacher, whose word was law
in his own sphere, suggestive of mutual rights
which teachers too often overlooked. As a mem
ber, it became my privilege to share in the honours
of the organization and to work side by side with
7

GETTING li^TO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
men many years my senior. Moreover, it gave me
an opportunity of studying character and no little
training in business which greatly modified the
crystallizing tendencies of the schoolroom. But
perhaps its greatest advantage, apart from the
pledge of total abstinence, was the practice of
addressing my fellow members on matters arising
in the ordinary course of business. Then occasion
ally there was a field-night " for the good of the
Order," which meant a debate on some prearranged
topic, with essays and speeches on temperance or
other non-political subjects. In these field-nights
the schoolmaster, as the highest authority on all
literary and polemical questions, was by virtue of
his office a designated exponent. So from neces
sity, more frequently than from choice, I was
obliged to wrestle, not always logically, I fear, with
the protagonist of every proposition on which it
was possible for opposites to contend.
In addition to my practice in speaking before
my fellow members of the Temperance Society, I
acquired some reputation for public speaking at
the school picnics of my fellow teachers, and so
when the first general election under the British
North America Act was about to take place some
of my too ardent friends proposed to put me in
nomination for a seat in the House of Commons.
Why should I continue to blush unseen? This was
early in 1867. The thought was appalling. What
did an obscure teacher know about politics? How
could he discuss great questions of state before men
old enough to be his grandfather, and without any
convictions except those obtained by proxy? How
could he wrestle against men who had fought the

• POLITICS IN THE GEEM
beasts at Ephesus, and who carried the scars
of victory as proudly as royalty wears its crown?
" But why should I not run for Parliament?" my
friends said. Young men were wanted. Old men
had their day. And even if I would not run, I
might attend the Liberal convention about to be
held in North Middlesex, address the electors, and
try my luck at political roulette. If not nomin
ated, I would at least be advertised as a " coming
man," and that was an important consideration.
All I had to do was to prepare a speech that would
" astonish the natives," and my future was assured.
W^ell, I yielded so far as to promise to attend the
convention. And then began a searching of books
and papers for pointers. What could I say to
qualify even for a decent advertisement? I had
read that Disraeli, in his first contest for a seat in
the British House of Commons, after his opponent
had declared the platform on which he sought the
support of the electors, was asked, " And now we
want to know what you stand on, Mr. Disraeli."
His answer, quick as thought, was, " I stand upon
my head, sir !" Good enough in his case, but alas !
for my empty head and its vacant cells. I had no
experience of public life, no wealthy patron to
vouch for me, no fortune to place at the disposal
of the electors, and if my head failed me then I was
undone. Although I had prepared diligently for
the ordeal, it was with feelings of the utmost dread
and trepidation that I entered the public hall
where the delegates were assembled. There they
were, about one hundred and fifty sturdy old yeo
men, who had voted in many elections before I was
born, and among the younger were many of my
9

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
old schoolmates, who looked upon my aspiration
for a seat in Parliament as the outcome of a dis
ordered brain combined with a sublime conceit not
warranted by their knowledge of my attainments
as a fellow-pupil.
Presently the convention was organized, with
an old friend of my family (Squire Wells) in the
chair. After some routine business was transacted,
the nomination of candidates for Parliament was
called for. The sitting member (as the one last
occupying the place is usually called), Mr. Thomas
Scatcherd, a lawyer from London, was first nom
inated, and his name received with great applause.
He opposed Confederation, but was nevertheless
personally popular, and had several years' experi
ence in the Parliament of Canada before the Union.
Then my name was presented as " a fit and proper
person " to represent the yeomanry of North Mid
dlesex. How fit, and why proper, were the ques
tions which I knew were being excogitated by
the delegates present. " Any other nominations?"
asked the chairman. There was no response.
" Then I declare the nominations closed." Imme
diately the audience called " Scatcherd ! Scatch
erd!" and from a secluded part of the hall a
man emerged in response to this call, proceeded
to the platform, and in a very businesslike and
modest way began to give an account of his stew
ardship and to ask for the support of the conven
tion. Strange to say, in his address he took up
nearly every topic on which I had prepared myself,
and before he was through I sat in a cold sweat,
half dazed with the embarrassment of the situa
tion. A prisoner waiting for the sheriff, with the
10

POLITICS IN THE GEEM
gallows in sight, could hardly feel worse than I
did. Mr. Scatcherd's speech was well received,
and the applause which followed the close of it only
added to my wretchedness. Then the chairman,
in a few kind words, called me to the platform.
Great Csesar! what an audience, and how menac
ing everyone looked! For a few moments there
was an uproar, and it seemed as if I would not be
heard, when a stalwart — one Sandy Hutson —
shouted " Order !" and demanded that the young
man be heard. Then there was silence more ter
rible than the uproar, and every delegate as well
as myself " held his breath for a time." With true
maiden-like modesty I apologized for my appear
ance before the convention. I said I could not pre
vent my friends from nominating me. If the con
vention preferred Mr. Scatcherd, that settled the
matter, and I would heartily accept its decision.
I then told the convention how I had prepared a
speech, but Mr. Scatcherd, lawyer-like, had appro
priated the greater part of it, even without power
of attorney. This remark was received with a
round of sympathetic applause, and with that 1
found myself and adapted the fragments of the
speech I had prepared as best I could for the occa
sion. My speech was moderately successful, but
the vote of the convention was ten to one for
Scatcherd, just as it ought to have been. How
could I expect to reap where I had not sowed? But
if little was gained I felt that nothing was lost.
I was " advertised " as an aspirant for Parlia
mentary honours. For the first time I became
known to the leaders of political opinion in a great
constituency, all of which might be of service some
11

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
day. On the whole it was a strange experience.
It was my first encounter with that curious
abstraction called the " public," which was a force
to be reckoned .with. What was the secret of its
power? Could it be placated, coaxed, wheedled,
bullied, or brow-beaten? Had it human sym
pathies to win or affections to cultivate? Was it
a roaring lion or a sucking dove? What were its
likes and dislikes? These were questions which I
asked of myself for many days after, as I was try
ing to cast the horoscope of the future and decide
whether " the cobbler should stick to his last " or
seek some other occupation with a wider outlook
and more promising expectations. I had caught
the infection of publicity, for which the remedy
seemed to be more publicity — similia similibus
Gurantur. Why not try journalism? I said to
myself. That will fill the aching void. Who so
conspicuous as an editor? Who will dare question
his right to be heard? Who can steal his thunder?
With one dash of his editorial pen he can make
havoc in the enemy's ranks and at the same time
win the admiration of a confiding public. That's
the golden fieece to be sought at once. Therein lies
the way to the heavenly heights from which Ambi
tion beckons with smiling countenance, and it may
also be the remedy for an attack of Bacillus Par
liamentum, with which I was evidently infected.
While tortured with these thoughts I was unex
pectedly offered the proprietorship of the Strath-
roy Age, a paper founded about a year previously
by W. F. Luxton, afterwards founder of the Win
nipeg Free Press. It was a small four-page weekly
with a circulation of about three hundred and fifty,
1»

POLITICS IN THE GEEM
and valued — presses, type and equipment — at |600.
Cheap as it appeared to be, its price was quite up
to the limit of my finances; and so, finding a sub
stitute for my school, I took possession, on the 14th
day of June, 1867, of this comprehensive printing
plant and waited for the obeisance and applause
of the vast multitude, to whom an editor was, or
ought to be, the object of profound reverence and
respect. Well, I waited — that is all that need
be said.
At the time that I assumed the control of the
Age, the first elections under the Confederation
Act were in full swing. I took no part in platform
work, but attended many meetings in the three
ridings of Middlesex for the benefit of my great
" Weekly." My more immediate concern was for
the election of the Liberal candidate in West Mid
dlesex, where my weekly was printed and published
and read, of course. The candidates were Dr.
George Billington, Liberal, and A. P. McDonald,
Conservative — my opponent in 1872. Dr. Billing
ton was of English origin, a splendid speaker,
but without any of the accomplishments of Vivian
Grey. Mr. McDonald was of Scottish origin, a
poor speaker, but exceedingly affable in manner,
and personally a great favourite. The Duke of
Wellington once said " that he had no small talk
and Peel had no manners." Dr. Billington had
manners but no small talk, and small talk, like
small coin, often serves a useful purpose. Mr.
McDonald had small talk and coin large and small,
and in spite of the great forensic ability of his
opponent, won the seat by nineteen of a majority.
The Liberals were beaten, the great weekly was
13

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
beaten, and the intelligence of the electors was
graded accordingly. Journalists must not be too
sensitive. Even the London Times has been found
in the minority.
The character of the weekly newspaper has
greatly changed since my first connection with the
press in 1867. Then it aimed at directing public
opinion with the same wide outlook as the daily
newspaper of to-day. Its patrons, in most
instances, had no other source of information on
public questions. There were only a few who sup
plemented the local papers with the larger metro
politan dailies. The editor of the weekly was,
therefore, "a guide, philosopher and friend," as
well as the medium of news within the orbit of
his subscription lists. And so he had editorials
on matters of public policy, on politics national
and municipal, and on the many questions of wider
interest than the minutes of the town council or
the proper location of the town pump. It might
be invidious to name the weeklies of those days
whose editorials on public affairs would do
credit to many of the dailies of to-day. Some still
fortify their editorial columns with opinions well
expressed on public questions, but the majority
aim simply at collecting news of their town and
vicinity, leaving the larger field of politics
to the daily journal and the magazine. For
this evolution of the weekly there are many
good reasons. In this age of activity and quick
communication who could wait a week with
out knowing what was going on in Britain and
Japan? Besides, the daily has been greatly cheap
ened in price. In fact, many dailies are cheaper
14

POLITICS IN THE GEEM
now than weeklies were forty years ago. More
over, the great dailies are the exponents of the
political principles of the two militant parties of
the country, and every loyal party man wants to
drink from original sources of supply. But while
this relieves the editor of a weekly from much
labour and responsibility, he is, nevertheless, in
other respects a great factor in the education of
the public. Locally the weeklies are a sort of vigi
lance committee, and many a municipal councillor
and school trustee act and vote with an eye to the
paragraphs in the weekly paper which his conduct
may suggest. On the other hand, a word of praise
for any form of public service wisely rendered is
just as much appreciated and as helpful as ever.
While the editor cannot be directly quoted for his
opinion on such questions as the Hague Conference
or the election of Senators by popular vote, he has
opportunities to keep the moral atmosphere of the
community in which he lives sweet and to make
the trifler and the knave and the meddler ashamed
of himself. Even the lighter society gossip of
the town, the arrivals and departures, the home
visits of old citizens and the gayety of the young
brides passing out into the world, have about them
human touches which appeal to everybody and
which relieve the monotony of shop and office and
flreside. The weekly has still its place in the news
paper economy of the world, and to use it for the
highest good is an ambition not unworthy of the
altruist and the educationist.
My journalistic experience was comparatively
brief, not exceeding three years, and embraced
some service in every department of newspaper
15

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
work. I wrote editorials, reported political meet
ings and all other kinds of meetings, collected
society notes, solicited advertisements, pulled at
the old-fashioned hand-press on which William
Lyon Mackenzie had printed his most violent
denunciations of the Family Compact, made out
accounts, canvassed for subscriptions, addressed
the mailing list, and so on, in all its varia
tions and permutations, and as a multum in
parvo sort of an editor did many things in a
little way. In spite of these multitudinous duties
rolled in one for the sake of economy, the income
little more than balanced the expenditure, and so
I parted at a small proflt with my exacting charge,
took a partnership in the Seaforth Expositor,
parted with that after a short time, and in 1871
became Inspector of Public Schools for the Eastern
Division of the County of Lambton.
Vale, journalism! vale! Agreeable in all your
associations, profltable by a new experience in
business and a larger acquaintance with the
activities of life, and useful in the wider range
of knowledge to which you compelled attention.
Vale!

16

CHAPTEE II.
FIRST ELECTION VNDER CONFEDERA
TION.
I HAVE already stated that I entered on my jour
nalistic career in 1867. This was the year of the
first general election for the Dominion Parliament
and the Provincial Legislatures under the British
North America Act, and so the political atmos
phere was doubly charged with excitement. As the
campaign for both Houses was conducted simul
taneously, we had a compote of Dominion and local
issues — both very indefinite, and more speculative
than real. Sir John Macdonald had been called
to form a Government for the Dominion and the
Hon. John Sandfield Macdonald to form a Gov
ernment for the Province of Ontario, and both
appealed to the country with the declaration that
Confederation had dissolved the old parties, that
there were no political issues before the country,
and that they had a right under the circumstances
to a " fair trial." Neither of them promulgated a
new policy or party platform. As the Hon. Wm.
Macdougall said, they were beginning with a
tabula rasa, and were entitled to public confldence
till proven unworthy. From this view the Liberal
party, through its leader, the Hon. George Brown,
dissented, claiming that although the two great
parties coalesced for bringing Confederation into
effect, this accomplished, they automatically
3 ' 17

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
resumed their former positions, and therefore the
elections should be conducted on the party record
of pre-Confederation days. The answer to this
from the Conservative party was that the coalition
formed to effect Confederation still existed, as the
Hon. William Macdougall and the Hon. W. H.
Howland, two Liberals, were still members of the
new Dominion Government, and that Sandfield
Macdonald, an old Liberal, had formed a Govern
ment for Ontario composed of three Liberals and
two Conservatives — ^what better proof than this
could be afforded that old issues were dead, and
that Canada had entered on a new career, where
the voice of the partisan would be stifled and the
patriotic fervour of the new-born citizens would
substitute for effete party cries the broader spirit
of a new nationality? The new political shibboleth
was well chosen. The party rancour which pre
vailed during the ten years preceding Confedera
tion " had overleaped itself," and many of the mod
erate men who usually followed their party as a
matter of loyalty, responded to the call for a " fair
trial." The Hon. George Brown refused to accept the
declaration of his quondam political opponents.
Sir John Macdonald, he argued, was simply play
ing his old game of personal and political aggran
dizement — the Ethiopian could not change his
skin, no matter how he attempted to conceal its
real colour amid Liberal colleagues. Place him in
power and he would be a Tory as of old, in spite
of all declarations to the contrary. Even the selec
tion of Sandfleld Macdonald as Premier of Ontario
did not placate the Liberal leader — his appointment
18

FIEST ELECTION UNDEE CONFEDEEATION
was of sinister origin; his Tory companions, like
the fly in the ointment, gave his Government a bad
odour; there must be no alliance with the enemies
of " Eep. by Pop." and non-sectarian schools. So
with characteristic force and energy he appealed
to the Liberal party to repudiate both coalitions
as dangerous and unreliable.
To arouse his followers to give battle as of yore,
Mr. Brown called a convention of the Liberals of
the Province, to meet in Toronto on June 27th,
there and then to consider what should be done to
prevent the success of Sir John Macdonald's new
party tactics. About six hundred responded to the
call, and for three days the temperature of the old
Music Hall on Church Street would not be consid
ered a comfortable average for a summer resort.
As the editor of a Liberal newspaper, I was a
qualified delegate to the convention, to which I
looked forward with unusual interest. Now it
was not the " red schoolhouse," with its rules and
regulations, its restless occupants glad to escape
from its restraint (the teacher often no less than
the pupils), but the political stage, with some of
Canada's greatest men behind the footlights. What
would they look like? I had never even seen their
portraits. This was before the days of photo
gravures and other devices for encroaching on the
privacy of life. Were they as intelligent-looking
as the readers of my great weekly, or the patrons
of my miniature job office? Well, I must know for
myself, and accordingly I resolved to attend the
convention. I will not attempt to recount the proceedings of
the convention in detail. Suffice it to say that
19

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
attention was mainly directed to the debasing ten
dency of coalitions generally, and particularly
of those formed by the two Macdonalds, Sir John
and Sandfield. The convention could in no sense
be called a deliberative body, as no one appeared
to be deliberating. The atmosphere was so sur
charged with passion and the fiery spirit of its
great leader that deliberation was impossible.
There was no necessity for argument — the jury
were already acquainted with the case and were
prepared to give their verdict. The Demosthenes
of the convention was undoubtedly George Brown.
I remember well his tall form and intense earnest
ness as he paced the platform, emphasizing with
long arms and swinging gestures the torrent of his
invective. His manner was so intense, because of
its fiaming earnestness, as to overshadow the
cogency and force of his arguments. Every sen
tence had the ring of the triphammer. Every
climax smelt of volcanic fire — sulphurous, scorch
ing, startling — and the response was equally torrid
— " We will fight against Phillip ; we will conquer
or die!" While George Brown was a great power
on the platform and in Parliament, because of his
" moral earnestness," as was said of Gladstone, his
leadership at this convention reminded me of the
words of Macbeth, " Lay on, Macduff ; and damn'd
be him that first cries, ' Hold, enough !' " and sad to
say, as in the great drama, Macduff prevailed.
In contrast to George Brown was his former
ally and colleague, now charged with treachery to
the Liberal party — the Honourable William Mac
dougall. When the coalition of 1864 was formed
to carry out Confederation, Messrs. Macdougall
20

FIBST ELECTION UNDEE CONFEDEEATION
and Howland, along with George Brown, repre
sented the Liberal wing of that famous compact.
In 1865 George Brown retired from the coalition
because he felt he was ignored by Sir John Mac
donald in matters of public policy on which he
believed he should have been consulted. Messrs.
Macdougall and Howland declined to follow their
leader, arguing that as a coalition was necessary
to the accomplishment of Confederation, so only
by a coalition could the new regime be successfully
inaugurated, and the united Provinces properly
launched on their new career.
To square himself with the Liberal party, Mac
dougall had asked to be allowed to address the
convention. His request was granted, and seats
were reserved for him and Mr. Howland on the
platform. It was really a case of Daniel in the
lions' den — large, angry lions at that. They were
more than hostile, they were furious, but as
restrained as could be expected under the circum
stances. Mr. Macdougall, tall and strongly built,
rose in solemn silence, if we except a few sup
pressed growls from the back of the hall. His
face bore no expression of fear, in fact no particu
lar expression of any kind. He was calm, digni
fied and resolute, and without preface or apology
gave his reasons for refusing to leave the coalition
Government. " Though Confederation is an accom
plished fact constitutionally," he said, " there is
much to be done to get the new machinery in
motion. As it was brought about by the two great
political parties of Canada, is it not reasonable
that both parties should continue for a time to
guard the cradle of their own offspring? Why
ai

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
should the Liberals withdraw their help in such a
crisis?" and so on. Occasionally his remarks pro
voked dissent, but, nothing daunted, he proceeded
steadily and calmly until he had stated his case,
and with an appeal for support on patriotic and
non-party grounds he took his seat. His colleague,
Mr. Howland, spoke in a similar strain, but with
less force and power.
And now the tournament was really opened.
The coalitionists had been heard, and it was for
the convention to hear the other side — evidently
a work of supererogation, for they knew it, or
thought they did, already. George Brown was
called to reply to the two culprits who had offended
against Liberal canons. He was in splendid form,
although somewhat overwrought by the excitement
of the occasion. This accentuated a hesitating ten
dency of speech which affected him more or less
on all occasions. It could hardly be called stam
mering. It seemed more like the rush of a mighty
flood too great for the channel through which it
was passing. And a flood it was — a flood of argu
ment and invective and incrimination and censure.
In effect, his speech was a declaration that coali
tions were dangerous, if not worse, and justified
only when all other means of preserving the state
had failed; this one was particularly bad, as it
served no public purpose except to keep Tories in
office, and Macdougall and Howland had sold
themselves to Sir John Macdonald for that con
sideration. And so the flood rolled on and on over
the applauding six hundred delegates, who were
clearly convinced that Monteith, who betrayed Sir
William Wallace, or Benedict Arnold, who offered
33

FIEST ELECTION UNDEE CONFEDEEATION
to sell his country for British gold, were angelic
beings compared with Macdougall and Howland.
Call Mr. Brown's speech torrential eloquence or
call it what you like, it was the speech of a man
with strong convictions and great intellectual
power — a man dangerous to meet anywhere, but
particularly with admiring friends at his back; a
man who could command an audience with the
forcefulness of his manner and make his argument
effective by intensity of presentation. Needless to
say, the coalitionists were condemned without
beneflt of clergy — which I cordially approved.
Many others took part in the convention; among
the more noted I shall simply mention Alexander
Mackenzie and Edward Blake.
The convention was pronounced a success,
although as a political movement it failed to influ
ence the election to any appreciable extent. The
two Macdonalds achieved their purpose. Mac
dougall and Howland remained in the Govern
ment; George Brown was defeated in South
Ontario, and I received my flrst course of instruc
tion in party politics. Was Mr. Gladstone far
wrong when he said that " a convention is a noun
of multitude signifying many but not much"?
Here let me tarry a little while over Macdougall
and his future career. Mr. Macdougall, as he
appeared to me then and on several occasions since,
was a man of many gifts. As a speaker he was
dignifled, frank and deferential to his audience.
He had none of the sledgehammer methods of
George Brown, not even the incisive energy of
Alexander Mackenzie. His language was well
chosen, his sentences well balanced and his voice
S3

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
full, resonant and agreeable. He was a debater
more after the model of the English Parliament
arians than the Canadian. I have seen him in the
House of Commons follow the arguments of an
opponent for an hour or longer without reference
to a single note — sometimes quoting a statement
almost verbatim and then dissecting it with the
coolness of a German surgeon. Like D'Arcy
McGee he was sparing of gesture; he was never
known to attempt oratorical aviation ; his tempera
ment forbade emotion and passion; but for clarity
of statement and logic unadorned he had no
superior in the House of Commons. Once I
encountered him on the political platform. It was
in the winter of 1876, when the late Dalton
McCarthy was a candidate for the riding of Card-
well. As the meeting was called by the Liberals,
I led in the debate^ on behalf of the Liberal candi
date, Mr. Bolton. Mr. Macdougall followed, and
treated me with the greatest courtesy, while of
course endeavouring to refute my arguments. My
reply, I am sorry to say, was more stormy declama
tion than argument, and was so far personal as
to charge Mr. [Macdougall with treason to the
Liberal party, in terms similar to those used by
George Brown at the Toronto convention. Mr.
Macdougall asked to be allowed to reply, but this
I declined, as it was my privilege, according to the
rules of debate, to close the meeting. I expected
he would on the flrst opportunity resent my rude
ness, but, far from so doing, he treated me in the
House and out of it with more than conventional
courtesy. During his illness I visited him fre-
24

FIEST ELECTION UNDEE CONFEDEEATION
quently at his home in Ottawa, and was always
accorded a kindly welcome.
Mr. Macdougall did not attain in public estima
tion the position to which his great ability entitled
him. As a member of the Government he dis
charged his public duties honestly and efficiently.
He was never accused of proflting pecuniarily by
his ministerial opportunities. Why he failed as a
political force after Confederation I am quite
unable to say. It has been said that as a Minister
he was persona ingrata with his chief. Sir John
Macdonald, and that he was appointed Lieuten
ant-Governor of Manitoba in 1869 as an easy way
to secure his removal from the Cabinet. It is even
said that Sir John intrigued against him, but this
could hardly be conceived in view of the danger to
party interests from the unsettled condition of
Manitoba. With his failure to reach Winnipeg on
account of the Eiel rebellion, his political star
never afterwards shone with its former lustre.
Neither in the House of Commons nor the Legis
lature of Ontario, where he sat for a few years,
did he ever regain the public ear. Liberals gave
him the cold shoulder and the Conservatives
treated htm as one whose usefulness was gone. I
believe both parties are open to the charge of
ingratitude. In the flfties and early sixties, when
the Liberals of Upper Canada were fighting for
the secularization of the Clergy Eeserves and jus
tice to all religious denominations, Mr. Macdougall,
in the press and on the platform, was one of their
most doughty champions; and in the general elec
tion of 1867, and afterwards in 1878, when the
National Policy was the main political issue, he
35

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
never spared himself to advance the interests of
the Conservative party. Yet from neither party in
his later years did he receive the slightest token of
appreciation.
" The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones."
A good story was told me by the late Alexander
Mackenzie of Mr. Macdougall's application for
admission to the Law Society of Upper Canada.
He was a member of the Government at the time,
and trusted to the courtesy of the Law Society for
admission to the bar without the usual examina
tion prescribed for an ordinary law student. On
the receipt of his appUcation his case was referred
to the Treasurer of the Society, the Honourable
John Hillyard Cameron, for examination and
report. Mr. Cameron invited Mr. Macdougall to
dine with him, intending, after dinner, to examine
the new candidate for legal honours. Accordingly,
as both were seated in front of a comfortable fire
enjoying their after-dinner cigar, Mr. Cameron dis
closed the purpose of his social courtesy, stating
that he had been appointed by the Law Society to
examine Mr. Macdougall as to his qualifications
for call to the bar, in order to report as directed.
"And now, Mr. Macdougall," he said, "perhaps
you will tell me what you kno;w of law." " Not a
damned thing !" was the startling reply. " That
will do, Mr. Macdougall, that will do," said Mr.
Cameron, and the conversation was turned to other
subjects. At the next meeting of the Law Society
Mr. Cameron presented his report, to the following
effect: "As directed by your honourable body I
36

FIEST ELECTION UNDEE CONFEDEEATION
examined Mr. Macdougall as to his knowledge of
law, and found his answers quite satisfactory and
correct." On this report, it is said, Mr. Macdougall
became a barrister in good standing, and possibly
a striking exception to some who were admitted in
a more formal manner.
Another story is told of his experience in the
county of Lambton in the general election of 1867.
The contest was between Alexander Vidal, after
wards Senator, and Alexander Mackenzie, after
wards Premier of Canada. Mackenzie was one of
the rising Liberals in the old Parliament of Can
ada, and his defeat would be a great political vic
tory, as he opposed Sir John Macdonald and all
his works. Mr. Macdougall was a member of Sir
John's " Fair Trial " Government, and was sent to
Lambton to check Mackenzie's career. According
to the custom of those days, a political campaign
was a series of platform duels between the candi
dates or their representatives. The excitement ran
high at every meeting. It is said the Gael dearly
loves a fight, and Mackenzie was, like many of his
countrymen, " a bonnie fechter." Mackenzie was
in his prime, belligerent, aggressive and caustic as
potash; Macdougall was dignified, argumentative
and sometimes cynical. The battle between the
two raged fiercely several days. The climax was
reached in the village of Arkona towards the close
of the campaign. Macdougall had made a slashing
attack on Mackenzie for his disloyalty in opposing
the Queen's Government at such a crisis in the his
tory of Canada — " Did he want the new Dominion
to crumble into its original atoms and become a
prey for the United States," and so on. The charge
37

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
of disloyalty was intended as a solar plexus blow,
and was cheered by the Tory section of the meet
ing as a flnal settlement of Mackenzie's political
career. Nothing daunted, however, Mackenzie rose
to reply. " Mr. Macdougall," he said in unmistak
able Doric, " calls me disloyal. Me disloyal ! Do
I not wear the Queen's uniform? Have I not
camped with my fellow citizens on the border to
repel the Fenian invaders who would trample
under foot the British flag? Can Mr. Macdougall
quote a word of mine either in Parliament or out
reflecting upon the Queen or the British monarchy?
Let me tell him to his face that he is mistaken.
Loyalty to the Queen is a noble sentiment in which
all true Liberals share, but loyalty to the Queen
does not require a man to bow down to her man
servant, her maidservant, her ox or her ass." And
with the last word of the quotation he turned some
what signiflcantly towards Mr. Macdougall. The
blow was flerce as the stroke of a Lochaber axe, and
after that night Macdougall left the electors to
their own devices. At the close of the polls the
Doric exponent of loyalty was elected by a majority
of over six hundred votes.

28

CHAPTEE III.
WITH ALEXANDER MACKENZIE IN WEST
MIDDLESEX.
During the interval between my retirement from
journalism and my appointment as Inspector of
Public Schools, the flrst Parliament of the Pro
vince of Ontario expired, and the election for the
second Parliament took place. The election was
fixed for March 21st, 1871, and Sandfield Mac
donald's Government was on trial before the elec
tors. Sandfield Macdonald had held office four
years, and claimed support on two grounds: first,
that he had managed the business of the Province
so economically that, after paying for administra
tion and all other expenses, he had a surplus of
over two millions ; and, second, that his policy was
progressive in regard to every vital Provincial
interest. Both claims were fairly well founded.
He built asylums for the insane, for the deaf and
dumb, and for the blind, all of which were sorely
needed. He projected the College of Agriculture
and took a large vote for railway development. He
provided for the prompt trial of criminal offences
by summary conviction, and erected the Central
Prison for the confinement and employment of
prisoners of a certain grade. He limited elections
to one day, and passed legislation for the trial of
controverted elections before the High Court
Judges instead of before Committees of the House.
39

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
His four years of office were years of great activity
in every department of the public service, and he
had every reason to suppose that the country
would approve of his record. There were several
features of his administration, however, which
gave the Opposition, led by Mr. Edward Blake, the
groundwork for attack. He deliberately stated
that public institutions were located in recogni
tion of political support. In the case of a depu
tation for some special favour for the town of
Strathroy he went so far as to ask, " What the hell
has Strathroy done for me?" meaning that Strath
roy had no political claims upon Mm. These
statements had a sinister ring, and were regarded
as a political bribe which should be resented. In
his appropriation of |1,500,000 for railway aid he
refused to designate the roads to be aided. This
was also considered a form of coercion, as the
electors of any constituency looking for a subsidy
were led to believe that to vote against the Gov
ernment was not the best way to win its favour.
But what made this campaign of particular
interest to me was the nomination of Alexander
Mackenzie, member of the House of Commons, as
the Liberal candidate for West Middlesex. The
sitting member, Mr. Nathaniel Currie, was con
sidered exceptionally strong, and it was believed
no local Liberal could defeat him. Mr. Mackenzie,
with Scottish caution, refused to run unless it
were shown that the electors preferred him to a
local man. This was soon settled by a requisition
very numerously signed, and so he was formally
nominated and the race was on. Mr. Mackenzie
could only give a small portion of his time to the
30

WITH MACKENZIE IN WEST MIDDLESEX
campaign on account of his engagements at
Ottawa, the House of Commons being in session.
As I had some time at my disposal I was asked to
address several meetings on his behalf. The meet
ings were small, and, as Mr. Currie was not repre
sented at any of them, it was plain sailing. Mr.
Mackenzie was a complete stranger in the riding
personally, but well known through the press as
one of the strong men of the Liberal party. I had
heard him speak at the great Liberal convention
in Toronto already referred to, but beyond that I
had formed no opinion as to his power on the plat
form. As his time was limited, he held two meet
ings a day, and so bad were the roads that the
saddle was the only means of quick transporta
tion. It was a whirlwind campaign, and Mr.
Currie's friends were completely stampeded.
When the votes were counted, Mackenzie had a
majority of 410. It was a glorious victory, and
even " the ranks of Tuscany could scarce forbear
to cheer." To me the campaign was an educator
in two ways — I gained some experience in platform
work, and I had an opportunity of studying the
platform methods of an acknowledged champion
of debate.
Mackenzie was sui generis a debater. He had
more than the average pugnacity of his race, and
reminded one of a fellow countryman of his who
was asked on his deathbed if he would not like the
friends present to join in singing a hymn or two
to comfort him. "Hymns!" said the dying man.
"Na, na, I want to argy (argue)." Mackenzie had
a clear-cut face, distinctly angular, and without
any surplus tissue to round it off at any point.
31

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
His voice was not musical, but carried well and
had as decided a Scottish " burr " as that of
Souter Johnny or Tam O'Shanter. He had a
marvellous memory, which never failed him, and
a command of simple, expressive English that
would do credit to a university professor. His
grammar was faultless, and he was one of the very
few who could be reported verbatim. He was never
stagy, never aimed at effect. His primary object
seemed to be to unhorse his opponent if he were
present, or if not present, to make his audience
believe that he could do so very easily. Very few
men possessed his directness in debate. There was
no circumlocution, no dallying with an opponent.
His business was to shoot to kill, and he rarely
failed in his purpose. He could be caustic or
cynical at will, and his humorous sallies blistered
like a blast from a flaming smelter. Not only did
he leave his opponents mangled and bleeding at
his feet, but he shot into them barbs which, like the
quills of a porcupine, festered wherever they
struck. As an example of his readiness in repartee, I
might cite an incident connected with his election
in West Middlesex. He was making a strong
appeal to the audience on behalf of the Liberal
party as the exponent of unswerving loyalty to
principles of public policy in the interest of the
country. " On all questions of principle the party
is not only Liberal," he said, " but clear grit in
the real sense of the word." On mention of the
words " clear grit," Mr. C. H. Mcintosh, editor of
the Strathroy Despatch, called from the audience,
" Will you explain what you mean by ' clear
33

WITH MACKENZIE IN WEST MIDDLESEX
grit ' ?" to which Mackenzie instantly replied, with
his usual Doric accent, " ' Clear grit ' is pure sand
without a particle of dirt in it."
Mr. Mackenzie was ih great demand in bye-elec
tions. I have heard him relate his experiences with
D'Arcy McGee, Michael H. Foley and Sir John
Macdonald. He was not given to boasting, but I
could see that no Irishman at Donnybrook got
more pleasure out of his adventures than he did
out of these hand-to-hand fights. I had the pleas
ure of hearing him in an outdoor debate with Sir
Charles Tupper in my election of 1878. Sir Charles
was no ordinary antagonist, but he had neither the
agility nor the incisiveness of Mackenzie, and the
general verdict was that Mackenzie was the better
man. I believe he delighted to cross swords with
Tupper as much as with any man. Tupper's self-
confidence incited him to his best, and he no doubt
meant what he said of him once in St. Catharines,
that he was like Milton's Lucifer, " He would
rather reign in hell than serve in heaven."
Mackenzie's election to the Legislature spelled
trouble for the Sandfield Macdonald Government.
He was a good second to the Opposition leader,
Edward Blake, and their joint attack required
more than ordinary skill and courage to repel.
With an extraordinary want of foresight Sandfleld
opened the way for his own defeat. During the
recess, under his own Act to try controverted elec
tions before the Judges of the High Court, the
seats of eight of his supporters were vacated, and,
as no writ could be issued for a new election, as
the lav then stood, until the House had met and
elected a Speaker, Sandfleld was obliged to sum-
4 33

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
mon the Legislature. Without any difficulty or
even opposition, his nominee, Mr. E. W. Scott, of
Ottawa (now Sir Eichard Scott), was elected
Speaker. The Lieutenant-Governor, in his Speech
from the Throne, outlined the business for the ses
sion, and the Government evidently intended to
proceed as if it had nothing to fear from its
crippled condition. Had Sandfleld asked for an
adjournment of the House until the bye-elections
were held to fill the vacant seats, the House would
probably have supported him; but instead of this,
he proceeded with the debate on the Address, and
afforded Mr. Blake, with all the skill and force of
which he was capable, an opportunity to assail
him. Motions of want of confldence followed each
other in rapid succession, and in eleven days after
the opening of Parliament his slender majority
dwindled away, and his " Patent Combination,"
as he called the coalition which he had formed,
was dissolved. A new. Government was formed
under Blake, in which Mackenzie held the port
folio of Provincial Treasurer. Had the electors
of West Middlesex rejected Mackenzie at the gen
eral election, Sandfleld Macdonald's defeat might
have been indeflnitely postponed. So much often
hinges on winning or losing a single seat.
To me, personally, a different result might have
been very inconvenient. In June, 1871, as stated, I
was appointed Inspector of Public Schools, and in
March, 1872, I was nominated to . contest West
Middlesex for the House of Commons. Doctor
Eyerson, then Chief Superintendent of Education,
consulted Mackenzie as to the propriety of an offi
cer of the Education Department, which I was
34

WITH MACKENZIE IN WEST MIDDLESEX
practically, being allowed to enter the political
fleld, and proposed that my resignation should be
asked for. Mackenzie, while not expressing any
opinion on the political aspect of the question, sug
gested that the matter stand over until after the
election — if I were defeated there would be no
necessity for further action; if elected, then the
question might be taken up. And there the matter
rested from that day forward during my term of
office. By an Act of the Dominion Parliament passed
in 1872, members of a Provincial Legislature were-
disqualifled from sitting in the House of Commons.
Both Mackenzie and Blake, accordingly, resigned
their seats in the Legislature, and that led to the
reorganization of the Government of Ontario, with
Oliver Mowat as Premier. But more of that later.

35

CHAPTEE IV.
MY FIRST ELECTION TO THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS.
Early in 1872 the flrst Parliament of Canada
completed its full term of flve years, and the two
great parties began immediately to marshal their
forces for a death-struggle at the polls. In West
Middlesex, the Conservative party had nominated
the sitting member, A. P. McDonald, whose course
in Parliament was eminently satisfactory to his
party followers. With the Liberals a choice was
not so easily made. On account of McDonald's
well known election methods, it was thought that
success depended upon flnding a candidate who
could meet him on his own ground, and no local
Liberal appeared able to fulfll this condition.
Accordingly, the nomination was offered to Mr.
Daniel McFie of London, a retired merchant of
excellent character and ample means. Mr. McFie
took the offer into consideration, looked over the
Tiding, and concluded that the odds against him on
many grounds were too great, and so he declined
the proffered honour. Another convention was
called, and by a unanimous and enthusiastic vote
I was offered the nomination. It was said that I
was fairly well known in the riding from my work
in the Mackenzie campaign the previous year ; that
I was a resident of the riding, effective in debate,
and that I stood a fair chance to carry the election.
36

FIEST ELECTION TO HOUSE OF COMMONS
This offer came to me quite unexpectedly, and was
more or less embarrassing. When I accepted the
Inspectorship of Lambton I intended to prepare
myself for entering the legal profession by devot
ing all the time I could spare from my inspectoral
duties to Blackstone. It was soon enough, I
thought, to take up politics when I had a profes
sion to fall back upon. Moreover, I felt that
McDonald was in some respects a formidable
opponent. He had many years of experience in
Parliament, he was much better acquainted with
the electors than I was, he knew all the arts of
electioneering; and for a young man inexperienced
and without the sinews of war to hope to defeat
him was tempting the fates. The Liberals, how
ever, were very urgent, and pledged themselves to
support me with every means in their power. At
length I consented to run, and with the betting
heavily against me accepted the nomination.
According to the custom of those days, candidates
for Parliamentary honours always issued an
address to the " free and independent electors "
(as if some electors were not free), declaring their
views on the questions before the country and ask
ing for their " vote and influence." My address, as
it now appears to me, was quite a pretentious docu
ment. I certainly had exalted ideas as to what a
member of Parliament ought to do. Had I been
the leader of the party I could not have promised
more, such are the presumption and the optimism
of youthful inexperience. It is gratifying to notice,
however, that the legislation then advocated has
since been passed, and that the general policy out
lined in my address is still considered of para-
37

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
mount importance to Canada. For a Liberal to
declare himself in favour of " Canada for the Cana
dians " in 1872 was to anticipate one feature of the
National Policy, which I by no means intended
when I used the phrase. Here is the precious
"document :
To The Electors of the West Riding of Middlesex,
Q-entleme-n, — ^When I addressed you, immediately after the
•convention held at Mount Brydges, on the Sth of March last,
I promised a fuller exposition of my views on questions of
public policy; I now submit a few of the more important
measures bearing upon the prosperity of the country which
will receive my hearty support.
1. An Election Law for the Dominion similar in ita general
principles to that adopted by the Legislature of Ontario, includ
ing the trial of controverted elections before the Judges.
2. The Independence of both Chambers of the Legislature,
and the enactment of a law by which Senators could not hold
any office under the Crown, except that of a Privy Coun-
¦cillor. 3. The abolition of Dual Representation in the House of
Commons. 4. Economy in the payment of salaries and In the manage
ment of all the Executive Departments of the Government.
5. The reduction of tariffs and customs, so far as compatible
with the faithful discharge of our financial obligations.
6. The encouragement of immigration, and the speedy
settlement of the vast territory now under the control of the
Dominion. 7. The protection of territorial rights against any and
every aggressor.
8. The opening up of the best markets for Canadian pro
duce, and the cultivation of commercial interchange with
countries whose produce we require.
9. The undertaking of such Public Works as would be
productive without being burdensome.
10. The development of our mineral resources, the renewal
of Reciprocity with the United States, the Improvement of
38

FIEST ELECTION TO HOUSE OP COMMONS
our Insolvency Laws and the maintenance of Parliamentary
independence. 11. The removal from power, at the first opportunity, of
the present administration, whose actions in connection with
the Intercolonial Railway, the North-West, British Columbia,
the Washington Treaty, the Pacific Railway, the Redistribu
tion Bill, etc., render them no longer worthy of the confidence
of the electors of this Dominion.
These and similar measures, no matter where they originate,
will receive my hearty support. Canada for the Canadians
made prosperous by good Government, honesty, industry, and
public morality, will be the aim both of my life and my legis
lation. Trusting that this declaration of principles, sustained
by consistency and integrity, will command your approbation,
and receive from you such evidences of acceptance as will put
me in a position to advocate them on the fioor of the Canadian
House of Commons, I remain. Faithfully yours, Geo. W. Ross.
Strathroy, July 1st, 1872.
Mr. McDonald, confident in his strength and con
fident also that he would easily expose my unfit
ness for Parliamentary honours, announced a
series of meetings, to which, according to the old
Saxon method of " trial by ordeal," I was invited.
In the meantime he had prevailed upon Dr. Billing
ton, whom he defeated in 1867, to announce him
self as an independent Liberal, and he too was
invited to be present. " Now certainly," I thought,
" the clouds are thickening and my doom is sealed.
To divide the Liberal party would in itself mean
certain defeat, but to confront two candidates at
one time and escape with my political life would
be a miracle." But I had no choice. To refuse the
invitation would be to wear the brand of cowardice.
39

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
" Possibly I can harass the enemy," I thought,
" even if I cannot turn the battle into a rout. The
captain must fight at the head of his men if he is
to retain their confidence. Defeat is not neces
sarily a disgrace — cowardice is." At length the
much-dreaded encounter took place, and after the
first round my friends assured me that I more than
held my own. I attacked McDonald with all the
energy of despair, and declared that I would attend
all his meetings and let the electors know how
shamelessly he had misrepresented them in Parlia
ment. The third candidate proved to be harmless.
On election day he polled only seven votes.
The difficulties of conducting an election forty
years ago were in some respects much greater than
at present. Public halls were few in number and
limited in accommodation, and so it was necessary
to hold numerous meetings to fully instruct the
electors. Newspaper readers were comparatively
few, and it was only by personal canvass, or
through meetings in schoolhouses and elsewhere,
that the electors could be reached. In my first
campaign I addressed thirty-five meetings. The
want of political literature was also a great dis
advantage to a candidate without inside knowledge
of the doings of Parliament. It is true the Toronto
Globe gave from day to day much information
regarding the questions discussed and the votes
cast in Parliament against measures proposed by
the Liberal Opposition. But the Globe could not
be quoted as an authority — it was a party organ,
and its statements as well as its opinions would
be received in a public meeting with jeers. Such
an authority as the Journals of the House were
40

FIEST ELECTION TO HOUSE OF COMMONS
only available to the few who had friends in the
public offices from which they were supplied.
There were no yearbooks with official statistics, no
Hansards with official reports, and unless an
opponent's speech were quoted from his own party
organ it would instantly be repudiated as a false
report intended to do him an injury. This leads
me to narrate two circumstances illustrative of
what I have already stated.
My platform campaign was mainly directed to
show that my opponent's votes in Parliament were
not in the interest of his constituents and did not
entitle him to a renewal of their confidence. For
instance, in adjusting the tariff after Confedera
tion for revenue purposes, among other things a
small duty, I think not more than ten per cent.,
was imposed on Bibles, prayer books and hymn
books. This was opposed by the Liberal party, and
in the division that took place McDonald voted
with the Government, at whose instance the duty
was proposed. This vote was noticed in the Lib
eral press, and I of course seized upon it as one of
the grounds on which McDonald should be con
demned. I was unable to procure a copy of the
Journals of the House containing the division list,
and could only cite the Globe in proof of my charge.
McDonald denied the charge point blank, and
declared it was made by the Globe while knowing
it to be false, and challenged me to the proof.
What could I do? I was convinced the charge was
true, and if proven by documentary evidence I felt
that electors of strong religious convictions might
possibly resent it. As a last resort I wrote to the
Collector of Customs in the city of London, and
41

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
received a reply to the effect that duties were
imposed on Bibles and hymn books in 1867 but
repealed in 1869. Now I felt armed for a renewal
of my charge, and the opportunity soon came in
the Town Hall in Strathroy. As usual a joint
meeting for political slugging drew a crowd. I
renewed my charge and expressed my deep regret
that McDonald forgot what was due to the moral
and religious interests of his country and outraged
all sense of propriety by voting for a tax upon
Bibles. They were sent to the heathen, I said, free
of cost, but McDonald refused to treat Canadians
as well as the heathens were treated — ^was there
ever anything so base? And to confirm the charge
I read, very regretfully, the letter of an officer of
the Government that McDonald supported, whose
word was not open to question, at least by the Con
servatives. McDonald was still game, and in his
reply reiterated his denial, refused to accept the
statement of the Collector of Customs and declared
that I was wilfully and maliciously misrepresent
ing him, and in proof he drew from his wallet with
an air of bravado what he alleged was the Official
Blue Book published by the Dominion Govern
ment, in which it was stated that Bibles, prayer
books, etc., were free, shook the book jn my face
and asked the audience to condemn me as a pre
varicator and slanderer. My position was for a
moment or two very embarrassing. There it was,
apparently what he represented it to be, an Official
Blue Book. Was it possible that the Collector of
Customs had made a mistake? I must see this
Blue Book for myself, and so I jumped to my feet
and asked McDonald to let me look at it. " No, no,
43

FIEST ELECTION TO HOUSE OF COMMONS
there it is !" was the reply, and speaking with more
than his former vigour he went on to brand me as
most unworthy of respect. So strongly did I feel
that if I could but examine his alleged Blue Book
it would relieve me from the intolerable position
in which I was placed, that I reached up and
snatched it out of his hands, and in an instant
perceived that his authority was not a Blue Book
at all — and holding it up to the audience I read
from the cover " Maclear's Almanac, 1869," and
threw it down on the table before him. It was
enough. His friends were dumbfounded and my
triumph was complete. That McDonald deliber
ately intended to mislead his audience and dis
credit my statement was beyond question. To
make the Almanac appear like a Blue Book, he
had turned the cover back, thus exposing the fly
leaf, which was blue. To the audience and to those
on the platform it appeared to be exactly what he
represented, and but for my discourteous pertin
acity I would have been branded as a knave. In
the subsequent course of the campaign he heard
from me a good many times, and was asked to pro
duce his Almanac whenever he was in a tight place
My next dilemma for the want of official evi
dence was somewhat similar, and ended greatly to
McDonald's disadvantage. The Tariff Bill already
referred to proposed a small duty on imported live
stock of every description; the Liberals moved to
exempt live stock when imported for breeding
purposes. Macdonald voted against the Liberal
proposition, and I asked the farmers if they could
approve of this vote. McDonald, as in the case of
the duty on Bibles, denied having given such a vote,
43

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
and said I was misrepresenting him knowingly and
wilfully. As in the former case my only authority
was the Toronto Globe, and that would not be
accepted by McDonald or his friends. So I deter
mined I must get the Journals of the House if at
all possible and nail him down once for all. I wrote
to Mr. Mackenzie at Sarnia for the much-needed
document, and fortunately he had a spare copy
which he sent and which I received on the morn
ing of the official nomination, one week before elec
tion day. In those days nominations were held in
the open air, and a platform, called the hustings,
was erected for the use of the election officials and
the candidates and their friends. The electors
were massed in front to hear the candidates and
any others who might be present to address them.
McDonald as the sitting member was first nomin
ated and made the usual address. I followed, and
among other things repeated the charge that he
had voted against the free importation of live stock
for breeding purposes. " Prove it ! ' Prove it !"
called McDonald. I at once responded and read
from the Journals of the House the resolution on
the subject and McDonald's vote from the division
list. At this McDonald became greatly enraged,
still denying his vote. I then took up the Journals,
and turning to him said, " If you think my state
ment not correct read it and be convinced that I
am not misrepresenting you." Taking the book
from my hands he shouted "Eead it yourself!"
and, raising it, was about throwing it at my head
when one of his friends intervened. The excite
ment of the electors was intense, and I was not sure
for a second or two what part I might be required
44

FIEST ELECTION TO HOUSE OF COMMONS
to play to vindicate my good name. It was the last
exciting episode of the campaign. A week later
the votes were polled and I was elected by a
majority of 56. Thus was verified the means by
which a noted Scotchman declared success could
be achieved — " Audacity, Audacity, Audacity " ;
or as Danton said in the French Assembly, " Dare,
and again I say Dare and Dare."

45

OHAPTEE V.
INITIATION DAY IN THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS.
The Second Parliament of Canada was called
for the despatch of business on March 5th, 1873.
The Liberals did not carry the country, although
they reduced the majority against them in the
House. I was summoned in the name of the Queen,
as others were, to appear at " Our City of Ottawa,"
all excuses being laid aside, for the despatch of
business to " treat, do, act and conclude upon
those things which in Our said Parliament of
Canada by the common council of Our Dominion
may by the favdur of God be ordained." Accord
ingly, I arranged my work as Inspector of Public
Schools so that nothing would suffer by my
absence, and with free transportation by the cour
tesy of the railways, I took a train that I was
assured, if I changed often enough, would in the
course of time bring me to Ottawa. Forty years
ago railway travel was not as luxurious as it is
to-day, and many were the jolts which are now
avoided by the substitution of the Miller coupling
and the airbrake for the link and bolt and strug
gling brakesman of those early days. Pullman
cars we had for the night, with dusky porters and
frowzy blankets and oil lamps — all amazingly
grand as comfort was then understood. There
were no " through " cars or trains as we now have,
46

INITIATION DAY IN HOUSE OF COMMONS
so I had to change at London, twenty-two miles
from home, and wait indefinitely (for schedule
time was then a misnomer), then change at Ham
ilton and wait still more indefinitely, change at
Toronto and refresh at the railway restaurant and
wait; and after jolting along two hundred and
twenty miles, more or less, change again at Pres
cott, at five o'clock in the morning, or earlier, and
wait some more; until in the course of about
twenty-four hours I found myself, jaded and tired,
in Ottawa somewhere on Sussex Street, but exactly
where I did not know. It was the end of the
journey and I was still alive.
Hailing a French-Canadian cabby wrapped in
a buffalo overcoat which proved to be strongly
saturated with tobacco, I was assured that I would
be taken safely to any part of the city for the
modest fee of twenty-five cents. Ottawa, at day
light, in those days, was not much of a sight, nor
was I disposed to give its straggling appearance
due credit for future possibilities. " To No. —
Albert Street," were the orders given to the driver,
for I had taken my lodgings in advance. " Off
again," as Finnigan would say, and I found the
speed of my buffalo-robed driver was fully equal
to that of the train I had just left, and with fewer
jolts and shocks — no street cars to bedevil the
streets, no cahots to double you up against an
empty stomach. On we went, over the canal and
around corners, regardless of the skidding propen
sities of my chariot on runners. It was cheap
transportation, and I got full value for my money.
As I crossed the canal I got a glimpse of the Par
liament Buildings; but sight-seeing was not my
47

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
object. Visions of clean towels and a refreshing
toilet, to be followed by a generous breakfast, had
obscured all other objects, and the quicker these
visions became a reality the better I would like it.
No. — was a large boarding-house kept by one
Mrs. Brown. There was a Mr. Brown in the part
nership, but he was not the working member of the
firm. Mr. Brown was a civil servant whose duties
precluded all other service, and so he simply lent
his name to the firm to give the partnership a legal
status. Besides, Mrs. Brown required no assist
ance, and would doubtless have resented it if
offered. She was nevertheless a kindly landlady,
well matured (her age not known even to the
census-taker), attentive and anxious to make her
guests feel at home.
At the breakfast table I found myself in a
goodly company — Edward Blake, Alexander Mac
kenzie, David Mills, George E. Casey (West
Elgin), Wm. Harvey (East Elgin), and James
Findlay (North Eenfrew). Not bad associates, I
thought, as politicians go; and the number was
suggestive — " We are seven." Breakfast over,
then what? To the Parliament Buildings, of
course ; where else could I " treat, do, act and con
clude," as required by Her Majesty's writ? So up
Elgin Street I went on a slippery sidewalk ; around
by the old Free Press office ; then along Wellington
Street to the iron gate opening into the grounds;
up the main walk, then an inclined plane, with a
frozen fountain midway around which the path
made a detour; under the main arch; through
swinging doors of heavy oak, that clanged against
the jambs as I passed in ; then up some steps to the
48

INITIATION DAY IN HOUSE OF COMMONS
left, past the post office, past a porter in uniform,
to the lobby on the north side, where I found a
locker with " Eoss — Middlesex " on the door, to
distinguish me from other clansmen of the same
name (there were six of us). Here coat and cap
and overshoes were deposited, that I might be dis
encumbered for the duties of the day. Alas! for
the vacant receptacle intended for my umbrella.
Alas! that umbrella, purchased, not borrowed or
otherwise procured for the occasion (good silk and
ivory handle at that), and paid for in good coin
of the realm, was now in Montreal, to become the
ward of anyone who would assume its guardian
ship. It was resting comfortably when I last saw
it in a rack overhead, and without any look of
regret parted company with me at Prescott while
I waited, and I have never been able to this day to
resume its acquaintance. I fear after forty years
of separation I would not recognize it, even if its
ivory handle were presented for my friendly grasp.
Now I am within the sacred precincts of the Par
liament Buildings, located at what Goldwin Smith
called an " Arctic village," selected on the advice
of Her Majesty the Queen as being less likely to
be blown up or looted in the case of an invasion
by the dreaded Yankee. No doubt, in choosing this
city, then so "splendidly isolated," Her Majesty
had in mind the destruction of the Capitol at
Washington by a namesake of mine in the War
of 1812, and she wished to make reprisals as diffi
cult as possible. My first care was to be sworn
in, and as I had no such scruple as Mr. Bradlaugh
of English fame I kissed the book, signed the roll
and was qualified to take my seat at the hour
5 49

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
appointed. Some twenty or thirty who wished to
qualify for a similar privilege jostled each other
at the clerk's table at the same time, and all as
cheerfully consented as I did " to bear true
allegiance to Her Majesty."
This done, I must needs look around and get
some idea of the geography of this extensive pile.
Though not quite labyrinthine in its many halls
and lobbies, it nevertheless required some care to
keep one's bearings; so back I went to my ward
robe as a starting-point, thence easterly to a door
marked " Speaker's Office — Private," thence south
erly to the smoking-room and library — one delight
fully fragrant, the other oppressive with the gar
nered wisdom of all the ages — thence westerly past
a multitude of wardrobes bearing names famous or
to be famous in the history of Canada, and thence
northerly through the main lobby to the place of
beginning. Was this circuit of the building to be
an epitome of my Parliamentary career— starting
from myself, back to myself and nothing more?
Had I not heard of such cases?
But there were other parts of the internal
geography yet to be explored. Off I went alone as
before, like a modern Columbus to find unknown
worlds. This time it was through the main lobby
southward for a sunnier climate and more shel
tered retreat from the cold winds that blew down
the Ottawa valley than prevailed in the quadrangle
to which my oath of allegiance bound me. South
ward I went, down steps, then on the level about
eighty feet, then up steps again (what steps and
steeps a politician has to climb compared with the
easy levels of life!) and now I am in a lovely and
50

INITIATION DAY IN HOUSE OF COMMONS
spacious lobby carpeted in crimson, with uni
formed officers variously stationed. What a dis
covery! Surely this is the vestibule of a Beulah
Land where philosophers in constitutional law
and statecraft can find repose from the distracting
cares to which common humanity is exposed. I
was right in my surmise — it was the main lobby
of the Senate Chamber; and looking through a
glass panel I saw a spacious room, with crimson
hangings and carpets and roomy chairs uphol
stered in crimson, and what appeared like a minia
ture throne with a single chair, flnely carved, sur
mounted by a crown in purple and gold. It was
only a look, for I felt so rebuked at my presump
tion in encroaching upon a place so completely
hedged by trappings befitting a king, that I
retraced my steps, and, meeting my fellow-lodger
Casey, wandered to Eoom Number Nine, where he
told me the " boys " had a sort of private rendez
vous, in which they foregathered without intrusion
from the cavaliers who haughtily occupied the Gov
ernment benches. And so to Number Nine I went,
for I dearly wanted to see the " boys " and learn
something of the private life of a member of
Parliament when not under the discipline of the
Speaker's eye. Number Nine, though somewhat
obscured by tobacco smoke, was humming with
life. Probably twenty members were there, in
little groups, recounting their campaign experi
ences and telling of forced marches, of encounters
with the sons of Anak, of battles fought in country
schoolhouses by the flickering light of tallow
candles, of clever devices by which doubtful voters
were taken and held in durance till the polls were
51

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
closed, of torchlight processions and throbbing
drums and waving handkerchiefs from windows
fllled with admiring suffragettes, and so on. Now
this, I said to myself, is life without its carking
cares, and its dread of offended and exacting con
stituents. Mr. Casey with brotherly kindness
introduced me to several members then present.
¦" Eymal," he said, turning to a gentleman of large
girth and genial countenance, " this is George Eoss
— I suppose I should say, as there are so many of
his tribe here — Eoss of Middlesex; allow me to
introduce him. He is a new member like myself."
" George," said Eymal, " I am glad to meet you.
You are a daisy. You defeated that old rascal
A. P. McDonald, didn't you? I knew him well.
He was here too long." And with a grip which
signified unmistakably that he was personally and
politically glad, I found a chair and as many
acquaintances as the room contained. Time was
no consideration with the occupants of Number
Nine. They seemed a company of lotus-eaters who
had enough of action and believed that " all life
should not labour be." Here the member wan
dered who wished to smoke his pipe, hear the
gossip of the day, read the daily papers or evade
Parliamentary bores — a happy shelter, but not
fitted for meditation; tempting too because of its
Bohemian abandon and freedom from convention
and the cordial relations which prevailed among
its occupants. No club or brotherhood could be
more sympathetic. Every member was of equal
standing. There were no officers to obey. The
door was never tiled. Leave of absence was never
53

INITIATION DAY IN HOUSE OF COMMONS
required. All was merry as a political procession
of the winning party on election day.
" Three o'clock, gentlemen. Parliament is to be
opened. Every man to his place," and we all
looked at our watches. So it was; and knocking
the ashes out of their pipes, the occupants of Num
ber Nine and all others, the Queen's " trusty com
moners," directed their way to the Chamber to
await orders. My seat was to the left of the
Speaker (or rather to the left of his chair, for
there was as yet no Speaker), and about the middle
of the fourth tier of seats. Who designated me to
this particular part of the Chamber I do not know.
I answered to the label on my desk. It was the
same as that of my wardrobe locker, " Eoss — Mid
dlesex." My seat was well situated for observa
tion, and, comfortable though it was, I felt myself
in strange surroundings — strangers to the left of
me, strangers to the right of me, strangers in front
of me, shuffled and chattered. But many were old
acquaintances by reputation, good, bad and indiffer
ent; all told, there would be exactly two hundred.
Mr. Patrick, Clerk of the House, is sitting at
the head of the table, looking towards the main
entrance as if expecting somebody. To the right
of him and in the front row sit the " Old Guard "
of the majority.
First in precedence, although not first in the
row, is Sir John Macdonald. I looked him over
with more than ordinary curiosity. It was my
first look at him, as it was at his colleagues and
at all but the few members I had met in Number-
Nine. Is that the " John A." of whom I had read
in the Weekly Globe in my rural retreat as a
53

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
teacher, and whom I had " scored " in the edi
torials of my great weekly and later held up as
the bete noir of Canadian politics on the public
platform? If he only knew all I said about him
what a reception I would get from him later ! Yes,
it is the " John A." whose name garnished every
editorial in my great weekly — now Sir John, but
the same man notwithstanding the prefix. I
looked htm over critically. " Is my reading of
his physiognomy correct?" I reflected. Did that
gentle-looking man threaten the life of George
Brown one dark night in the winter of 1865, and
so cause him to flee from the Capital like Chris
tian from the City of Destruction? Surely not, he
does not look like an Italian assassin. Did he
betray the Liberal party when he formed the coali
tion of 1867? Well, so I was told, but his coun
tenance does not conflrm the charge. He is not
even aggressive-looking, although he has pushed
his way from the Division Court room to the
Premiership of Canada. Oh, but he is a cunning
old fox — no mistake about it! His eye is furtive.
THe looks around, but thinks straight ahead. He
is a winner. He has a smile for everybody that
loves him, and they appear to be in the majority;
.an air of confldence that he can play the game, par
ticularly if allowed to deal the cards. There's the
jTub — to deal the cards! At any rate, he is the
central flgure on the first row, and prepared to
fight for it, I suppose, if his claims are questioned.
The next to him is a somewhat shrivelled old
man, with sharp features, stooped shoulders and a
countenance indicating irritability and nervous
tension. My plan of the House shows him to be
54

INITIATION DAY IN HOUSE OF COMMONS
Sir Francis Hincks, Minister of Finance. He was,
I know, once Premier in the old Parliament of
Canada, and hyphened with Mr. Morin as the
Hincks-Morin Government; a quondam journalist,
like myself; a financier, author of the twenty-five
cent paper currency, and so forth. He was called
" The Hyena " for his fierceness in debate.
Then there is Charles Tupper — plain Doctor
Tupper, broad-shouldered, self-contained, vigorous-
looking as Wellington's charger " Copenhagen."
He was the champion of Confederation in Nova
Scotia, and all honour to him for it. In repose,.
even, he looks as if he had a blizzard secreted some
where about his person. My weekly said he was
a dangerous man, and shall I for one moment now
question its accuracy?
Then further on in the same group of notables.
Honourable Hector Langevin, afterwards more
notable; Honourable John Henry Pope, the
Diogenes of the group; and Honourable Joseph
Howe, the shadow of a great figure in Nova Scotia
politics — a great man whose intellectual windows
are frosted. How sad that old age comes at all to
some men.
On the back benches there was a variegated
assortment of men from the east, the west, the
north and the south, too numerous to mention or
to describe; all tried and true, according to their
own political standards, the best hand-picked fruit
in the local orchard, and loyal servants of the
Queen for an indemnity of six hundred dollars
plus travelling expenses and spoils (if any).
The figures on the left of the Speaker's chair
were subalterns, but some of them with a marshal's
55

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
baton in their knapsack. In the first row, sitting
bolt upright, as was his wont, with features as
firmly set as if chiselled in granite, was Alexander
Mackenzie, the national motto of Scotland written
in his face — " Nemo me impune lacessit "; then
Edward Blake, the greatest advocate of his day,
strong of frame, with a reserve force, apparently,
which his opponents would do well not to call into
play; then the Honourable Luther H. Holton,
Montreal, ex-Finance Minister of George Brown's
Government of 1858, which found its grave in the
" double shuffle." There was the genial Henri Joly
de Lotbini^re — a Huguenot, a gentleman in aspect
and in fact; one might mistake him for a courtier
of the days of the Grand Monarque. There was
Timothy Warren Anglin, Speaker of the third Par
liament, versatile, brainy and fair-minded. There
was James Young of Gait, strong in debate and
genial as the sunshine in May. Here and there
around me and in front of me were Parliamen
tarians in posse who came up to possess the land,
if they could only drive out the Philistines who
occupied the Government benches. Taken all in
all, it was a goodly Parliament, barring its Tory
majority of over thirty.
Looking over the list of members that assembled
that day on both sides of the Speaker's chair, I
find that the second Parliament produced no less
than four Premiers — Sir Charles Tupper, Sir
J. J. C. Abbott, Sir Mackenzie Bowell, and Alex
ander Mackenzie. Of Provincial Premiers it con
tained three, of future Cabinet Ministers twenty-
seven, of Lieutenant-Governors eleven, of Senators
56

INITIATION DAY IN HOUSE OF COMMONS
eleven, and many others distinguished in the
public service.
But I had hardly flnished the mental sketch of
my associates when my attention was arrested by
three loud taps on the main door — now something
was going to happen. The Sergeant-at-Arms went
to the door to ascertain if it was Poe's Eaven that
was the cause of this tapping at our Chamber, or
some other bird of ill omen. On opening the door
there entered a small man, not a bird, who, I after
wards learned, was the gentleman usher of the
Black Eod, Eene Edward Kimber, His Excel
lency's messenger, who with three obeisances grace
fully performed approached the Clerk's table and
informed us if we would go to the Senate Chamber
we would get some useful information. Having
said this in English and French (he was no
common bird), he backed out,, less gracefully, I
thought, than he had entered. But he got out, and
this was the important thing, for our curiosity was
aroused to hear this bottled information. So to the
Senate Chamber we went, preceded by the Ser
geant-at-Arms with the mace. There we were told
that if we would be good enough to elect a Speaker
and come back next day. His Excellency would
make us a speech. Coming from a Governor-Gen
eral who had been only a few months in Canada,
we did not wonder that he hesitated about making
our acquaintance rashly. And so, as soon as we
returned, up rose Sir John Macdonald (to whom
the Clerk pointed with his finger as if we had not
noticed him ) , and with a short preface moved that
the Honourable James Cockburn, member-elect for
the East Eiding of Northumberland, be appointed
57

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Speaker of the House for the present Parliamentary
term. This motion was seconded by Mr. Langevin
and carried; on which. Sir John and his seconder
sought the Speaker-elect, whom they found, not,
like Saul, " hidden among the stuff," but at his
desk, and each taking an arm, led him to the steps
by which his chair was approached, assuming of
course that he could find his way undirected after
that. Immediately the mace, that had modestly
concealed itself under the table, was lifted with due
dignity to its cushioned bed above the table, and
the Speaker said he was pleased and honoured and
then lost himself in his official oaken chair. At
any rate, we had done as commanded by His Excel
lency; and as I was waiting for the next order of
business, the Speaker and the mace disappeared
by a secret door and the House adjourned " till
three o'clock to-morrow afternoon." The time
given to business on this first day had been eight
minutes, the indemnity was six dollars — a full
week's wages for a teacher. What extravagance!
Do you wonder that I preached economy in my
great weekly? " And the evening and the morning
were the flrst day."

58

CHAPTEE VI.
OPENING OF PARLIAMENT— 181 S.
It is March 6th, and the Canadian ensign is
floating from the top of the flagstaff on the main
tower, resplendent in its red folds, with the Union
Jack just where it ought to be, on top, and where
members of Parliament have sworn to keep it.
Frock coats and smart ties are in demand to-day,
for the Governor-General is coming down in state
to open the House at three o'clock, as promised, if
we would elect a Speaker, which we did.
As three o'clock approached, coachmen in all
sorts of liveries were busy depositing valuable par
cels of millinery in motion (not moving pictures
but the real thing) at the official entrance of the
Senate Chamber, and ushers inside were busy
locating the parcels aforesaid according to the
precedence of the owners thereof. The crimson-
carpeted chamber that I looked in upon yesterday
was completely transformed and was refulgent
with all the colours of the rainbow. The desks
used for business were removed (the day was a day
for pleasure, not business) and senatorial chairs
were fllled with gowns, beautiful gowns from Paris,
London, New York, and who knows where. Beau
tiful they were beyond compare. I looked in just
before His Excellency arrived and thought surely
that " Belgium's capital had gathered there her
beauty and her chivalry." From the middle aisle,
59

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
rising right and left to the utmost limit of the
chamber, row above row, were seated the wives of
Senators and of members of the House of Commons,
and their sisters and their daughters and their
cousins and their aunts. In addition were the
wives of citizens of Ottawa and other cities and of
the more prominent officers of the Civil Service,
all becomingly decorated for the occasion. There
were coiffures a la mode and others in various
modes known to the portrait painter. There were
necklaces of pearls and diamonds which far out
shone the wealth of Ormus or of Ind, and there
were smiling faces as one and another reflected
how good it was to be inside before the doors were
shut. Bang! What is that noise? A shiver of silk
and a flutter of Parisian fans. Bang! More flut
tering. I know; it is a royal salute from the guns
on Major Hill in honour of the Governor-General
on his way to open Parliament. I went to a win
dow to see if the pageant was in sight. There it
was — the state carriage with four horses, postilions
in uniform, outriders, a military guard of honour,
a brass band. What more need a Governor-General
require to impress the country members of Parlia
ment with his official importance? To the dweller
among his herds and flocks, to the owner of lands
and forests where civilization trembled for the
future, to the doctor who with saddle-bags in front
of him cantered over country roads to relieve the
suffering, to the merchant who bartered his goods
for the products of the farm and did his own
freighting both ways, to the editors of great week
lies, and others unused to viceregal grandeur and
60

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
the roar of artillery, the day was an epoch in their
lives. Another relic, I thought, of medisevalism —
just following British precedents. Let it go.
Up the highway they come, caparisoned, as I
have said, to give us something to look at; now
under the main archway to the right; through the
crimson doors of the Senate, which open to receive
them ; through the double file of living millinery —
Governor-General and aides-de-camp and military
officers in scarlet and gold, swords clanking, spurs
glistening, march in dignified leisure towards the
canopied chair called the throne, where His Excel
lency sits for further consideration of the duties of
the day. The rustling millinery is hushed. The
Speaker of the Senate, by order of His Excellency,
sends his messenger, Eene Edward Kimber, black
rod in hand, to tell the Commons to appear forth
with in the Senate Chamber. Three taps again,
three exquisite bows forward and backward, and
the orders are carried out. The Speaker of the
Commons, preceded by the messenger and the Ser
geant-at-Arms, mace carried shoulder-high, march
to the Senate and stand outside the bar to hear
what His Excellency has to say. I shall not repro
duce this speech. Is it not written in the chronicles
of the House of Commons of the thirty-sixth year
of Her Majesty's reign? What more is wanted?
His Excellency, who is he? Thus reads his
pedigree : " The Eight Honourable Sir Frederick
Temple, Earl of Dufferin, Viscount, Baron Clan
deboye of Clandeboye, in the County of Down, in
the Peerage of the United Kingdom, Baron Duf
ferin and Clandeboye of Ballyleidy and Killeleagh
in the County of Down in the Peerage of Ireland,"
61

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
and so on, and so on. Well, it was the first time I
had seen a live Earl, and it was not long till I was
convinced that he was greater than his pedigree,
noble though it was.
" 'Tis only noble to be good.
Kind hearts are more than coronets
And simple faith than Norman blood."
But this was Irish blood — what better? Lord
J)ufferin, for that is the name by which he endeared
himself to Canadians, had the blood of the great
Sheridan in his veins, and somewhat of Sheridan's
eloquence on his tongue, as witnesses his speech in
the House of Lords on the death of Prince Albert.
He was at the beginning of his career when he
entered in state the Senate Chamber on that sixth
day of March, 1873, and what a distinguished
career was then begun. No man ever filled more
responsible positions in the diplomatic services
than he did in the Chancelleries of Europe. At St.
Petersburg he was able to circumvent the tortuous
diplomacy of the Czar of all the Eussias. At Con
stantinople he taught the Sultan to respect the
public opinion of his contemporaries and refrain
from repeating the cruelties of his predecessors.
At Eome he aided in the unification of the Italian
States. At Paris he taught a higher morality in
international relations than the uncertain Talley
rand. But it was in India that he reaped his great
est honours — "When shall his glory fade?" To
Canada he gave the first real impulse towards
nationhood. He saw the crude materials out of
which we were endeavouring to form a nation, pos
sibilities not seen by any of his predecessors, and
63

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
gave us courage to build on. Hear his inspiring
words : " Nestling at the feet of her majestic
mother, Canada will with confidence dream her
dream of the perpetuation for all time upon this
continent of that temperate and well balanced
system of government which combines in one
mighty whole as the eternal possession of all
Britons the brilliant history and traditions of the
past with the freest and most untrammeled liberty
of action in the future." And that dream is to-day
the inspiration of every true Canadian. Yes,
simple faith is more than Norman blood.
But the pageant is over. His Excellency doffs
his hat to the Senators, to the Commoners, to the
favoured guests. Swords clank again, ushers clear
the way, the military swing into line and again the
procession is in motion, this time towards Eideau
Hall. The Speaker resumes his chair in the House
of Commons, and tells us that he has a copy of
His Excellency's speech which will be placed upon
the journals for consideration later, and again
Speaker and mace disappear — time, forty-five min
utes. But members of the Liberal party had duties of
a private nature to discharge for which neither
Speaker nor mace was required, namely, to elect a
leader in the House of Commons. Since Confed
eration — then nearly six years past — the leader
ship of the Liberal party was in commission. Some
times Alexander Mackenzie assumed that responsi
bility, at other times Edward Blake or A. A.
Dorion. All was agreeable enough, but the time
had come for placing the reins, with the approval
of the party, in the hands of one man who would
63

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
speak for the party in the House and on the party
platform. And so the word was passed, and the
faithful assembled in Eoom Number Nine about
seventy strong, with the Honourable John Young
of Montreal in the chair. There were two men in
the Liberal ranks above all others qualified for the
post — Blake and Mackenzie. Neither would dis
pute the other's claim. There was no rivalry, no
jealousy. A committee was appointed to consider
the matter. The committee agreed upon Mr. Blake,
but he declined, alleging that Mackenzie's claims
were stronger on party grounds and length of ser
vice. The post was then offered to Mackenzie with
the utmost cordiality and accepted in a modest
speech, at the same time regretting that the first
nominee had declined. Personally I would have
been content to serve under either of them. Mac
kenzie, however, was fully entitled to the honour
by faithful service to the party and was heartily
congratulated on his appointment.
As the days passed, I was getting accustomed to
the ^routine and acquainted with my fellow mem
bers. Time never hung heavily on my hands, for
the library was a constant source of delight, and
there my mornings were usually spent. Alpheus
Todd was chief librarian, a prodigy of knowledge
on all conceivable questions, and the most obliging
of officers. How he had stowed away in his small
head all he knew was a constant wonder to me.
With his aid I became familiar enough with the
library to know where to look for any book I
wanted, and many were the pleasant snatches of
time spent with Mr. Todd in a retired alcove dis
cussing the most useful books for a young member
64

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
of Parliament to read. In these visits I met almost
daily David Mills of Bothwell, the best-read public
man within my experience. He could almost say
with Dr. Jowett of Balliol College, " What I don't
know isn't knowledge." His most favoured sub
jects were history and constitutional law, and so
great was his knowledge of these subjects that Sir
John Macdonald often deferred to his judgment.
He was also fond of theology, and could quote the
Fathers and the leaders of theological opinion from
Calvin to the latest exponent of theosophy and
other modern cults with a familiarity quite bewil
dering. Perhaps he lived too much with his books.
He got the reputation of being a doctrinaire, rather
than a practical legislator. However, I often
thought that a few doctrinaires of his calibre
would neutralize the wild fancies of the so-called
practical man, greatly to the advantage of legis
lation. In the third week of the session startling rumours
were pervading the lobbies that a political earth
quake was materializing and that some men in
the highest places in the land would perish in the
shock. What it was no member outside a favoured
few could tell, but it was something terrible. The
political sky would be darkened, yawning chasms
would open at our very feet; the most courageous
would fiee for security anywhere, if peradventure
they could save themselves from destruction. Who
had the earthquake in charge was eagerly asked,
and also who was to perish when the fatal day
arrived. We knew somebody could tell if they
would, but the oracle was dumb ; we must bide our
time — and it came. Four weeks from the day the
6 65

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Speaker was elected, on Wednesday, April 2nd,
1873, Lucius Seth Huntingdon, member-elect for
the county of Shefford in the Province of Quebec,
charged Sir John Macdonald with receiving from
Sir Hugh Allan, who was anxious to get control
of the construction of the Pacific Eailway, money
to be used for corrupting the electors. We know
this charge better by its familiar name " The Paci
fic Scandal." Now the secret is out, and Parlia
ment has a first-class sensation. Mr. Hunting
don took the responsibility of making his charge
against the Government as a member of Parlia
ment. This practically meant if he could not prove
it, or give good reason for believing it to be well
founded, that he would forfeit his seat as a mem
ber of the House. A great silence fell upon the
chamber when he had proceeded far enough to
indicate the object of his motion. He made no
speech. He could not do so without disclosing
some of the evidence in his possession. He simply
made his statement and then asked for a Com
mittee. Sir John made no reply ; " Call in the
members," was his only answer. It was a vote of
want of confidence and must be rejected, and so
it was by 107 to 79. Now we were an angry lot —
Number Nine was greatly excited. Was there ever
such procedure in a free Parliament? No denial,
no explanation — simply, " We will not investigate.
It is nobody's business if Sir Hugh Allan did help
us in the elections. We are in power and control
the House. Call in the members — that will be
answer enough; stamp us out." Eymal filled his
pipe and swore some. Stirton said, " It is like
John A. He is a scoundrel and ought to have been
66

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
hanged long ago"; to which we all assented.
Young, of Gait, and Charlton and Paterson and
M. C. Cameron declared the country would not
stand it. John A. must go. And i there was a
chorus of approval. In fact. Number Nine that
afternoon would approve of almost anything, short
of lynching, that would rid the country of " the
greatest corruptionist," to use Mr. Eymal's words,
" that America had produced."
Next day, however, we were somewhat relieved
when Sir John gave notice that he would ask the
House to appoint a Committee to do the very thing
he refused the previous day; and on the 8th of
April a Committee was named. But now for all
sorts of surprises, each of which deepened the inter
est of Number Nine in the proceedings of Parlia
ment. First, the Committee had no power to
examine witnesses under oath. " Pass a Bill,
then," said Mackenzie, " and give them the power."
But Sir John said, " I do not think we have power
to pass such a Bill without an amendment of the
British North America Act, and only the British
Parliament can amend the British North America
Act. However, to settle the matter I will bring in
a Bill, put it through the House in double quick
time and get the opinion of the law officers of the
Crown as to our jurisdiction." " Sparring for
wind," said Number Nine ; " this Bill will go to
England — that will take time ; the law officers will
examine it leisurely — more time; and then the
session will be at an end and a Committee cannot
sit after prorogation." And so it happened. The
Act was disallowed, and Number Nine said, "Didn't
we tell you so? You can't catch the old fox that
67

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
way." To enable the Committee, however, to go
on with the investigation Parliament was not pro
rogued but simply adjourned on the 23rd of May
to meet on the 13th of August to hear the report.
Bless the luck! The Liberals on the Committee
declined to act as they were unable to examine wit
nesses under oath. The law officers had so reported
on the 27th of June — a month after adjournment.
On the 13th of August we met as ordered by Par
liament, and Number Nine was again in a ferment.
The temperature was tropical — ^what it would be
in the shade nobody could tell, for there was no
shade. Ninety-four members of the House peti
tioned His Excellency to fire the whole wretched
crew and end this trifling. " I can't do that," said
Dufferin. " It is the privilege of a British subject
to be considered innocent till proven guilty. I will
give you a Eoyal Commission and promise to call
Parliament in eight or ten weeks to receive its
report. That is the best I can do." Number Nine
did not want a Commission. So we all foregath
ered in the Eailway Committee Eoom, appointed
a Chairman, and resolved that Parliament was
ignored, slapped in the face, kicked out of doors,
by Sir John and the Governor-General, supported
by the cringing, fawning, purchased followers of
the Government on the back benches. In the even
ing we went again to the Tower Eoom — more reso
lutions and much hot stuff. I said nothing — too
young and too hot. Well, home we went. Number
Nine was closed for the holidays. A Commission
was appointed, as the Governor-General had pro
mised, and on the 23rd of October Parliament was
called to receive the report of the Commission and
68

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
for other business. Now comes the tug-of-war.
The report of the Commission conflrmed the
charges made by Huntingdon. What would Sir
John Macdonald do? Would he resign or would
he flght it out?
The battle is on. Mackenzie, now leader of the
Opposition, is on his feet and submits a motion to
the effect that " His Excellency's advisers have
merited the severe censure of this House." We all
cheered him. His speech was hot shot with a Scot
tish accent, and we cheered the accent. We
expected Sir John to reply, but Sir Charles Tup
per, who never quailed before a foe, took the floor
and in a long speech courageously endeavoured to
vindicate his leader. Many were the remarkable
speeches made as the debate proceeded. As might
be expected, they were declamatory and impas
sioned, and dealt with the report of the Commis
sion in the strongest terms permissible by the rules
of the House. Among the most notable was the
speech of the Hon. E. B. Wood, formerly Treasurer
under the Sandfield Macdonald Government. Mr.
Wood was a strong debater of leonine appearance,
and with a voice so resonant and far-reaching as
to secure for him the appellation of " Big Thun
der." He proceeded step by step to show that the
Government had no escape from public condemna
tion — that the evidence of the leader alone was a
confession of guilt, and that like Lucifer they had
fallen, as they deserved, never to hope again. " But
we shall rise again," interjected Sir Charles Tup
per from across the House. " Else again," retorted
Mr. Wood, " but that resurrection shall not be
until the last trump shall sound — when the graves
69

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
shall give up their dead and death and hell shall .
give up the dead that are in them."
As the debate went on, it became quite evident
that the Government forces were disintegrating.
Some weakness was known to exist among a few
of the stalwarts from Ontario, although carefully
concealed. A canvass of the members showed that
out of a House of 206 members, the Opposition
could count with reasonable certainty on 101 votes.
Since the charges were made, however. Prince
Edward Island had been admitted to Confedera
tion, and the question was. What would the
Islanders do? Which side would they take? They
were six in number. Their leader, the Honourable
David Laird, was a Liberal of good standing in
his own Province. Would he have any leanings
towards the Government because negotiations for
the admission of the Island into Confederation
were conducted by Sir John? Mr. Laird was
regarded as a man of high character, and the
Opposition could only hope that no consideration
of personal or Provincial interest would sway his
judgment. But the climax is approaching. The fire of the
Opposition is taking effect. The leader of the Gov
ernment can no longer sit silent, and the word
goes around the lobbies that Sir John is up, and
immediately the restaurant is emptied and every
chair in the chamber filled. What will Sir John
say? Will he deny the charge, will he announce
his resignation — or what? Hear him. And so we
did, in a speech lasting between four and five hours
— a speech of great power, in which he denied that
he made a corrupt bargain with Sir Hugh Allan
70

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
for the purchase of the Pacific Eailway charter,
but admitted receiving money from Sir Hugh Allan
for election purposes. Why should he not? The
payment of this money, he said, had no effect upon
the terms of the bargain. It was a payment from
a great financier who was interested in the pros
perity of the country and who believed that that
prosperity could be attained only through the Con
servative party. Large contributions were made
in England for political purposes through the
Carlton Club, without offence. Why should not
Sir Hugh Allan do as he liked with his own? And
then followed a strong appeal to his supporters for
continued confidence on the ground of long ser
vice. His closing words were : " I can see past the
decision of this House either for or against me. I
know — and it is no vain boast for me to say so,
for even my enemies will admit I am no boaster —
that there does not exist in this country a man who
has given more of his time, more of his heart, more
of his wealth, more of his intellect and power, such
as they may be, for the good of this Dominion of
Canada." At two o'clock in the morning Mr. Blake rose to
reply, and was received with the most enthusiastic
cheers. We all expected his forensic powers would
show to the best advantage, and so they did. It
was a great effort, worthy of the speaker and the
occasion. But the end was approaching. Mr.
Laird of Prince Edward Island was about to make
his maiden speech. Was there ever a maiden
speech so fraught with doom? With great calm
ness and in a moderate tone he declared his oppo
sition to the Government, and the Opposition
71

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
benches rang with cheers. And now for the climax.
On the seventh day of the battle Mr. Donald A.
Smith, of Manitoba (now Lord Strathcona), took
the floor. He had preserved during the whole excit
ing debate a sphinxlike silence. He was known as
a staunch supporter of the Government, and his
silence was construed into loyalty to his chief. He
assured the House he had but little to say, and all
waited anxiously — both sides apparently equally
intent upon hearing that little. His opening
remarks were complimentary to Sir John and his
great service to Canada, and with that the faces
of the Opposition lengthened. But Mr. Smith had
not flnished " With respect to the transaction
between the Government and Sir Hugh Allan he
did not consider that the flrst minister took the
money with any corrupt motive. He felt that the
leader of the Government was incapable of taking
money from Sir Hugh Allan for corrupt purposes."
And now we thought we were done for. But wait
a moment. "He would be most willing to vote
confldence in the Government (loud cheers from
the Government side) could he do so conscien
tiously." (Great Opposition cheers.) "Con
scientiously " — it was a bolt from the blue to the
Government side of the House. To the Opposition
it was a song of deliverance, and we all concluded
that a Scottish conscience was a good thing to keep
on hand.
It was great news for Number Nine — " We will
catch the old fox yet," said Eymal. He was caught.
Donald Smith was used to trapping foxes in Lab
rador and the North-West — his speech did the
trick. At half past one o'clock on Wednesday,
73

OPENING OF PAELIAMENT— 1873
November 5th, the House iadjourned, and Mac
kenzie was sent for to consult with His Excellency.
The end had come, and Number Nine vibrated with
cheers. " The greatest scandal in history is now
to be punished," said Stirton ; " Sir John is dead
and gone forever," said Casey, as he lilted a line
from an old negro melody. It was a great night in
the lobbies, in the restaurant downstairs, in vari
ous nooks and corners throughout the building.
The vanquished were good-natured and resigned to
their fate, the conquerors happy and respectful to
their fallen foes. I went to my hotel, and slept
soundly ; though only a deck hand, I had helped the
" boys." Why should I not sleep soundly? Sir
John, whom I so severely castigated in my great
weekly, was now scrap-iron. In the words of
Curran, the great Irish orator, speaking of the
emancipation of the slave who touched British
soil, " We were redeemed, regenerated and disen
thralled by the genius of universal liberty."

73

CHAPTEE VII.
TO THE RIGHT OF THE SPEAKER.
A NEW Premier, a new Cabinet, the end of the
old regime, and a fresh start with a new broom to
sweep down the cobwebs from the walls and make
things sweet and clean! St. George had slain the
dragon, now we would have peace. It was with
these thoughts that I returned home after the fall
of the Macdonald Government to resume my duties
as Inspector and enjoy the political millennium
upon which I was confldent we had just entered.
But I found the millennium had not yet arrived.
In two months after my return the House was dis
solved, and back to our constituents we had to go.
Should I run again for West Middlesex or stick
to my bailiwick as School Inspector? " Eun, of
course," said the Liberal convention, which was
summoned on short notice, and out on the warpath
for scalps I went. But there was no scalping to
be done — I was elected by acclamation. My purse,
flabby by the experience of the previous year, was
more than happy, and I was happy too. Perhaps
the millennium had come after all.
Another trip to Ottawa the same as before,
minus my silk umbrella — the same waiting and
jolting, but not the same lodgings at the end of
the journey. This time I was to abide at a hotel
on Sparks Street known as the " British Lion," Mr.
Champness, landlord. Some of the "old hands"
74

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKE]^
had selected the place and had arranged for a suite
of rooms, consisting of a private parlour and din
ing-room and separate bedrooms for each guest.
There were twelve of us, and a happy family we
were, free from the intrusion of the transient
guests of the hotel. Everything served at our table
was of the best, and we had the flrst choice. At
the head sat Joseph Eymal — a good carver and a
generous one; at the foot David Stirton, just as
good; at the centre, on one side sat Adam Gor
don of North Ontario, chaplain, and opposite to
him John Charlton; while the rest of us, junior
members of the family, took the places appointed
for us. Our hostess superintended the proceedings,
and with a goodly number of waiters completed
the outfit. Who were we? Besides the four men
tioned, there were James Trow (South Perth),
afterwards party whip; Thomas Bain (North
Wentworth), for a short time Speaker of the
House of Commons; rare Tom Bain — bachelor
then, farmer. Liberal — too modest to make the
most of himself; David Thomson (Haldimand),
large-hearted and kindly as a brother; Thomas
OKver (North Oxford), my desk-mate, not to be
forgotten — everybody loved Tom Oliver, for his
Scotch heart had warmth as well as blood; John
Gillies, a stalwart from the county of Bruce; Wil
liam McGregor of South Essex, who loved and told
a good story; Daniel Galbraith (North Lanark),
an elderly young man of seventy odd years ; Thomas
McKay (Colchester), now a Senator, unobtrusive,
gentlemanly; and myself, the youngest of the party.
For three sessions the " British Lion " welcomed
us hospitably, and we parted from him with regret,
75

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
for our hostess died and the " Lion " went out of
business. In the new House there were many strange faces.
In Ontario, alone, fifteen Conservative saddles had
been emptied in the last election. Still, the
majority of Sir John's fighting men were returned
— Tupper and Pope and Peter Mitchell and Mac
kenzie Bowell and Abbott and Haggart and Kirk
patrick, and a number of others quick to learn the
art of obstruction and criticism. On the Treasury
benches there was a complete change, of course. At
the head sat Alexander Mackenzie, alert as ever;
then A. A. Dorion, a model of courtesy, not aggres
sive, but tenacious in debate; Eichard J. Cart
wright, of whom more later; Burpee, Eoss of
Halifax, Albert J. Smith, Laird, Blake (without
portfolio), and others; and on the back benches
Wilfrid Laurier with his marshal's baton in his
knapsack; David Mills, to be Minister of the
Interior, then of Justice, then a Judge of the
Supreme Court; William Paterson, who could
bend the bow of Ulysses either on the platform or
on the floor of Parliament; Thomas Moss, a Judge
of the High Court, and a good one; E. B. Wood,
late of Sandfield Macdonald's Government, to be
Chief Justice of Manitoba by and by; M. C. Cam
eron, to be Lieutenant-Governor of the North-West
Territories; John Lorn McDougall, to be the first
Auditor-General; James McLennan, to be Judge
of the High Court; James Young, of Gait, whose
retirement from Parliament was a public loss;
Donald A. Smith, of Manitoba, to be Lord Strath
cona, and others without a baton or any other talis
man in their knapsacks. 76

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
Parliament was opened with the usual formali
ties. There were on exhibition the same lustrous
millinery and jewels, the same official equipage,
state carriage, soldiers, brass band, and so forth.
His Excellency sent the same Black Eod with his
three taps to tell us to meet him in the Senate,
which we did, where we were told to go back to
our own chamber and elect a Speaker, and if we
would return the next day at three o'clock he
would tell us why he called us to " Our city of
Ottawa to treat," all of which orders we, as lov
ing subjects of Her Majesty, obeyed. On the third
day we met, Speaker Anglin in the chair, to con
sider His Excellency's gracious speech, which, by
the way, we knew had been prepared for him, but
for which we were bound by ancient usage to
thank him all the same. The speech contained the
programme for the session. We were told to pass
a Bill for vote by ballot, for the establishment of a
Supreme Court, for trying controverted elections
before a Judge, for the construction of the Pacific
Eailway, and several other matters of more or less
importance. According to the rules of Parliament
at that time, we had to offer thanks for each separ
ate item in the speech, much as if the head of a
family were to offer thanks for each separate
course at a family dinner. Now the practice is to
say grace en bloc.
Ml". Moss, member for West Toronto, by arrange
ment moved the thanksgivings of the House, and
Wilfrid Laurier in fluent French seconded the
motion. Mr. Moss was in the prime of life, rubi
cund, healthy and vivacious. His address was
dignifled, his language well chosen, and his whole
77

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
manner such as would win for him applause before
any audience. He remained far too short a time
in Parliament for his country's good. His speech
in 1875 on the reorganization of the Senate was the
only speech ever made in Parliament in which the
true basis of Senate Eeform was fairly argued,
namely, that the constitution of the Senate was
a matter of treaty with the Provinces entering
Confederation, and should not be altered without
their consent. Wilfrid Laurier spoke in French,
but not knowing the language I was unable to form
an opinion as to the matter of his speech. His
manner was, however, polished and graceful, and
the applause with which it was received by his
French compatriots was evidence enough that he
was speaking to some purpose. After a short
speech from Sir John Macdonald, who hinted
that the address was inspired by George Brown,
and that it was the same " Brown stuff " as
appeared in the Globe, the motion of thanksgiving
was adopted and the House adjourned till " three
o'clock to-morrow afternoon," mace and Speaker
disappearing as before.
I had not been many days in the House till I
began to feel that to change sides was to change
my political axis. In Opposition I was a free
lance, although I had not then learned to use my
privilege. If I could not in Opposition assist the
Government with any useful suggestion, I could
at least criticize their want of wisdom, their indis
cretions, their extravagance, their conservative ten
dencies, and become indignant at their general
incapacity — none of which I did the year I sat
in Opposition. But the fleld was open, and it was
78

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
my privilege to enter the ring. Now I was on the
Government back benches, and a great privilege
I thought it was to sit near the Treasury with all
that it implied, and to have under my control offices
of emolument and sweet morsels of patronage for
the faithful electors of West Middlesex. Besides, I
would share in the honour and glory of my party,
and obtain the applause of all good men for the
legislation which was to emanate from the Govern
ment, of course with my assistance.
I had not, however, been long on the sunny side
of the House till I had learned that " free lances "
were not required there, and that one of the first
duties of a supporter of the Government was to
preserve a discreet silence on all public questions
till after some responsible member of the Govern
ment had spoken. I might have opinions — that
was all right and quite harmless, whether they
were right or wrong, so long as I did not turn them
loose on the House. Of course, if my opinions were
in harmony with the Government, all was well,
providing the Government wanted to hear them.
If not, it was purely a work of supererogation to
give them, and so I had better govern myself
accordingly. If I was silent the first session, when
the sport was easy, I now felt that I must take a
full session to study the game under new condi
tions, before I took up my position on the field.
I was on a few committees, which would save me
fi-om complete obscurity, and that was enough for
the present.
I have already said that there were many new
• faces in the House, but the last I expected to see
was that of the first man on the Opposition side—
79'

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Sir John Macdonald. "Could it be possible," I
thought, " that the electors of Kingston had so
little regard for public morality as to forgive him
for the discredit he had brought upon his party
and his country and for which his Government
was compelled to resign a few months before?"
Yet there he was, not simply a private member,
but the first man on the Opposition benches and
still leader of his party — was there anything more
wonderful in the political history of any country?
Indeed, I was informed by Mr. Alonzo Wright,
Conservative member for Ottawa County, Quebec,
that the very day after his defeat he was chosen
leader, and that the party had the utmost confi
dence in his ability to bring them back to power
within five years. " Well," I thought, " if that
expectation is realized, it will be a greater miracle
than the passage of the Israelites through the Eed
Sea, on dry land, four thousand years ago."
Having decided to take no part in the debates
during the session, I had plenty of time to study
the House and its moods and tenses. Two hundred
and six members of Parliament with seats inside
the Chamber and only forty or fifty present — ^what
did that mean? Well, every day is not a working
day; why should they not enjoy the fresh air or
the relaxation of a stroll through the lobbies? I
thought it my duty, however, to remain constantly
in the House — would I take Parliamentary life less
seriously later on? Even when it was a working
day how few attended to the work in hand. Some
would be reading the evening papers, others busy
with their correspondence or carrying on a sub
dued conversation with their deskmates, while ten
80

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
or fifteen members near the front would be settling
the terms of an important Bill or voting millions
for the public service. Is that the proper way to
" treat, do, act and conclude," as we were com
manded on coming to " our city of Ottawa " ? Then
suddenly the House might be in an uproar — some
body had struck an opponent below the belt, and
due reparation must be made. Everyone would be
attention. The rules must be observed. We are
all honourable men. What a lesson in good
manners !
In 1880, on a visit to Washington while Con
gress was in session, I remember spending a most
interesting night in the gallery of the Senate. It
was a fighting sitting. The Democrats were fili
bustering to defeat a Bill that was obnoxious.
There was heat in the atmosphere as well as in the
debate, and every speaker aimed at drawing blood.
Senator Eoscoe Conkling was then an important
personage — he was of robust frame, and his figure
and countenance seemed a replica of our own
Doctor Eyerson, Chief Superintendent of Educa
tion. He was in a fighting mood, and somebody
was going to be hurt. La Marr of Mississippi had
roused his fiery temperament and must be pun
ished. " If I were outside this Chamber," Conk
ling said in measured and deliberate tones, " I
would characterize the Senator from Mississippi
as a liar, a scoundrel and a villain, but I know I
cannot apply to him these terms in this Chamber,
and do not use them in my capacity as a member
of the Senate; but they are my sentiments never
theless, and the honourable Senator can make the
most of them." " Order ! order !" was called from
7 81

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
all parts of the Chamber; but Conkling said no
more. By the subterfuge of simply declaring that
his remarks were not intended for the Senate, he
apparently evaded the rules of the House, and
La Marr returned his furious attack with an indif
ferent smile. There was no such violence of lan
guage in the House of Commons in my early experi
ence, but there were occasional assaults which
relieved the monotony of debate, and I refiected
that human nature is not always changed by its
environment. Then I observed that some members seemed to
consider that no subject brought before the House
was properly disposed of till illuminated by their
superior wisdoin. Their lamps were not always
well trimmed, and it required a prolonged effort
to satisfy even themselves that they were not of
the best design. Sometimes their efforts were
renewed, but still the oil burnt low, till the
exhausted members cried " Time !" or indulged in
noises significant of their disgust. Among the most
active in their resentment against the Parlia
mentary bore was Mr. Joseph Cauchon, after
wards Lieutenant-Governor of Manitoba. Mr.
Cauchon owned a Jewsharp of generous propor
tions, and, secreting himself behind the back row
of seats, he would produce the most distracting
sounds from it that ever fell on human ears.
Although his music had no charms to " soothe
the savage breast," it sometimes had the effect of
curtailing an irrelevant speech; and so I thought
I would study brevity rather than be silenced by
a maddening Jewsharp. 83

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
In my repose from active duty I had the oppor
tunity also of considering various styles of Par
liamentary oratory, or, more properly speaking, of
debate, for of British oratory there was none, as
I understood the term. If oratory there was (but
not knowing the language I could not decide), it
was in the sole possession of the French members
of the House. Their vocal vivacity was a revela
tion of the unlimited powers of human speech ; but
their speeches were more than mere articulation.
They were conveyed, or rather interpreted, by the
hands, shoulders and face, and accentuated by the
gyrations of the body and the ceaseless vibration
of the head. The French speaker spoke all over
himself and everybody else — now swift and for
cible, then emphatic and defiant. I never heard a
Frenchman supplicate, or appeal to the grace of
the party from whom he wanted a favour. His
plea was for justice, which must not be denied. To
refuse him was to wrong him — why should he be
refused? There would come a day of reckoning
sooner or later. And so with the spirit of the
Marseillaise vibrating in every argument, he
demanded recognition, and with an air of confi
dence in the early fulfilment of his demands, he left
his case to the judgment of the House.
To this perfervid style of speaking there were
several notable exceptions, even among the French
members. Wilfrid Laurier, who had seconded the
address, was by no means wanting in earnestness,
but he never flamed up like Prevost, nor even like
Mercier, whose temperature though warm never
reached the melting point. But even cooler than
Wilfrid Laurier was A. A. Dorion, Minister of
&3

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Justice. He always appeared to be stating a case
before a bench of Judges, where light and not heat
counted. His candid manner and deferential atti
tude towards the House were more effective than
inarticulate gesticulation. Only for his accent,
and that was not very pronounced, he might be
taken for an English professor of law speaking up
to the level of what was best in his audience and
himself. Another characteristic of the French speakers
was their freedom from hesitancy. There was no
lapse in the continuity of their thoughts, no cast
ing about for language in which to clothe them.
Might it be that the French language, with its flne
idioms, lends itself better to expression of thought
than the less reflned Saxon on which I was nour
ished, or was it the Norman temperament that
burned with such internal heat that the mind
became a red-hot crucible, changing into a flux
every idea which came within its reach? I could
not tell, but it was a quality of speech which I
admired. A third characteristic of French speakers which
struck me less favourably was their rapidity of
utteraifce. It was a fault of my own, one which to
this day I have not been able to overcome, but I
was only as a post-chaise to a limited express com
pared with my French colleagues in the House.
Of course there were exceptions to this general
characteristic. Mr. Laurier and Mr. Langevin
took breath between their sentences, and that
afforded relief to themselves and to those who were
listening to them. 84

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
The English speakers were not orators; they
never declaimed ; they might not argue better than
the French, but they did it in their own deliberate
and often hesitating way. If they lacked for a
word, they jerked their heads or kept on repeating
the last word they had corralled until they could
lasso another. Sometimes, acting under some
unseen cerebral impulse, they flamed like an arc
light, when all of a sudden the current went off,
and then came a pause. Even some of the best
thinkers were subject to these intermissions of
thought, and fllled up the vacant spaces with a pro
voking " er — er — " like the buzzing of a disordered
telephone. Was this also temperament or want of
concentration? I think, judging by my own
experience, it is the latter. If the cerebral cur
rent fails to drive the mental machinery to its full
capacity the speaker hesitates, of course — " Er —
er — er — buzz!" then another start, and so on till
exhausted nature or an exhausted current compels
him to sit down. Concentration is a great power.
But hesitation, bad as it is, was not so great a
fault with the English speakers as rapidity of
utterance. While never attaining the rate of their
F'rench rivals, ninety per cent, of them impaired
the value of their speaking by excessive speed.
This may be a national weakness, perhaps a tem
peramental one, but a weakness it is nevertheless.
The great British speakers have a restfulness in
their best efforts. Lord Dufferin was very delib
erate, we would even call him slow ; but every word
was in its place and every sentence as finished as
a minted coin. Balfour and Chamberlain were
never rapid of utterance, although not so deliber-
85

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
ate as Lord Dufferin. Gladstone was not a fast
speaker according to Canadian standards; but
occasionally when the fountains of the great dee])
within him were broken up, then let the reporters
stay by their pencils — it was a giant refreshed with
new wine that was now before them, and his strides
did not belie his gianthood.
And so the session passed with observation of
the methods of business, much reading in the lib
rary or at my seat in the House, delightful tete-d-
tetes with my fellow members and an occasional
longing to say something to make my location
in the House more than a mere " geographical
expression " — to be known simply when I stood up
to vote had become a little monotonous. But for
some mysterious reason I had the utmost dread of
rising to my feet, and often while waiting for an
opportunity, some other member would perhaps
rise and appropriate the few ideas I had collected.
After much indecision and resolves and re-resolves,
however, I concluded that I could not learn to
swim without getting into the water, and even if
I were to drown I would make the attempt. My
maiden efforts consisted first of a speech on immi
gration of about ten minutes, next of a speech on
the necessity of restricting the sale of intoxicating
liquors of about forty-five minutes and a speech on
the Pacific Eailway of about twenty-five minutes.
I spoke from notes, as was my habit before I
entered the House, but such was my state of ner
vous excitement that I dreaded a moment's pause
to look at them. My knees trembled as if alarmed
at my presumption in addressing the House. To
prevent my attention being distracted by the gen-
86

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
eral restlessness of the members present, I fixed
my eye upon the Speaker, who seemed to be the
only person who took any interest in what I had
to say, and . poured into his ears with reckless
rapidity the arguments that I intended for the
House. I never lost entirely the thread of my
subject, although more than once I wandered from
my premeditated course. A few members, who I
fear had not listened to me very attentively, con
gratulated me on my maiden effort. To myself
the effort was far from satisfactory. I pitched my
voice several points too high and I galloped along
from start to finish like Tam O'Shanter when pur
sued by the witches of Auld Kirk Alloway. I
thought my experience on the platform and in all
sorts of forensic combats would have so hardened
me for the ordeal that I could face the House of
Commons without a quiver. Vain delusion! The
House bore no resemblance to any audience I had
ever addressed. It was as stolid as the Sphinx and
as unimpressionable as an obelisk. A few days
later in reading Mr. Trevelyan's Life of Macaulay
I came across the following passage in which he
described the British House of Commons and the
fate of some of its most brilliant men : —
" The House of Commons is one of the most
peculiar audiences in the world. I should say that
a man's being a good writer, a good orator at the
bar or a good orator in a debating club, was rather
a reason for expecting him to fail than for expect
ing him to succeed in the House of Commons. A
place where Walpole succeeded and Addison failed,
where Dundas succeeded and Burke failed, where
Peel now succeeds and Mcintosh fails, where
87

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFT^E
Erskine and Scarlett were dinner bells, where Law
rence and Jeykell, the two wittiest men, or nearly
so, of their time, were bores, is surely a very
strange place."
" The most peculiar audience in the world " —
the Canadian House of Commons was just like its
British prototype when I first tried to make its
acquaintance and gain its confidence. But try
ing and discouraging as my experience was, I
would say to the young member, " Begin, and do
not postpone too long your beginning. The longer
it is put off, like the day of grace, the greater the
danger, till in the course of a year or two you
look upon yourself as a seat warmer, whose chief
duty is to respond to the division bell. At all
hazards, unless convinced that you are constitu
tionally disqualified, begin; you may not find it
an easy task, not even after you have made several
efforts — but begin. How to express your thoughts
with clearness requires practice. Sentences in
spite of your best efforts may become entangled
in each other, and some sentences will not crystal
lize at all — your intended points are pointless, the
barbed arrow falls short of the mark. What
misery! The applause that you anticipated is
stillborn, and you are about resolving that if you
survive this effort, you will never venture another.
Eemember Disraeli's failure in his flrst effort in
the House of Commons, and his challenge to the
derision of his hearers : ' The time will come when
you will be glad to hear me!' It is only through
great tribulation that you can be enrolled among
the list of flrst-class speakers." 88

TO THE EIGHT OF THE SPEAKEE
The young member of Parliament should also
remember that a good platform style is a bad Par
liamentary style. This may be rather an extreme
way of putting the case, but it is in the main true.
A platform admits of exhortation, of the assump
tion of knowledge superior to your audience, of a
little schoolmastering, but Parliament never.
Again, a platform admits of rhapsody, of rhetori
cal flreworks, but Parliament never, at least not
nowadays. A platform admits the dramatic, the
emotional, and will even allow a little judicious and
dignifled burlesque; Parliament has no place for
such weaknesses. In Parliament the speaker must
be of all other things persuasive. He may be as
earnest as he chooses, but he must expound rather
than appear to instruct. He is talking to his
equals, and so he must be deferential. The busi
ness before the House is of some importance, there
fore he must be serious, calm, judicial; his voice
must correspond to his theme and to the normal
temper of the House. His message is to be received
voluntarily, not forced upon the House. To dogma
tize is to provoke opposition; to lecture the House
is to be considered impertinent ; to speak often and
long is to be a bore. The beginner must so adapt
himself to the conditions of Parliamentary speak
ing that he will not offend against its canons of
debate, or its unwritten rules of persuasive oratory.
Peel, it was said, could play on the House of Com
mons as on an old fiddle. How many Parlia
mentarians are qualifying themselves for Peel's
place?

89

CHAPTEE VIII.
THE MACKENZIE GOVERNMENT.
The Mackenzie administration was from its very
inception confronted with many difficulties. Some
of them were legacies from its predecessor, others
grew out of commercial conditions for which
nobody in particular was responsible. Macken
zie's first trouble was in dealing with Louis Eiel,
who fomented the Manitoba Eebellion of 1869-70
and who had the sympathy of his compatriots in
Quebec. Eiel led the malcontents of Manitoba in
resisting the control which the Dominion proposed
exercising over the lands held by the Metis of the
North-West, under their title by occupation from
the Hudson Bay Company. During his leadership
of the rebels, one Thomas Scott, who resisted him,
was murdered. When the rebellion was suppressed
Eiel was indicted for murder and fied to the United
States. In the meantime he was elected to the
House of Commons by the French constituency
of Provencher, Manitoba, and, returning secretly
to Canada, proceeded to Ottawa on the opening of
the session and was sworn in as member of Par
liament in the Clerk's office, and then vanished
from the scene. Efforts were made to arrest him,
but to no avail. He was a fugitive from justice,
and therefore should be expelled from the House.
A motion to that effect was made by Mackenzie
Bowell on April 15th, and carried by a vote of 124
to 68. The suggestive thing about this vote was
90

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
that it divided the members of the House mainly
on racial lines. Not a single French-Canadian, as
I read the names, voted for the expulsion of Eiel.
Several of the English-speaking members from the
Province of Quebec also opposed the motion. What
did that mean? Plainly, that the French-Cana
dians sympathized strongly with their compatriots
of Manitoba, and that they were not prepared to
condemn Eiel for leading a rebellion in defence of
the rights of the French settlers of Manitoba, as
they understood them. To Mackenzie this vote
signified trouble. His strength, at no time great
in Quebec, was weakened by his support of Bowell's
motion, and now the electors of Quebec looked upon
him as the enemy of their race and creed. The fact
that nearly all the Conservative members of the
House (Sir John Macdonald and Tupper being of
the number) also voted the same way, did not save
him. He was head of the Government, and could,
with his majority, have protected Eiel from the
disgrace of expulsion from Parliament.
Mackenzie's next difficulty was over the con
struction of the Canadian Pacific Eailway. By the
terms under which British Columbia entered Con
federation the Dominion Government bound itself
to connect British Columbia with the railway sys
tem of Ontario by a transcontinental line within
ten years. To make the necessary surveys for the
location of the road would alone exhaust the time
limit, and so Mackenzie found himself under an
obligation imposed by the previous Government
which it was physically impossible to carry out.
Mackenzie claimed that to finance such an under
taking would tax the country beyond endurance,
91

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
and accordingly an effort was made to secure the
assent of British Columbia to a modification of the
terms on which it had entered Confederation. Mr.
James Edgar was sent as a special ambassador to
secure such a modification, but accomplished noth
ing. The Governor-General undertook an official
visit to British Columbia to exercise his well-known
diplomatic powers to the same end, and although
he handled the question with great tact, his mis
sion had very little effect. A reference was then
made to Lord Carnarvon of the Colonial Office in
the capacity of quasi-arbitrator between the Colum
bians and the Dominion, but even his proposals
were not satisfactory; and so Mackenzie had no
alternative but to proceed with surveys and con
struction as quickly as practicable, in the hope that
an honest effort to keep faith as far as possible with
British Columbia would be accepted in lieu of the
literal fulfilment of the agreement.
To avoid the overwhelming expense of the imme
diate construction of an all-rail route, which, he
told the electors of Lambton in his address, would
necessitate borrowing $100,000,000, he proposed
that advantage should be taken of the intervening
" water stretches," as he called them, to save the
immediate construction of over one thousand miles
of railway. His plan was to extend the railways of
Ontario to the Georgian Bay; this would lead to
the upper lakes; thence navigation could be con
tinued by way of Pigeon Eiver, Eainy Lake and
Eainy Eiver through the Lake of the Woods and
the Winnipeg Eiver into the Province of Manitoba
and thence by rail across the prairies and the
Eocky Mountains to the Pacific coast. This would
92

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
afford a summer route across the continent. For
winter travel he proposed to connect Manitoba
with the American railways running north from
St. Paul to Pembina. To this plan the Opposition
took objection. First, an " amphibious route," as
they called it, would involve several transhipments
of freight and would be slow and expensive; and,
second, to transport emigrants through the United
States would permit the agents of American rail
ways and land companies to cajole them to settle
in the United States, and but few, if any, would
ever reach Manitoba. However, the House gave
Mackenzie the power he asked for, and as soon as
the surveys were completed he called for tenders
for the construction of the road as promised, and
before he retired from office the connection with
American railways was completed to Winnipeg
and a great part of the Eocky Mountain section
was under way, as also the section between Fort
William and Manitoba.
The route which he had chosen across the
prairies did not suit the representatives from
Manitoba any better than the general scheme
suited the Columbians. The chief settlements in
Manitoba were in the neighbourhood of Winnipeg,
or Fort Garry, as it was formerly called, and west
erly towards Portage la Prairie. The Mackenzie
route would place the railway twenty-five miles
north of Winnipeg, and would be of no immediate
advantage to the great bulk of the population.
Moreover, it was proposed to cross the Eockies by
the Yellowhead Pass, and this, it was alleged, was
too far north to promote the best interests of the
railway or the population of the West. In the
93

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
selection of this route Mackenzie was not influ
enced by local considerations. What he kept in
view was, first, the shortest commercial route;
second, the route that would be most likely to
develop the West ; and, third, the route that offered
the fewest engineering difficulties. It is needless at
this late day to point out that no better proof of the
soundness of his judgment in all these respects is
necessary than the construction by the Government
of Canada of the Grand Trunk Pacific along the
greater part of the route which he proposed over
thirty years ago. The selection of Fort William as
the Lake Superior terminal, though condemned by
his opponents at the time, is now admitted to have
been in the best interests of the country.
As might be expected, the representatives from
the West, but particularly those from British Col
umbia, were loud in their complaints against delay,
and also against the use of the " water stretches "
in lieu of an all-rail route. Among the most active
and aggressive were Amor de Cosmos, Arthur
Bunster and EJdgar Dewdney. De Cosmos was
the head of the Provincial Executive of British
Columbia, and claimed to speak for the Province
with more than ordinary authority. He was orig
inally from the Province of New Bruswick, and
on his westward migration tarried a few years in
the State of Minnesota. He brought to that state
the plain name of William Smith, all too plain to
give him the distinction to which he thought his
talents entitled him. Accordingly he applied to
the State Legislature by private bill to substitute
for the plebeian cognomen of William Smith the
higher-sounding name of " Amor de Cosmos." The
94

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
Bill according to routine went to the usual com
mittee, where a humorous legislator moved that
the word ^' Cosmos " be struck out and " Muggins "
inserted in lieu thereof. This was defeated by a
majority of one, and so when he arrived in British
Columbia his obscurity was entirely hidden in the
Spanish resonance of the name to which he became
entitled by the grace of the Minnesota Legislature.
Bunster was a brewer of beer in Columbia and
a brewer of trouble in Ottawa. He was short-set,
with enormous whiskers, always belligerent, and
in language fierce and defiant he attacked the Gov
ernment. He contracted a great dislike to Blake,
and berated him fiercely for his reference to Col
umbia as " a sea of mountains." On one occasion,
when his feelings were more overwrought than
usual, he drew from his pocket a buckskin glove,
threw it on the floor in front of Blake and dared
him to take it up. What would have happened if
Blake had accepted his challenge no one can tell.
Dewdney was an engineer, of milder temper, but
equally persistent with his colleagues. As might
be expected, these malcontents were encouraged by
the Opposition to wage daily war upon the Gov
ernment, all of which they did con amore. It was
said of Canning that he " could not bear fools
gladly." Mackenzie was similarly constituted, and
resented with great force and spirit their unreas
onable attacks, while at the same time labouring
heroically to fulfll the " bond " with the West.
Mackenzie's third difficulty was to provide for
such an increase of revenue as would meet the
ordinary expenditure of the Government. Although
the utmost enonoiny was practised, such was the
95

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
commercial condition of the country, that imports
were falling off— having dropped from $78,000,000
in 1875 to |60,000,000 in 1876 and still lower the
next three years. There was also a loss in revenue
from customs of about $3,000,000. For this con
dition there appeared to be no remedy except an
increase of the tariff.
As the loss of revenue was intimately associated
with the depression of business, the two questions
were necessarily discussed together. Mackenzie
was a free trader of the old school, and any increase
of tariff could only be justifled by the necessities
of the Treasury. There were, however, in the Lib
eral ranks a few members who favoured a tariff
for protection purposes, the most prominent of
whom were Mr. A. T. Wood, of Hamilton, and his
colleague, Mr. JEmilius Irving, and Mr. Thomas
Workman of Montreal. The majority of Liberals,
however, were free traders. On the Opposition
side it was quite evident from the talk of the lob
bies and from the reception given to the petitions
of manufacturers for protection against the United
States, that the feeling in favour of protection was
growing fast. An attempt was made to parry any
movement to that effect by the appointment of a
Committee on the Depression of Trade, of which
David Mills was chairman; but its investigations
only served to fasten public attention on the unsat
isfactory condition of Canadian trade. An attempt
was also made to placate manufacturers by a sop
to Cerberus in the form of an increase of the tariff
from flfteen to seventeen and a half per cent. But
this increase failed to give what the manufacturers
claimed to be necessary relief, and so was valueless
96

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
for political purposes. It was currently reported
at the time that the Government was favourable to
a flat tariff of twenty per cent., but on inquiry it
was found that such an increase would meet with
strong opposition from their supporters in the
Maritime Provinces. As a tactical move to draw
the flre of the Protectionists, I did not believe it
would be of much service. What they wanted was
a tariff framed distinctly for protection and not
for revenue. And this brings me to the genesis of
the National Policy.
Sir John Macdonald, with his usual astuteness,
saw in the commercial depression of the country
an opportunity for formulating a new tariff policy
which would be acceptable to manufacturers and
which at the same time could be defended for
revenue purposes. The increase in the Mackenzie
tariff stil left an annual deflcit of two millions.
By a judicious adjustment of the tariff it was urged
the deflcit could be overcome and the industries
of the country protected from the unjust competi
tion of the Americans. And so in 1876, the third
session of the Mackenzie Government, he moved
his flrst resolution by which he committed his party
to the principles of protection, afterwards known
as the National Policy. This resolution only
applied to manufactured imports, but in 1877 it
was further expanded to take in some natural pro
ducts, and in 1878 it developed into protection as
comprehensive and radical as its most ardent advo
cates could desire. In brief. Sir John proposed to
readjust the tariff so as to foster agriculture, min
ing and manufacturing, restore prosperity to
struggling industries, prevent Canadians from
8 97

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
expatriating themselves to maintain their families,
prevent Canada from being a sacrifice market and
pave the way for reciprocity with the United States.
The means adopted to place this policy before
the country in its most favourable light also showed
the astuteness of its promoters. Its possible effect
upon the consumers was carefully kept in the back
ground, and the injustice to Canadian interests
from unfair competition with foreign manufac
turers and producers proclaimed from the house
tops. The press took up the question, monster
picnics were held, addressed by Sir John and lead
ing members of Parliament, and the strongest
appeals were made to defend Canada from Ameri
can rapacity. " Canada for the Canadians " was
the slogan from far and near.
Although special attention was given to educat
ing public opinion in favour of the National Policy,
the Opposition lost no opportunity of baiting and
harassing the Government in Parliament. They
knew that Mackenzie had the confidence of the
country for honesty of purpose and uprightness of
character, and so it was necessary to minimize the
practical value of his legislation and if possible to
make it appear his administration was neither
economical nor progressive. The estimates were
criticized in detail, and scarcely an item allowed
to pass without the charge of mismanagement or
extravagance. To lead a Government in the face
of an Opposition so active and aggressive was no
easy task. Had the business of the country been
more prosperous less attention would have been
paid to party strife. Empty pockets always make
the electors sensitive and critical.
98

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
There were two exciting episodes during the
session of 1878, in both of which Doctor Tupper
was concerned. The first was between Tupper and
A. G. Jones of Halifax, Minister of Militia. It
was a battle royal between rivals, for political
supremacy in Nova Scotia. Tupper charged Jones
with disloyalty, inasmuch as he opposed the accept
ance of Confederation by the people of Nova Scotia
and declared that "when the British flag was
hauled down from the citadel at Halifax he would
take off his hat and cheer." Such evidences of dis
loyalty, Tupper said, disqualified him from sitting
in Parliament, and much more from holding the
Portfolio of Minister of Militia. Mr. Jones
explained that his reference to the flag did not
mean that he wanted to separate Nova Scotia from
her connection with the Empire. His words
applied to her separation from the Dominion of
Canada, and that was no more than Joseph Howe
had said, who sat with Tupper in Parliament, and
was a member of the Government for three years.
He also pointed out that Tupper sat at the same
council table with Sir George E. Cartier, who had
taken up arms against the Grown in the Eebellion
of 1837. Although the answer was more a tu quoque
than a justification, the occasion caused consider
able excitement, and was an example of a first-
class Parliamentary duel between two powerful
debaters. The second episode occurred at the close of the
last session and while Black Eod was on his way
to ask the Commons to meet His Excellency for
prorogation. It appears that Donald A. Smith
(now Lord Strathcona) took offence at certain
99

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
allusions made to him in the Conservative press,
and notably to those made by Mr. Tupper in a
speech at Orangeville to the effect that the with
drawal of his support from the Government during
the Pacific Scandal was not purely disinterested.
Mr. Smith rose to a question of privilege as the
House was waiting for Black Eod and cited various
instances where Tupper and even Sir John Mac
donald endeavoured to restrain him from follow
ing his convictions, and challenged them both to
produce any evidence of his having profited per
sonally or politically through his position as a
member of Parliament. Tupper was greatly
enraged, and charged Smith with cowardice in
taking advantage of the last moments of the ses
sion, when reply was impossible. Mr. Smith, how
ever, persisted in his attack and was met with
cries of "Order!" from the members and cries of
"Coward! coward! mean, treacherous coward!"
from Tupper, and the remark from Sir John Mac
donald, " That fellow Smith is the greatest liar I
ever met!" In the meantime Black Eod entered,
the Speaker left the chair to meet His Excellency,
and there the Hansard report ends. Neither Sir
John nor Smith, however, followed the Speaker;
both met in the lobby, when Sir John, apparently
greatly excited, moved towards Smith in a menac
ing attitude, declaring that he " could lick him
quicker than hell could scorch a feather." A. H.
Dymond, who was standing near and who told the
story afterwards, interposed, and the last round in
a session militant beyond its predecessors closed.
Mackenzie's five years of office were particularly
laborious. Beside his varied duties as Premier he
100

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
had charge of the Department of Public Works,
which at that time included railways and canals.
The Intercolonial Eailway was under construction
when he took office, and its early completion was
urgent. The Welland Canal was being enlarged
and deepened, and there were millions to spend or
to save on that enterprise. The route for the Cana
dian Pacific was being surveyed, and all the details
incident to such a tremendous undertaking had to
be considered. Added to this there was the deep
ening of the St. Lawrence, the erection of public
buildings and the improvement of the harbours
from Halifax to Vancouver, for which the mem
bers particularly concerned were clamouring. As
the Departments were then arranged, Mackenzie
was doing the work now done by two Ministers and
that of Premier in addition. No wonder he kept
long hours and taxed himself far beyond his
strength. During the sessions of Parliament Mackenzie
was also required to do more than a fair share of
the work of the House. Mr. Cartwright was his
only working colleague in the Cabinet; Mr. Dorion
left him at the end of the first session to take the
Chief Justiceship of Quebec, and his successors in
the Department, with the exception of Mr. Blake,
who was Minister for only two years, were not
strong men in the House, though capable enough
professionally. Huntingdon did not take charge
of a Department till the beginning of the second
session, and Mills became Minister of the Interior
at the beginning of the fourth session. Thus out
of thirteen portfolios held at different times by
twenty-three Ministers, there were only four Min-
101

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
isters beside himself who could defend their Depart
ments properly against the attacks of the Opposi
tion, namely, Cartwright, Mills, Blake and Hun
tingdon. The Militia Department under A. G.
Jones and the Inland Eevenue under Laurier were
ably manned during the last year of Mackenzie's
administration, but relief came too late to redeem
the past from its record of incompetence. The con
sequence of this was that the Premier had to assist
more than half his Ministers in legislation, and
also to help them through with their departmental
estimates. On every large question that involved
prolonged discussion, the official debates show that
the burden of sessional work, except for the two
years Blake was Minister of Justice, fell upon
Mackenzie and his Minister of Finance.
During the five years that I sat behind the Min
isters I had ample opportunity of studying the
game of politics. Two things impressed me — ^first,
that legislation no matter how excellent, and a
record for administrative ability no matter how
good, may be minimized by persistent criticism or
overshadowed by the presentation of some great
issue that affects the whole body politic. There is
no doubt that the attacks upon Mackenzie's rail
way policy practically neutralized the favourable
impression which otherwise it would have made
upon the country, and although under existing fin
ancial conditions he was perhaps justified in utiliz
ing the water stretches to save expense, he would
have done better for himself politically had he
grappled with the scheme in its entirety regardless
of cost. There is a charm about courage, even if
it borders sometimes upon recklessness. Lloyd
103

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
George's Budget would have been a failure had it
been less extensive in its application to landed
interests of every kind. Mackenzie's Pacific Eail
way scheme was at best a half measure, and it was
quite clear, before his term expired, that he could
make no political capital out of it. It alienated
British Columbia and Manitoba; Ontario and Que
bec, whose interests were only second to those of
the West, were comparatively indifferent; the
Maritime Provinces were so remotely affected that
they looked on the whole scheme as one of very
trifiing advantage to them.
The position of the two parties as they entered
on the campaign which closed on September 17th,
1878, was now becoming clear. Mackenzie would
go to the country with a record for economy and
administrative ability which could not be success
fully challenged. He had no scandals to answer
for, although an attempt was made to discredit his
Government for the premature purchase of a large
consignment of steel rails for the Pacific Eailway.^
There was no extravagance, as the Government
actually reduced expenditure during its term of
office. The legislation was progressive and useful.
The Government gave the country the ballot, the
trial of controverted elections before the judges,
a Supreme Court Act, a Military College, and a
very generous prohibitory Liquor Act subject to
local referendum. The Pacific Eailway was under
construction, and trains were actually running
into Manitoba by way of the American railways.
And conspicuous from Halifax to Vancouver as
the insignia of its fiscal policy, the Free Trade flag,
nailed to the top of the mast, floated to the breeze.
103

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
What better record could a Government have had?
If that record failed to carry it through, then hon
esty and efficiency were no longer passports to
success. Opposed to Mackenzie's claims for the support
of the country the Conservatives placed flrst and
foremost the National Policy — a glorifled panacea
for every ill affecting the body politic, to be taken
whether well shaken or not. Were the farmers suf
fering from low prices? Here was the remedy;
more money for all the produce of the farm, dairy,
garden and orchard — what a happy prospect! No
wonder that at the thought of it the farmer
wrapped the drapery of his couch about him and
lay down to pleasant dreams of a new couch and
better drapery. Was the manufacturer suffering
from pernicious business anaemia, languid during
the day and disquieted by insomnia at night?
Here was the remedy that would flll his veins with
red corpuscles and his vaults with yellow gold.
Away with all dread of insolvency and smokeless
chimneys and scrap-iron! Was the workingman
about to bid adieu to the home of his childhood,
where no longer he could flnd daily bread for him
self and family? He was told there was still balm
in Gilead. If so, why should he expatriate him
self? And the patriotic Canadian, the man who
placed his country before party — the Savonarola
of Canadian politics rubbed his massive brow and
asked, solemnly, " Does the National Policy really
mean ' Canada for the Canadians '? If so, then
party predilections to the winds ! Free Trade is a
theory no longer applicable to our conditions.
Begone with theories and parties, let us have none
104

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
of them !" Nothing could have been more insidious
or effective. To conjure by free trade was a con
fession of weakness, for had we not had Free Trade
for the past generation? You cannot drive
machinery by exhausted steam. And the country
listened. This was a constructive policy. It was
new, alluring, fascinating.
Against Mackenzie's policy for the construction
of the Pacific Eailway, Sir John placed his prefer
ence for an all-rail route. Mackenzie's " amphibi
ous " route was a mere makeshift. There were
doubts as to its practicability. It would make the
transportation of goods expensive owing to many
transhipments from cars to boats, and vice versa:
the route to the north of Winnipeg was unfair to
the settlers in the south — it was a road for buf
faloes, not for immigrants; it was dependent on
the United States in the winter; it would place
immigrants to the West at the mercy of American
land agents; it did not keep faith with British
Columbia. On the general record of the Govern
ment there was little said — it was a " Grit " Gov
ernment, and the electors were told, with a sug
gestive leer, not to expect much from the Grit
party. The next phase of the game was the manner in
which it presented itself to the different Provinces.
It was apparent that Mackenzie had nothing to
hope for from the West. There his Pacific Eail
way policy superseded all other questions, and to
that policy the West was opposed. In Ontario, the
National Policy was uppermost — therein was dan
ger. Quebec had its recollections of the expulsion
of Eiel from the House, and was disquieted. In
105

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
the Maritime Provinces it was assumed, as they
were always in favour of a low tariff, that the
National Policy would be fatal to the Conservative
party. The third factor in the game was the leadership
in the different Provinces. In the West there was
no strong leader in command on either side, and
with its small representation in Parliament its
attitude was not considered important. In Ontario
the combatants were well matched. Mackenzie
himself was more than the equal of any opponent
on the platform, and Cartwright never turned his
back upon a foe. Both met the electors in differ
ent parts of the Province, and were well received.
The Conservative forces were equally active, and
Sir John gave his personal attention to the cam
paign in all its phases. The electors had ample
opportunity of judging between the policy of the
two parties and the character of the leaders on
both sides. In Quebec Mackenzie's difficulties were
partly historical. He had been so closely allied
with George Brown, the hHe noir of the French-
Canadians, that he was placed at a disadvantage
from the start. Laurier, though a member of the
Government, had not acquired the full status of
a leader. Huntingdon, another member of his Gov
ernment, represented the English-speaking element
chiefiy, and so could not appeal to the racial spirit
of the French-Canadians. It was therefore doubt
ful if Quebec would hold its own. In the Maritime
Provinces Tupper was in charge, and that meant
a great deal. Summing up the situation as it
appeared to me then, Mackenzie stood to lose the
West and Quebec, with Ontario and the Maritime
106

THE MACKENZIE GOVEENMENT
Provinces pretty safe. The National Policy would
surely not be accepted, I thought, by Ontario, with
its Free Trade predilections and its strong British
sentiments. Then would the French habitant
revenge the expulsion of Eiel from Parliament,
Mackenzie voting with the majority? And as the
Maritime Provinces opposed duties of all kinds
except for purely revenue purposes, and were even
reluctant to go that far, there should be no doubt
as to their final decision. In a conversation with
Mackenzie five days before the election, he gave me
practically this forecast of the result. It seemed
a reasonable one then, and judging by precedents
seems reasonable now. But politics is an indeter
minate equation. In any other calling a + h means
something certain; in politics a + h may mean
y ov IS or any other quantity.
My own election in West Middlesex was con
tested with unusual keenness. The electors could
not get enough of platform talk. Meetings were
large and sympathetic, and yet I felt when my
arguments appeared to be convincing that there
was an undertow which might cost me the elec
tion. Was I being deceived? Did I trust too much
to the abstract as against the practical? And so,
though trusting to the platform for the general
exposition of the Liberal policy, I found it neces
sary to meet personally all who were reputed to
be unsettled in their political creed. I escaped
shipwreck, but how I can hardly tell. No doubt
my knowledge of the subject and my persistence
both on the platform and in personal canvass had
something to do with my success. In all elections
votes are jewels, and the loss of one jewel may
107

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
decide whether you or your opponent shall wear
the coronet of victory.
The two parties met at the polls on September
17th. It was the first election by ballot, and the
secrecy which the ballot afforded was used by
many to conceal their intentions on polling day.
In all the Provinces there was the same common
ruin of the party. In Ontario, considered so safe,
some of the strongest men in the Liberal ranks
went down to defeat, among them Blake, Cart
wright and Young. In Nova Scotia, Jones, who
led the ranks against Tupper, and his colleague
Thomas Coffin, lost thpir seats. Free Trade, once
so popular down by the sea, was consigned to the
limbo of exploded political theories. It was really
a dies irae for the Liberal party.
Mackenzie felt his defeat very keenly, and no
leader ever fell for whom his followers had greater
sympathy; but regrets are unavailing. Let the
dead past bury its dead. Eing down the curtain.
A great man is passing out through the greenroom
to the streets. The footlights behind which he
appeared so often and amid the greatest applause
are turned down; other actors are about to appear
in a new play. They had many rehearsals, and
some of them are old performers. Hark! The
musicians are tuning their instruments — the pit
and galleries are fast filling up. Let me to the
open air — I feel depressed.
" AU the world's a stage
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances."

108

CHAPTEE IX.
FIVE YEARS IN OPPOSITION.
The new actors are on the stage. The curtain
is up. I am back at the left of the Speaker, where
I first surveyed the stage six years ago. The chief
performers are also back in their old places. Sir
John Macdonald, Tilley, Tupper and Langevin
have still the most important parts of the play;
Bowell now appears for the first time, and minor
parts are assigned to the less experienced. It is
a new Parliament, with many aspirants for fame.
It contained fourteen members who became Min
isters of the Crown, eight who became Lieutenant-
Governors, three who became Judges, two Speak
ers, two Provincial Premiers, three Premiers of
Canada, and one a member of the House of Lords.
In the Opposition benches Mackenzie confronted
the victorious ranks with the same stern, unyield
ing front he presented as leader of the Govern
ment, with Laurier and Huntingdon and Hol
ton and Mills close by. Blake was defeated in
South Bruce, and did not appear till a seat was
found for him in West Durham some time later.
On the back benches I was glad to find so many
of my old friends — Paterson and Charlton and
Oliver and M. C. Cameron and Casey and Bain
and Trow, with others. I cannot say that we felt
particularly happy. We had nobody to blame but
ourselves, for we were unanimous in opposing the
109

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
National Policy, and now we were reduced to a
little band of about fifty. On the first division of
the House, for the dismissal of Letellier, Lieuten
ant-Governor of Quebec, we stood 51 to 136, and
in the next division, on the National Policy, 53
to 136; or just about the converse of our numbers
respectively in the previous Parliament.
This being a new Parliament, our first duty was
to elect a Speaker. The choice of the House fell
upon Joseph Goderic Blanchet, better known as
Doctor Blanchet, of whose qualifications for the
position nobody appeared to have any doubt. In
due time we were ordered to attend in the Senate
Chamber for the opening speech by the Governor-
General, and obeyed accordingly. Earl Dufferin,
so much beloved, had left us to enter upon that
career in which he won a first place among the
diplomats of Europe. The throne was occupied
by his successor. Sir John Douglas Sutherland
Campbell (commonly called the Marquis of Lome),
" Knight of Our Most Noble Order of the Thistle,
Knight Grand Cross of Our Most Distinguished
Order of St. Michael and St. George, Governor-
General of Canada." " Now," I thought, " my
Scottish prejudices are being considered, and the
prosperity of Canada is assured."
The Marquis of Lome was of noble stock. When
and how the title which he bore and the dukedom
to which he was heir was founded is lost to the
antiquarian ; Ossian might have known, but he has
not told us. This we know, that the Campbells
were an ancient clan capable of wielding the clay
more and the pike, and untamed as the eagles that
nested in Ben Nevis. The Argylls played an
110

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
important part in the history of Scotland for cen
turies; two of them paid for their loyalty to the
Scottish line of kings with their lives on the scaf
fold. One of the most striking pictures in the lobby
of the British House of Commons is a painting of
one of these martyrs as he appeared on the eve of
his execution.
His Excellency read his speech, strange to say,
without Scottish accent. How he avoided the burr
of his native hills was a mystery. Exceptions only
prove the rule; he could have read it in Gaelic as
well as in English and French. But Gaelic is not
authorized by the British North America Act,
much to the discredit of those by whom it was
drafted. The Scottish race rarely gets its rights.
I have already shown that Lord Dufferin struck
a high note of national patriotism when Canadian
nationalism was at a low ebb. The Marquis of
Lome was equally exemplary. Hear him as he
spoke at Winnipeg in 1881 — thirty years ago —
after travelling from east to west and seeing for
himself the material wealth of Canada : " Of one
thing you may be sure, that the country you call
Canada and which your sons and your children's
children shall be proud to call by that name, will
be a land of power among the nations. Affording.
the best and safest highway between Asia and
Europe, she will see traffic from both directed to
her coasts; with a hand upon either ocean she will
gather for the benefit of her hardy millions a large
share of the commerce of the world. To the east
and to the west she will pour forth of her abund
ance, her treasures of food and the riches of her
mines and of her forests, demanded of her by the
111

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
less fortunate of mankind. For me, I feel that I
can be ambitious of no higher title than to be
known as one who administered its Government in
thorough sympathy with the hopes and aspirations
of its founders and in perfect consonance with the
will of its free Parliament." Well said, and
prophetic in foresight!
The IMarquis of Lome and his consort of royal
blood made themselves familiar with Canada in all
its business and educational activities. The Gov
ernor-General spoke with the dignity and weight
which attached to his position, and since his retire
ment, now thirty years ago, his interest in Canada
has never failed. On every occasion on which I
have met him since, his first enquiry has been,
" Well, how is dear young Canada getting along?"
His successors, too, have been equally helpful,- both
during their term of office and afterwards, in
encouraging our young nation to be worthy of her
great opportunities.
The two questions that excited the greatest inter
est during the first session of the new Parliament
were the dismissal of Letellier St. Just from the
Lieutenant-Governorship of Quebec and the Tariff
Bill introduced by Leonard Tilley to carry out the
terms of the National Policy. The first was a con
stitutional question, and should have been decided
on constitutional grounds. Largely through the
political animosity of the Quebec members, how
ever, it resolved itself into a political question.
Letellier took offence at the treatment accorded him
by his Councillors as Lieutenant-Governor. He
claimed that he had a right to be consulted about
the legislation proposed by his Government before
112

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
it was introduced, and that he should not be asked
to approve of Bills without having been advised of
their purpose. He accordingly dismissed his Min
isters and called upon Mr. Joly to form a new Gov
ernment. Mr. Joly accepted the invitation of the
Lieutenant-Governor, thus assuming full responsi
bility for all his acts, and appealed to the country.
He was sustained by, a small majority. It was
claimed that this was constitutionally a complete
vindication of Letellier's course. Had Mr. Joly
been defeated in the country Letellier would of
course have been bound to resign. Nevertheless it
was argued that Letellier's conduct was arbitrary
and unwarranted, that his grounds for dismissing
his Government were not sufficient, and that in the
words of Sir John's recommendation to Council
" his usefulness was gone." The debate lasted
three days, and was conducted with great bitter
ness by Letellier's enemies in Quebec, and resulted
in a vote of censure which was made the excuse for
dismissing Letellier shortly after.
Early in the session Mr. Tilley, Minister of Fin
ance, introduced the resolutions which, according
to Parliamentary usage, precede a Bill for fixing
the tariff on dutiable goods. The Opposition
regarded them as a complete surrender to the
advocates of protection, and protested strongly, as
might be expected. After the lapse of so many
years it might be interesting to recall the attitude
of the Liberal party on a protective policy, and so
I quote the resolution which Mackenzie, who was
acting as leader, submitted to the House : " That
while the House is prepared to make ample provi
sion for the requirements of the public service and
9 113

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
the maintenance of the public credit, it regards the
scheme now under consideration as calculated to
distribute unequally and therefore unjustly the
burdens of taxation, to divert capital from its
natural and most profitable employment, to benefit
special classes at the expense of the whole com
munity, and as tending towards rendering futile
the costly and persistent efforts of the country to
secure a share of the immense and growing trade
of the continent and towards creating an antagon
ism against the commercial policy of the Empire
that might lead to consequences deeply to be
deplored." For this resolution we voted 53 strong, but
against us was the solid phalanx of 136 cast-iron
National Policyists. We were beaten, and so the
National Policy had its first Parliamentary vic
tory, and has been in evidence ever since, under
aliases and other illusory terms, but semper idem
in its fundamental principles.
Mr. Tilley defended his resolutions in all their
stages with much tact. He fully mastered his sub
ject, and his attitude towards the House was recep
tive as well as conciliatory. I felt during the dis
cussions that it was more difficult for him to
restrain the high protectionists of his own party
from driving him to extremes, than to frame a
tariff for revenue purposes simply. However, after
a debate extending from the 14th of March to the
15th of April the first river was crossed, and with
very few objections to details the National Policy
became statute law under the title " An Act to
alter the Entries of Customs and Excise " on May
15th, 1879, or in a little more than three years after
114

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
Sir John Macdonald moved his first resolution in
its favour as leader of the Opposition.
An amusing encounter between two New Bruns-
wickers occurred in the debate on the tariff policy
of the Government. Arthur H. Gilmour, member
for Charlotte County, New Brunswick, was reply
ing to some observations made by Colonel Dom-
ville in support of protection. Gilmour was a Free
Trade stalwart, and as uncompromising as Cobden.
He was not a frequent speaker, but incisive, pun
gent and ready-witted. Domville did not quite
relish Gilmour's criticisms of his speech, but to
show his courage under fire, he moved from his
own side of the House to a seat immediately in
front of Gilmour. Domville had a nose of Wel-
lingtonian proportions, and as he sat he looked up
into his assailant's face. Gilmour ridiculed Dom
ville's knowledge of trade matters, and proceeded
to freely quote the lines, " I gaze, and as I gaze the
wonder grows, how one — " then he hesitated a
moment, " how one shiall face can carry so much
nose." It was a witty, harmless sally and greatly
delighted the House.
In 1880 Mr. Blake resumed his place in the
House, and we on the back benches looked forward
to great Parliamentary tournaments in which our
rivals were sure to be worsted. Mackenzie's health
had suffered from his excessive labours in Par
liament, particularly while Premier ; and although
his resolute nature kept him in his place early
and late, it was evident to his friends and con
ceded by himself that he could not discharge the
duties of leader much longer. On April 28th, ten
days before prorogation, he announced to the
115

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
House his retirement, and his supporters returned
home saddened by the thought that a great force
in the politics of Canada had become exhausted.
Mr. Blake was unanimously chosen to succeed
him, and the Liberal party betook itself with
renewed energy to the task of emptying the saddles
and spiking the guns of the occupants of the
treasury benches.
During the recess of 1880 the Government
entered into an agreement for the construction of
the Canadian Pacific Eailway by a private cor
poration, with George Stephens of Montreal at its
head, and the House was summoned on December
9th to give its approval. Under the Mackenzie
Government the work of construction had begun,
and the Macdonald Government carried it on' pend
ing the formation of a company to take it over.
Negotiations with the new company were con
ducted principally through Tupper, the Minister
of Public Works. The company was given extra
ordinary concessions, and the Government, before
submitting the Bill to Parliament, considered it
expedient to call a caucus of the party for its con
sideration. I was told by a member of the caucus,
whose word could not be doubted, that on its first
presentation, the caucus was so shocked and over
whelmed at the enormous concessions made by the
Government that not a single member of the
party expressed approval. The caucus was then
adjourned to the following day. With his usual
forcefulness, Tupper persuaded his supporters
that the terms were reasonable and that the con
struction of the railway as proposed would give
the party such eclat throughout Canada as would
116

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
render it invincible in the next election. On the
second day of the session the agreement was laid
on the table of the House, and the Opposition
thought now that " vaulting ambition had over-
leapt itself" surely, and the country could be
easily convinced that to carry it out would be
ruinous beyond question. Mackenzie immediately
moved for all letters and papers concerning the
construction of the railway, and copies of any
offers received from other companies; this was
refused. Mr. Blake asked that the action of the
House be delayed till the scheme could be fully
considered; this was refused; but notwithstanding
the evident determination of the Government to
push the scheme through the House, the holidays
intervened, and this gave us on the Opposition
benches time to catch our breath. We thought if
we had the opportunity of rousing the people
through the press and by public meetings, that we
could persuade the Government to modify the
scheme, at least in some of its most objectionable
features; and so we left Ottawa to spend our holi
days in this patriotic task. Blake addressed large
meetings at London, Hamilton and Toronto, and
was followed by Tupper an evening or two later.
Nearly all the Liberals held meetings in their own
constituencies, and a few beside the leader
addressed outside meetings. I spoke in the town
of St. Marys, but beyond that my missionary
labours did not extend. I cannot say that the pub
lic response to our efforts was very encouraging.
The House reassembled on January 4th, and the
debate was resumed with the greatest vigour on
the part of the Opposition. Twenty-four different
117

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
amendments were moved, each dealing with some
objectionable phase of the Bill. Mr. Blake's
amendment was unique both as to matter and
extent. It covered three and a half pages of the
Joumals and raised fifty-three distinct objections
to the proposed legislation. The discussion was
continued without interruption, except by routine,
from December 10th to January 28th, and fills
many pages of Hansard. It was an earnest debate,
every speaker evidently being impressed with the
obligations which the country was asked to assume.
My own speech occupied four hours and three-
quarters in delivery, a feat I have never attempted
since. We attacked the Bill from every conceivable
standpoint. We asked for time, for tenders, for a
reference to the people before the ratification of the
contract; we declared the company was allowed
too much land and money, that the lands should
not be exempted from taxation, that conditions of
settlement should be required, that the company's
stations should be taxable, that running power
should be allowed to other railways over it, that
the standard of construction was too low, and so
on. Many of the objections taken to the Bill have
been justified by experience. But the Government
was immovable. With them it was " the Bill, the
whole Bill and nothing but the Bill," and so it
passed on a vote of 46 to 108 ; and with it the Cana
dian Pacific Eailway Company entered upon a
career the greatest of any railway corporation in
the world. It is possible the same result could
have been achieved at less cost; but the risk was
great and the rewards must needs be proportion
ately great. There are very few who now contend
118

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
that the Canadian Pacific Eailway Company has
not given good value for its princely endowments.
During the remainder of the session the Opposi
tion kept up a steady fight against every measure
of the Government. I was becoming more talka
tive, and spoke on a variety of topics, but not at
such unpardonable length as on the Pacific Eail
way Bill.
The chief interest in the session of 1882 centred
around the Bill to adjust the representation of the
electoral districts of the Province of Ontario, bet
ter known as the Gerrymander Bill. Under the
constitution the representation of the different
Provinces must b'e adjusted decennially, Quebec
alone remaining constant. After the census of
1881 it was found that Ontario was entitled to four
additional representatives in the House of Com
mons, and this furnished the Government with a
pretext for changing the boundaries of fifty rid
ings. It was quite evident, however, that the object
of the Bill was not so much to equalize the popu
lation of the constituencies as it was to obtain
political advantage by " hiving the Grits," as Sir
John facetiously admitted, and to make doubtful
seats safe for the Government. Sir John Macdon
ald introduced the Bill on April 28th, or within
three weeks of the close of the session, and the
excitement on the Opposition benches was intense.
Nearly all its active members were affected by the
changes proposed. It was evidently the intention
of the Government to hold its majority by brute
force, otherwise why change county boundaries
and shift municipalities like pawns on a chess
board, regardless of symmetry or public conveni-
119

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
ence? Nothing more unfair could have been
devised, and the debate was accordingly warm and
aggressive. Blake led off in a speech of much
power, and was replied to by Mackenzie Bowell,
said to be chairman of the committee that arranged
the gerrymander. The debate was kept up with
great spirit from the Opposition benches, with no
attempt at a defence or justification by the Gov
ernment. Instead of seriously arguing the ques
tion on public and constitutional grounds I thought
a travesty of the Bill exposing its weaknesses
would be an effective way of holding it up to the
ridicule of the House and the country. Accord
ingly I presented what I called an Alternative Bill
in part as follows :
Whereas by the census of the year of our Lord 1881 and
in accordance with the British North America Act of 1867
the Province of Ontario is entitled to four additional mem
bers in the House of Commons, and
Whereas it is desirable to secure if possible the defeat of
the Liberal party of Canada and the return to power for the
next five years of the present Government,
Therefore Sir John Macdonald, by and with the advice
of party wire-pullers and Tory deputations from the Province
of Ontario and with the connivance of the Tories from the
other Provinces, enacts as follows:
1. The House of Commons shall consist of 211 members,
a majority of whom shall belong to the Conservative party.
2. That as several members of Parliament during the
last four years have loyally supported the present Govern
ment at a great sacrifice to their conscious conviction of
duty and at the peril of their political lives, and as it is
alleged by the members aforesaid, to wit, the members
representing the electoral districts of (here follows about
a dozen constituencies) that their constituents are very
much dissatisfied with many of the votes given by the
members aforesaid, therefore it is expedient so to readjust
130

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
the constituencies of said members as to prevent their being
driven from public life and their vote and influence lost to
the Conservative party,
and so on. In this strain the purpose of the gerry
mander was worked out in some detail. My Bill
was not even read a first time. As was expected,
the Government Bill was passed, but not until
twenty-seven amendments proposed by the Opposi
tion were voted down.
An interesting episode occurred by which I was
personally affected while the draft Bill was under
consideration. My opponent in West Middlesex,
in order to make sure that the constituency would
not be overlooked in the general shuffle, visited
Ottawa and called upon Sir John. After showing
Sir John how, by certain transfers and additions
to West Middlesex as it then stood, his election
would be perfectly sure. Sir John looked at him
rather doubtfully and remarked, " You may put
this township in West Middlesex and you may take
that one off, or you may make any shuffle you
please, but that little devil Eoss will beat you in
spite of what you do!" My opponent told me of
this interview a few months after his defeat, as an
instance of Sir John's political sagacity, and with
out any feeling of disappointment.
In proroguing the House the Governor-General
announced an early dissolution and gave his rea
sons. He said : " I heartily congratulate you on
the rapid and successful development of our manu
facturing, agricultural, and other industries. I
am, however, advised that their progress would
have been still greater were it not that capitalists
hesitate to embark their means in undertakings
121

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
which would be injured, if not destroyed, by a
change in the trade and fiscal policy adopted by
you in 1879. In order, therefore, to give the people
without further delay an opportunity of express
ing their deliberate opinion on this policy and at
the same time to bring into operation the measure
for the readjustment of the representation in the
House of Commons, it is my intention to cause this
Parliament to be dissolved at an early day."
It was evident that the Government felt that
their position in the country was strengthened by
three years' experience of the National Policy, and
that the prospect of increasing that prosperity by
the acquisition of additional capital would at least
retain the support given them in the previous elec
tion. They had also made friends in the West by
their Pacific Eailway policy. They had strength
ened their position in Ontario by a wholesale gerry
mander. In Quebec and the Maritime Provinces
the condition of parties had shown little change
since last election.
The Opposition did not admit that the National
Policy was any benefit to Canada, and they said
so. They condemned the Pacific Eailway policy
" root and branch," and charged the Government
with extravagance, and above all with the grossest
abuse of power, as shown by the Gerrymander Act.
It was a constructive policy on one side against
criticism able and destructive on the other. It was
Sir John with the promise of increased prosperity
and the development of Canada through the Paci
fic Eailway against Blake with a lofty defence of
the sacred character of the Constitution and a
denunciation of extravagant expenditure. The
123

FIVE YEAES IN OPPOSITION
people wanted prosperity. They might listen to
Mr. Blake some other time.
My seat in West Middlesex, not too safe at the
best, was rendered still more doubtful by the gerry
mander; and so I entered upon my third contest
under conditions by no means encouraging. The
open and infamous attempt to defeat me by Act
of Parliament secured for me much sympathy, and
also the votes, which were very welcome, of not a
few Conservatives who would not subscribe to the
policy of their leader. When the polls closed I had
a majority of forty -eight — no ordinary victory.
The Government was, however, sustained, and the
National Policy for the second time proved to be a
very present help to the Conservative party in time
of need. As a party shibboleth it would have been
sufficient of itself to win the day, but when it was
supplemented by the Gerrymander Act the Lib
erals were powerless against their doubly-armed
opponents.

123

CHAPTEE X.
POLITICAL LEADERS.
Political leadership in England first became
distinctly marked with the Premiership of Eobert
Walpole. There were, no doubt, great leaders
before his time, but with few exceptions their lead
ership was rather military than poKtical. Oliver
Cromwell, masterly in all things, had his hand
always on the hilt of his sword, and retained
his ascendency by the memories of Marston Moor
and the invincible Ironsides. Walpole's leadership
was tainted with corruption, but was nevertheless
powerful in its combination of adroitness and
courage. Chatham was a great leader, but greater
in directing armies than in controlling the tur
bulence of factions in the " piping times of peace."
The apparent indifference with which British
public opinion treats its great leaders is one of
the peculiarities of politics. Lord John EusseU
was twice Premier of Great Britain. What were
the causes of his downfall after the popularity he
acquired as the champion of the Eeform Bill of
1832? Was it a tactical blunder on his part that
his first Administration was defeated on its fin
ancial policy after six years in office, and his
second Administration in nine months on a Bill
for the representation of the people? Sir Eobert
Peel was also twice Premier. He was strong
enough to force upon his Tory colleagues the Bill
134

POLITICAL LEADEES
for the Eepeal of the Corn Laws, although on the
very day on which it passed the House of Lords
he was defeated on a Bill affecting Ireland. Earl
Derby was three times Premier and leader of the
dominant party, first for a period of about ten
months, then for sixteen months, lastly for eighteen
months. Why was he unable to hold the sceptre
which his strong hand had wrested from his oppon
ents? Palmerston and Disraeli were twice placed
in power, and Gladstone had the marvellous record
of surviving three defeats and holding the Premier
ship on four different occasions. The common con
clusion when a party fails to carry the country is
that the leader is at fault, and that he is wanting
in tactical skill or in sympathy with public opinion.
If intellectual strength alone could command suc
cess neither Peel nor EusseU nor Disraeli nor Glad
stone could have been beaten. Is it because public
opinion is unstable or capricious? Then why did
such great leaders as I have named not adapt them
selves to this condition of the public mind and
steer through the breakers without making ship
wreck or failure? And stranger still is the fact
that leaders who were not strong enough or astute
enough to save themselves from defeat were strong
enough in the course of time to turn defeat into
victory, and that not once but many times. Is
there not some truth in what Cardinal de Eetz has
said, " You need greater qualities to be a good
party leader than to be Emperor of the universe "?
And now the question arises, is it possible to
make such an analysis of the qualities of leader
ship that one can say with reasonable certainty
that such and such a person is destined to become
125

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
a great leader, because of this or that element of
his character or because of a combination of ele
ments not possessed by his fellows? I think not.
It is said a leader must be magnetic. Peel was cold,
reserved, and, as Wellington said of him, he had
no manners, and yet he was twice Premier. Salis
bury was similarly constituted, though in a less
degree, and he held his party in the hollow of his
hand. Is it necessary that a leader should be elo
quent of speech and attract the multitude by the
fascination of his flowing rhetoric? Burke was
grandly eloquent, and so was Fox; but neither of
them held a flrst place as leader. Melbourne was
slow of speech, commonplace, hesitating and dull;
Palmerston never made but one great speech in
his life — his Don Paciflco Speech, as it is called —
and yet both had a most enthusiastic following.
Disraeli and Gladstone were great speakers, yet
both were driven from office more than once. Eose-
bery, the most eloquent of living Englishmen, has
no place among the political leaders of the day.
Then is publicity an essential element of success
ful leadership? Pitt never addressed a public meet
ing during his whole career; all his speeches were
made in Parliament. Peel was almost as reticent.
Palmerston and Salisbury spoke barely once a year
outside of Parliament. A leader may have great
intellectual power, he may be scholarly, profound,
eloquent, forceful, courageous, aggressive, ener
getic, and watchful ; and yet either because he fails
to " take occasion by the hand " or because he " lags
superfluous on the stage " or does not " give
tongue " to his followei^s, he is set aside.
126

POLITICAL LEADEES
No doubt conditions purely factitious or even
transitory contribute to the success or failure of
leadership. " There is a tide in the affairs of men
which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune."
Happy the leader who launches his bark on such
a tide. Was it by any prescience on a politician's
part that the tide was flowing just when he wanted
to launch out? Lincoln became President on a
tide of public opinion running against slavery, and
sailed with the tide. McKinley became President
on a tide of high protection. Laurier came into
power on a tide of public opinion in favour of pub
lic education without sectarian coercion. Henry
Campbell Bannerman came into power on a tide
of public opinion against the conduct of the Boer
War. On the other hand, leaders often create the con
ditions by which success is achieved — they flrst
make public opinion and then claim their reward.
Gladstone did this on Irish Home Eule; Sir John
Macdonald did this with the National Policy; Sir
Oliver Mowat did the same with Provincial Eights.
As Napoleon said of himself, " I do not bend to cir
cumstances, but I bend circumstances to suit my
purpose." Looking over the record of successful
leaders, I flnd so many different grades of talent,
such varied types of character — great weakness
interfused with great force, courage combined with
apparent timidity, stubbornness with flexibility —
that I am forced to the conclusion that successful
leadership is not necessarily a personal matter.
Environment, the psychological equation, the for
tuitous concurrence of circumstance, the recep
tivity of the public mind, all contribute to a success
137

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
which even the leader himself would not claim as
the result of his foresight or his sagacity.
How far these observations apply to political
leadership in Canada I must leave to the judgment
of my readers. If the ability to hold the confldence
of the people for a prolonged period is an indica
tion of capable leadership, Canada loses nothing
by comparison with the political leaders of Great
Britain. With the exception of Lord Liverpool,
only once in the last century has any' British
Premier held office for more than a full parlia
mentary term of seven years. Salisbury's third
Premiership continued from 1895 to 1902, and
might have continued longer were it not for ill-
health. Palmerston, Gladstone and Disraeli, all
strong men, succumbed to a hostile electorate
before the end of the Parliament for which they
were elected. Sir John Macdonald's first Govern
ment lasted six years and his second eighteen years.
Sir Mackenzie Bowell's Government lasted from
December 21st, 1894, to April 27th, 1896. Sir
Charles Tupper's tenure of the Premiership was
from April 27th, 1896, to July Sth, 1896, or seventy
days; while Sir Wilfrid Laurier has entered on
his sixteenth year of office.
In the United States the leadership changes with
every Presidential election except when the Presi
dent is elected for a second term. In any case,
under the traditions of the Constitution, personal
leadership cannot extend beyond two terms.
During the eleven years of my membership of
the House of Commons I had the opportunity of
studying at close range the two leaders at the head
of their respective parties — Sir John Macdonald
138

POLITICAL LEADEES
and Alexander Mackenzie. I saw them in opposi
tion and in power, and in both spheres their
methods were dissimilar. Of the two, Mackenzie
was the more aggressive in opposition, as well as
the more thorough. He was equally aggressive in
small matters as in large, and his arraignment of
the Government for the expenditure of a few dol
lars on some unimportant public work was as per
sistent and forceful as if the expenditure imperilled
the credit of the country. He applied the square
and plummet of his vocation as stonemason to
every act of the Government, and no variation from
these tests of ministerial workmanship escaped his
criticism. When transferred to the leadership of
the Government he still retained to an unfortun
ate extent the same critical attitude towards his
opponents, and thus instead of strengthening his
own defences and extending his breastworks, his
orders were as of old, " Up, Guards, and at them !"
and this whether the enemy appeared in units or
in battalions.
Sir John Macdonald, while critical and persist
ent, never allowed himself to be diverted from
showing, or attempting to show, that his views on
public questions were sounder, safer and more
practical than those of the Government. The Gov
ernment might not be altogether wrong, but he had
something better to offer, and would allow the
country to decide between them. This was spe
cially his line of argument with regard to the
National Policy. While avowing his belief in Free
Trade theoretically, he declared the National
Policy was not the abnegation of Free Trade, but
rather its adaptation to the industrial conditions
10 139

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
of the country. He never attempted to discredit
Free Trade as an economic principle. In view of
the commercial stagnation which then prevailed
Free Trade was a side issue. One thing only was
needful, that was prosperity, and the National
Policy was the only thing that would produce it.
Mackenzie, while bold and strong in criticism, over
looked the important fact that criticism, like a
bushman's fire, should only be used for clearing
the ground for the harvest. To neglecf to make
the cleared ground the seedbed for the propaga
tion of public opinion, was to lose the reward of
all his labours. Sir John Macdonald, on the other
hand, aimed from his seat in Parliament to draw
public opinion towards himself, as a great sower
who went forth daily with good seed (at least he
said it was good), from which he expected a har
vest, some thirty, some sixty, and some an hundred
fold. Mackenzie's leadership of the House was a
peculiar admixture of strength and weakness. No
man could have kept a firmer grasp of the public
business of the House than he did. He knew his
Order paper as perfectly as a churchman knows
his creed. He was prompt in all matters for which
he was personally responsible, and was not very
indulgent towards any member who failed to be
ready with his Bills and resolutions when called.
He worked the House very hard. Capable of
indefinite exertion himself, he never allowed an
early adjournment if there was any business to fill
up the time. His powers of endurance were mar
vellous, and at two o'clock in the morning he was
as keen in debate as at the opening of the House.
13Q

POLITICAL LEADEES
No leader was ever more alert in watching every
movement of an opponent or in intercepting him
if he tried to escape from an untenable position by
evasion or subterfuge. His replies were usually
brief and incisive. Nicholas Flood Davin said that
he was the only member of Parliament whose
speeches could not be improved by abbreviation.
His chief strength was his knowledge of the busi
ness of Parliament and his downright ability in
defending himself against attack and in repelling
the assaults of his opponents. In sheer force of
will, in courage and aptness in debate, the Parlia
ment of Canada never had a stronger leader.
His weaknesses were many. He had no gift of
conciliation, no " sunny way," no faculty for com
promising even in trifiing matters. It was usually
a blow for a blow, and the more his opponents
winced the more was the sport enjoyed. He took
a strange delight in making his opponents feel that
he was their master. This characteristic often led
him into trouble. I remember on one occasion his
refusing the postponement of a certain resolution
in which the late Dalton McCarthy was interested.
This refusal led to a personal wrangle, and
McCarthy and his friends retaliated by obstruct
ing business, and forcing the House to sit all night.
On another occasion during the question hour he
replied to several members of the Opposition so
curtly and cynically as to arouse a general spirit
of resentment on both sides of the House. My
deskmate, Thomas Oliver, felt so strongly that
Mackenzie acted unwisely that he took a sheet of
foolscap, wrote on it in large letters, " A pint of
molasses will catch more flies than a hogshead of
131

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
vinegar," and, folding it up, sent it by a page to
Mackenzie. We both watched him as he unfolded
it and with a snap of his jaw tore it into frag
ments and threw it on the floor. I would not like
to say that Oliver's cryptic message had any per
manent effect.
His attitude towards deputations was not always
considerate. He seemed to regard a deputation
as a band of marauders who were meditating a
raid upon the treasury, or who had come to instruct
him on matters which they did not understand
quite as well as he did, and often they left his
presence in a very unhappy frame of mind. It
was said that Sir John could refuse the request of
a deputation with better grace than Mackenzie
could grant what was asked. Even in his inter
course with his supporters he appeared to be under
restraint, and a business call at his office left the
impression that only under the most urgent cir
cumstances should the call be repeated. His offi
cial austerity was in striking contrast to the
geniality and warmth of his character in private
life. His home was always open to his friends,
where a cordial welcome awaited, no matter how
heavily he was pressed by the cares of state.
Mackenzie suffered much from the unreasonable
ness of party criticism. He was a man of far
larger conceptions of the influence of a Govern
ment upon the future of the country than his
opponents would concede. He fell upon times
unfavourable to his administration flnanciaUy and
commercially. The empty pockets of the electors
made them restless, and he suffered more from
scanty harvests and commercial depression than
132

POLITICAL LEADEES
he did from his own shortcomings. His sterling
honesty is a great heritage, and will keep his
memory green to all future generations. The lan
guage applied to Lord Eandolph Churchill by his
biographer applies in Mackenzie's case — " A politi
cian's character and position are measured in his
day by party standards; when he is dead, all that
he achieved in the name of party is at an end. The
eulogies and censures of partisans are powerless
to affect his ultimate reputation; the scales
wherein he was weighed are broken. The years to
come bring weights and measures of their own."
With feelings of affection I commit his ashes to
history's golden urn.
But let me now look towards the Opposition
benches, where sat Sir John Macdonald. It was
interesting to notice the movements of one so
skilled in Parliamentary tactics and ready in
debate — he evidently believed that the duty of an
Opposition was to oppose. When Lord Eandolph
Churchill led what was called the Fourth Party
in the House of Commons, his biographer recorded
that he was governed by three principles: " (1)
Obtain the victory, know how to follow it up and
leave the wholesomeness or the unwholesomeness
to critics; (2) take office only where it suits you
best; put the Government in a minority whenever
you decently can; (3) whenever by an unfortunate
concurrence of circumstances an Opposition is
compelled to support the Government, the support
should be given with a kick and not with a caress,
and should be withdrawn at the flrst advisable
tnoment." Sir John never, so far as I can recall,
gave his unequivocal support to any measure pro-
133

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
posed by the Government. He always found some
ground for objection, even when he did not think
it necessary to divide the House. It might be only
a passing criticism, or an objection to some clause
of a Bill, or a simple protest against the expendi
ture of money in the way proposed by the Govern
ment, but he always left himself open to take
stronger ground at a later stage, or to denounce
the Government if their plans failed or turned out
to be unpopular.
As a debater Sir John Macdonald was exceed
ingly adroit in repelling attack and in taking cover
when assailed. He was hardly ever driven into a
corner. Even Cartwright's assaults, though ever
so direct, were repelled by his alertness in flnding
some plausible answer which, though not a com
plete reply, left him comparatively unhurt. His
speeches were a rare combination of argument,
irony and sarcasm. No man could use ridicule to
better advantage. When occasion called for it he
could be severe and denunciatory, but his usual
rd^e was to expose his opponent's weaknesses with
out excessive heat or temper, and if possible make
him appear ridiculous to himseK as well as to
others. He never attempted to play the orator,
and seldom raised his voice in passion. His
speeches in Parliament were a sort of monologue,
clear and coherent, notwithstanding frequent
pauses as if waiting for a thought to crystallize,
or to find the right word for his purpose. His
speech on Confederation in the old Parliament of
Canada and his speech in defence of his relations
with Sir Hugh Allan were among the ablest efforts
of his life. 134

POLITICAL LEADEES
But it was not to his adroitness in debate that
Sir John owed success as a leader. He was always
looking out for men who were capable of serving
him. Nor did he necessarily confine his researches
to his own party. He was ready to receive recruits
from any quarter, and once within his camp they
were there to stay. His alliance with Howland
and Macdougall and Joseph Howe showed his
power in this respect. It is true these recruits
were not always required to serve for nought; but
whether for love or gain, they served with a loy
alty that amounted to devotion. His attitude to
his supporters in the House was equally remark
able. Whenever a member from the back benches
addressed the House, no matter how weak his
effort or how halting his speech, he was sure of
his leader's attention. I have seen him turn his
chair around and face a struggling fledgling in his
vain attempt to rise from earth, and interject an
encouraging " Hear ! hear !" to the merest platitude,
when everybody else was waiting impatiently for
his last words. What signified the impatience of
the House? His leader was listening, and that was
audience enough.
I remember on one occasion Mr. A. McQuade,
member for South Victoria, had occupied the
attention of the House late at night for a con
siderable time, discussing the resolution outlin
ing the National Policy. He had said nothing
new, nor was what he said in good form either as
to language or arrangement. Immediately on the
close of his speech the House rose, and members
pressed close on each other as they were leaving
135

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
the chamber through the door behind the Speaker's
chair, myself among them. In this movement Mr.
McQuade was passing out immediately in front of
Sir John, and on noticing the latest champion of
his policy. Sir John passed his arm around the old
gentleman's neck, giving him a friendly embrace,
and spoke in his ear loud enough to be heard:
" McQuade, you spoke like an angel. I am proud
of you." Whether Sir John felt sincerely proud
or not I do not like to say, but I am sure McQuade
did. Sir John Macdonald also had the faculty of
adapting himself to conditions which, if not irre
concilable, were apparently incompatible. He
could proclaim himself a free trader and yet inaug
urate a protective tariff. He could demand that
Eiel be brought to trial for his offences and yet
arrange for his exile from Canada. He could be
a friend of the Orange Party in Ontario and of
their French antagonists in Quebec. He could
oppose the federation of the British Provinces of
North America and afterwards outstrip its most
ardent advocates in his zeal for its accomplish
ment. He could resist Ontario for her demands
for Provincial autonomy without losing a single
supporter. Madame de Stael's description of
Talleyrand aptly describes his character — " He
possessed a most happy flexibility, a most agile
capacity for transition; he can be all things to
all men."
Personally I seldom came in contact with Sir
John Macdonald. Incidentally, I met him in the
lobby my first session, and without the formality
136

POLITICAL LEADEES
of an introduction he shook hands, quoting the
lines from Pope:
"Who taught that heaven-directed spire to rise?
' The man of Ross,' each lisping babe replies."
On another occasion, during the session of 1883,
in discussing the Estimates I got into a rather hot
dispute with Woodworth of Nova Scotia. Wood-
worth was capable of using forcible language, and
I was in the mood to reply to him with both heat
and force. The discussion grew, and extended to
the back benches on both sides. Sir John appeared
to be watching it with considerable interest. About
midnight I went downstairs to the restaurant, and
called for a cup of tea and bread and butter. A
few moments later Sir John came down, and sitting
opposite to me at the table, ordered some whiskey
and sherry. After a few moments pleasantly spent
in conversation he left me, and as he was passing
out remarked to the occupants of an adjoining
table loud enough for me to hear, " Come, boys,
hurry up; Dug Woodworth and Eoss have been
into a devil of a row for the last hour, and I am
going up to take a hand in the sport." I followed
him up to take my flogging as coolly as I could.
In a minute he got the floor, and greatly delighted
his followers by the half-humorous, half-cynical
castigation which he administered.
I never considered Sir John as effective on the
platform as on the floor of Parliament. He had
however a fund of quaint humour which was often
more telling than tables of statistics or quotations
from authorities in economics or constitutional
law; and though he sometimes used more mortar
137

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
than brick, he always left his audience under the
conviction that he was a master mechanic of great
skill and capable of competing successfully with
any rival.
For eight years after I left the House of Com
mons Sir John Macdonald was the most command
ing flgure in Canadian politics. Although not able
to hold the majority in Parliament which secured
his return to power in 1878, his right to the
Premiership was not disputed. In Ontario his
majority was reduced from flfty-nine seats in 1878
to forty-eight in 1891 and in Quebec from forty-five
to thirty. His opposition to Provincial Eights was
his chief weakness in Ontario, and the want of Sir
George E. Car tier's strong hand no doubt lost him
a few seats in Quebec. But notwithstanding all
the mutations in the voting strength of his sup
porters, there appeared to be no change in the
admiration of his followers for his political genius
and marvellous leadership. Even to the last he
devoted his energies with a degree of self-sacrifice
unprecedented to the interests of his party, and in
1891, in his seventy-sixth year, he plunged into the
campaign with all the energy of an ambitious can
didate for the honours of knightly spurs. The
strain was too great for his years. On June 6th,
just a few months after the general election, the
end came after a short illness, and one of the chief
founders of the Dominion, the destiny of which he
had guided for nearly a quarter of a century, passed
away. I shall not attempt a review of his political
career, nor question the motives which actuated
him as a party leader. I had the honour of being
138

POLITICAL LEADEES
invited to speak at the unveiling of a monument
to his memory at Queen's Park, Toronto, and also
in the city of Kingston, two years after his death,
and shall close this sketch with a quotation from
the speech delivered before thousands of his fellow
citizens in the city which had honoured him with
its confidence so long:
" Whatever our political differences may have
been, however much we may have questioned his
policy on many matters of state, it is sufficient for
us to remember in the presence of this proof of the
affection and respect of his fellow citizens, that he,
on whose grave in Cataraqui the maple is at this
moment showering its emblematic leaves, gave to
his country amid the ravings of faction and the
temptations of political strife the offerings of a
loyalty that never faltered; that in spite of diffi
culties that might have baffled a weaker man he
was successful in welding, with the assistance of
other great men, into a distinct, solid, and I trust
an enduring nationality, the people whom fortune
or destiny had sent to our shores ; that he had large
conceptions and fervid hopes as to the great possi
bilities of the land in which we dwell, and that he
left to us an unbroken record of fealty to that
gracious sovereign under whose beneficent sway
we have enjoyed in the fullest sense every privilege
which citizenship has a right to demand and which
a free constitution is calculated to bestow."

139

CHAPTEE XI.
MR. BLAKE AND THE OLD BRIGADE.
During the last three years of my membership
in the House of Commons, Mr. Blake was leader
of the Liberal party and devoted himself with
herculean energy to the task of displacing his
opponents. His constant attendance in his seat
showed how conscientiously he devoted himself to
the public service. He seemed to make a special
study of every Bill, no matter how unimportant,
that was laid before Parliament. It is said that
Daniel O'Connell, when he first ran for the county
of Clare, promised the electors that he would read
every Bill brought down by the Government or by
any member of the House of Commons. It is uot
recorded that he kept his promise. So far as I
know, Mr. Blake was the only member of the House
who appeared to be under such an obligation. In
fact, the back benches felt that he bestowed far too
much labour upon the ordinary legislation of the
House, and instead of allowing the responsibility
for legislation to rest upon the ^linisters with
whom it originated, he often helped them out of
difficulties, for which he received no thanks and
which must have cost him great thought and study.
As the first lawyer of the House he could not
apparently refrain from clarifying what appeared
obscure or eliminating what appeared contradic
tory. No doubt theoretically he was right, for in
140

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
a certain sense no member of Parliament can divest
himself of responsibility for legislation to which
he gives his assent, whether it emanates from the
Government benches or from a private member.
Mr. Blake had wonderful skill in framing amend
ments to Government measures which exposed
their inherent weakness. In fact, his amendments
were almost a precis of the arguments required to
controvert the policy of the Government, and in
looking over some of them after a lapse of thirty
years I can recall the substance of the debate to
which they gave rise. As I have already shown,
his amendment to the Pacific Eailway Bill was an
epitome of all its objectionable features, and the
basis of all the criticisms in the House and press
for years afterwards. In this respect his practice
differed entirely from British Parliamentarians.
With the exception of Mr. Gladstone's resolution
on the disestablishment of the Irish Church, reso
lutions involving a vote of want of confidence are
usually set forth in one or two sentences. Among
these might be cited the famous resolution of Mr.
Dunning on which he based a censure of the
Government — " The infiuence of the Crown has
increased, is increasing, and ought to be dimin
ished." For purposes of discussion Mr. Blake's
amendments were exceedingly useful, but many
were so overloaded with details as to destroy their
effect upon the public.
Mr. Blake as a debater was, beyond questioU,
the most exhaustive that ever sat in the Canadian
Parliament. He appeared to leave nothing further
to be said on his side when he sat down. I remem
ber on the introduction of the Gerrymander Bill
141

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
of 1882 being called to his room, along with M. C.
Cameron, John Charlton and Wm. Paterson. Mr.
Blake went briefly over the main features of the
Bill, indicating what line he proposed to take in
opening the debate and assigning to each of us
certain phases of the question which would help
to flll up the discussion so as to cover fully the
whole Bill. We went to work on our respective
assignments as directed, with the intention of not
encroaching on the ground which Mr. Blake had
reserved for himself or which he had assigned to
each of us. What was our dismay, however, when
Blake closed his speech a week afterwards, to find
that he had not only covered his own ground but
had almost completely exhausted our respective
assignments — for which M. C. Cameron berated
him immediately after in language more forcible
than elegant. This propensity arose, however, not
from any desire to monopolize a debate, but
because of the comprehensive character of his
mind. He not only saw a subject in its general
bearings but also in detail, and from long legal
practice he could not rid himself of the assump
tion that the final verdict might turn on what to
other minds appeared a trifling matter. As a con
sequence nearly all his speeches were overloaded.
Not only were they long, but they contained more
matter than even the House of Commons could
assimilate, and to that extent his labour was lost.
In the preparation and arrangement of his
speeches no man could be more painstaking. Noth
ing was taken for granted. Every statement had
to be verified by reference to original documents
where possible. Nothing seemed to be dreaded
142

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
more than the making of an incorrect assertion.
It was my privilege for the last two years of my
association with him in the House of Commons to
be his "jackal." I read for him in the library
constitutional authorities, old journals, newspaper
files, volumes of statistics and generally as directed
made notes or placed markers in the books to
which he wished to refer, and never in my experi
ence did I feel that he could not have digested
twice as much material as I was able to furnish
him. By one glance at a passage he was able to
decide if it would be of any use to him, and if my
citations were not apropos he did not always con
ceal his disappointment. Though my labours were
not quite congenial, it was excellent training.
Besides, to be called to make bricks for such a
master builder was no small honour.
Mr. Blake had a distinguished presence on the
public platform. Large of frame, erect and com
manding, an audience could not help but be pre
possessed in his favour. His voice was soft, but
clear and resonant, and when raised above its
ordinary register was exceedingly powerful. He
never appeared to think it necessary to ingratiate
himself with an audience by any by-play. He was
there to discuss public questions, and there was no
time to be lost in compliments ; instanter he set out,
as in the House of Commons, to prove his thesis
and to elaborate it from the fullness of a mind
saturated with every particular. But the very
abundance of his knowledge was his weakness;
evidence that would have been sufficient to his
audience was not conclusive to his mind, and so
he piled Ossa upon Pelion and threw Parnassus
143

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
above them both, till everyone became dizzy scal
ing the heights to which he was being lifted. I
have often watched from a public platform the
dazed look of many of his hearers. They were
attentive enough, but at the same time appeared
to be wandering in a maze from which they were
unable to extricate themselves, while the object of
their admiration was moving apparently with the
greatest confidence. Notwithstanding this Mr.
Blake was very impressive. No one could doubt
his sincerity and honesty. His object was not so
much to entangle his opponents as to keep him
self right with his audience. If he made his own
position impregnable, there could be no doubt in
his own mind as to the final result. His object was
not to win applause but to carry conviction. If
he had only added a few touches of illuminating
humour to his arguments I often thought he would
have been much more effective. He could wield
the hammer of Thor, but never the lighter weapon
of Comus. The altitude from which he spoke
would not admit of levity, even when ridicule
would be more effective than logic. If he could
not dominate by cold, unimpassloned reason, his
cause was lost, and the fault must be with th(;
hearers and not with the speaker.
As a leader Mr. Blake had the unbounded con
fidence of his followers. They knew, whether he
failed or not in a division of the House, that he
never failed in leaving his opponents helpless at
his feet except to vote against him. But powerful
as he was in debate, whether in opening a subject
or in replying to the opposite side, he was not
equal to Mackenzie in a political melee. I do not
144

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
think he was wanting in courage, but he seemed
to be lacking in the skirmishing qualities of his
predecessor. Mackenzie would break in upon bis
opponents when the battle was at its hottest, and
by a few well directed blows drive them from the
field. If any of his colleagues were being pushed
hard he always came to their rescue; Mr. Blake
seldom took up the cudgels in such cases. If his
friends could not fight their own battles, let them
be more prudent in the future. Neither did he cul
tivate to any extent the personal regard of his
followers. He was often morose, and apparently
depressed and discouraged, as if he thought the
game was not worth the candle. He never appeared
to rise above the serious side of life, or to be play
ful in manner or speech amid the companionship
of his supporters. He enjoyed a good story, but
never " swapped " with anybody. He could not
make himself " one of the boys." He was always
on his good behaviour.
As the Opposition was engaged principally in
criticizing the Estimates and the legislation pro
posed by the Government, I suggested to Mr. Blake
that it might be profitable, from a party point of
view, if we brought before the House some ques
tions of general public interest, to show that we
had some power of initiative as well. After a
review of several suitable topics it was agreed
that I should give notice to reopen the ques
tion of Eeciprocity with the United States in the
form of a motion asking for correspondence
between the Governments of Canada and the
United States bearing upon the subject. As the
question was a comprehensive one, and might
11 145

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
involve an expression of the policy of the Liberal
party, it was agreed that I should submit an out
line of my speech for Mr. Blake's approval, which
I did. In the course of a couple of weeks my
motion was reached, and I rose to deliver myself
of a speech which I had carefully prepared, and
which I felt confident would be a reasonably credit
able presentation of my case. I spoke for about
three-quarters of an hour, and was listened to
with fair attention by both sides of the House.
The Hon. Mr. White replied to my arguments,
and with one or two other short speeches the
debate closed. Though not particularly impressed
with my effort to instruct the House, I ven
tured to say to ]Mr. Blake a few hours after
wards, " Well, I have done my best for Eeci
procity. How did you like my speech?" " My
dear boy," he said, " I did not hear a word of it. *I
slept the whole time you were speaking." Whether
to take his repose as a mark of perfect confidence
in my ability to do justice to the subject, or as
showing a lack of interest in anything I might say,
was my dilemma. It was, however, the last speech
about which I asked his opinion, either before or
after delivery.
Mr. Blake will be remembered by those who
served under him as a model of Parliamentary
courtesy and dignity. The High Court of Parlia
ment was to him a forum demanding the exercise
of the highest gifts; to trifle with its traditions or
its ideals was a crime. The forces which it con
trolled reached to all time. To direct these forces
for the good of his country was his great ambition.
To degrade that forum by baseness or dishonesty
146

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
was the terror of his soul. I was severed from him
in 1883 when I retired from the House of Com
mons, but the memory of his great talents and his
devotion to duty are still fresh and green as on the
day of my separation.
As a public speaker. Sir Eichard Cartwright pos
sessed many striking characteristics well worthy
of imitation. He had the faculty of condensation
and clearness in a remarkable degree. The matter
of his speeches was well arranged, and with a logi
cal sequence that vastly facilitated his hearers in
following his argument from start to flnish. More
over, his sentences were never involved, never over
loaded with qualifications and digressions, but fol
lowed each other in crisp, transparent terms, the
meaning of which was unmistakable. As a master
of good English, free from slang and the language
of the street, he had no superior in public life in
my time.
Sir Eichard was one of the very few who could
be reported verbatim. No one would pronounce
him an orator, notwithstanding his purity of dic
tion and felicity of expression. His addresses
never appealed to the emotions of his audience,
and it is there that oratory is most effectual and
real. He might appeal in a rhetorical manner to
the higher sentiments of his audience, but it was
Addisonian rather than Gladstonian. It lacked
in passion, in cadence, in verve; it was distinctly
intellectual and might carry conviction, but was
not such oratory as " would move the stones of
Eome to mutiny." Seldom did Sir Eichard indulge
in the soothing phrases of the forensic platform.
He appeared to delight more in the war-songs of
147

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
the Vikings than in the pipes of Pan. And yet to
those who knew him intimately he had all the
gentleness and warmth of an English gentleman
of the good old stock. His somewhat aristocratic
manner was no doubt constitutional, but it did
not in the slightest degree detract from the warmth
of his friendship or his geniality as a host.
To the Liberal party Sir Eichard gave of his
best. In the dark days of the early nineties his
voice was heard on many a battlefield, encourag
ing the party to " push the battle to the gate." No
leader ever shared more fully in all the fatigue
and labour of political campaigns than did Sir
Eichard. Many a citadel that would have capitu
lated to the enemy was held by the inspiration of
his courage and perseverance. Forty-eight years
of service found him at his best in breadth of view,
in sympathy with Canadian sentiment, and in
capacity to meet the growing demands of the
progressive forces of public opinion.
Next to Sir Eichard Cartwright stood the Hon.
David Mills in point of Parliamentary efficiency.
Mr. Mills was a good bookman. He studied poli
tics under Gibbon and Burke and Macaulay and
John Stuart Mill. He studied the system of fed
eral government under Marshall and Story and
Cooley ; and no member of the House, not even Mr.
Blake, had a better knowledge of the fundamental
principles of the British Constitution and its limi
tations under the federal system. He was quite as
familiar with the judgments of the Supreme Court
of the United States in constitutional questions as
with the judgments of Her Majesty's Privy Coun
cil. His speech on the true boundaries of Ontario
148

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
delivered against Sir John's evasive arguments
showed that he had mastered the question in its
historical and constitutional aspects. In fact, all
his speeches on the legislative jurisdiction of the
Dominion and its statutory limitations anticipated
the decisions of the Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council after argument by learned counsel
on both sides. As a debater Mr. Mills always broke
new ground. Whether early or late in a discus
sion, he was able to marshal new facts or to cite
some eminent authorities to clarify his conten
tions. The sophistries of the empiric were empty
eggshells which crumbled in his hands. He some
times expended more labour and research in expos
ing the weakness of an argument than seemed
necessary, but his object was not simply to para
lyze the enemy for the time being but to render him
forever after incapable of renewing his attacks.
Mr. Mills had a great faculty for tracing every poli
tical question back to what he called " first prin
ciples." What was the origin of the franchise? Why
were the prerogatives of the Crown limited by law?
Why should Ministers be jointly responsible for
every act of Government? These and kindred ques
tions gave full scope to the philosophical tendencies
of his mind. And for this Sir John called him the
philosopher of Bothwell, partly in derision and
partly as a compliment. I have alluded elsewhere
to his hesitancy of speech. It was unquestionably
a drawback on the platform, where fluency and
volubility are often glorified at the expense of
solidity and logic. But notwithstanding his
normal hesitancy, Mr. Mills generally commanded
the attention of his audience by his clearness of
149

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
exposition and the overflowing fullness of his
knowledge of the subject under discussion. I have
spoken from the same platform with him on many
occasions, and although the applause of his audi
ence was somewhat subdued, he never failed to
obtain the most respectful attention. In some
respects he was more useful in furnishing argu
ments for other speakers than in using them him
self — he was a great miner, but seldom smelted all
the ore which he produced. His elevation to the
Supreme Court left him without a successor as an
encyclopaedia of constitutional law and Parlia
mentary practice.
There were two other colleagues of the leaders
named to whom the Liberal party owed much
during my stay at Ottawa — John Charlton and
William Paterson. Mr. Charlton was par excel
lence a student. He conducted his own researches,
made his own analysis, and by dint of labour and
solid ability impressed himself upon Parliament
and the country. He always faced an opponent
squarely and boldly, and by intimate knowledge
of public affairs usually covered him with con
fusion. He enjoyed the " heckler," and generally
used him to good purpose. The harder he was
pressed the more defiant he became. For instance,
in his first election he was confronted at a large
meeting by a letter which he had written privately
to a friend on the relations between Canada and
the United States. The letter contained some
observations which were evidently damaging poli
tically. He was asked if it was genuine. In reply
to that question he asked the holder of the letter
to let him see it, that he might be sure it was in
150

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
his handwriting. The letter was handed to him.
" You say this is my letter. If so, it is my pro
perty, and if my property, I have a right to do as I
like with it," and with these words he tore it into
fragments in front of the audience. His opponent,
being unable to prove exactly what the letter con
tained, very soon after dropped all reference to it.
Mr. Charlton had a fine sense of humour and gen
erally relieved the tension of his audience by pithy
anecdotes illustrative of his argument.
Mr. Paterson was less a student than Mr. Charl
ton, but eminently practical in debate. He had a
voice of great compass, which he generally used
with little restraint. He appeared himself to be
quite unconscious of its power. His fellow mem
bers sometimes exaggerated its forcefulness for
their own amusement. It is said that the Hon.
Mr. Mackenzie while strolling around the grounds
met a friend from the city, and after some general
conversation about political matters Mackenzie
asked him if he had heard Mr. Paterson's speech
on the Budget the day before. His friend replied
that he had not. " Then," said Mackenzie, " you
must have been out of the city." Mr. Paterson was
a most effective platform speaker, largely because
of his earnestness and his practical methods of
presenting his case. He never discussed prin
ciples, he proved them by concrete illustrations.
A capital story is told of his reply to the offensive
remarks of a fellow member during a high tariff
debate some years after I left the House. It seems
that Mr. Paterson was showing that a tariff for
revenue purposes was best for the revenue iand
best for the consumers of imported goods. His
151

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
interrupter, who by the way was somewhat irre
sponsible for his rudeness, frequently exclaimed
" Eot !" as one argument after another was
unfolded. After many repetitions of the word
" rot " Mr. Paterson paused, looked at the sodden
gentleman sternly and said, " If the honourable
gentleman thinks it is rot, why does he take so
much of it?"
How can I close this chapter without referring
to the names of James McMullen and M. C. Cam
eron? No words of mine are needed to prolong
their memory. Mr. McMullen — now a Senator —
was the terror of his opponents, the stormy petrel
of the House and of political meetings. With
indignation as real as the fires of a volcano, he
might be heard saying " This Government is the
most corrupt, the most extravagant and the most
incapable that ever cursed any country !" " Did
they not build the Pacific Eailway?" someone
shouts from the audience. " Yes, and they built
the Pacific Scandal, too, and made millionaires of
their friends at the expense of the country !" " Did
they not give us the National Policy?" another
asks. " The National Policy ! Legalized robbery,
skinning the consumers for the benefit of the red
parlour and the whole pack of hungry office-seekers
that prey upon the Treasury!" and with his index
finger pointing to his interrupter and his words
coming swift and deadly as a mitrailleuse, he swept
the field as with a besom of destruction.
M. C. Cameron was of Highland descent; he had
a somewhat stern expression, but underneath was
a substratum of friendship for those he loved as
warm as eiderdown. He loved the fiail and the
152

ME. BLAKE AND THE OLD BEIGADE
threshing-floor and the winnowing of the chaff
from the wheat, and woe to the opponent whose
sheaves were blighted with an east wind! He
always seemed to speak to the " March of the
Cameron Men."
Of others dear to memory, such as Mulock, Lan-
derkin, Fisher, Trow and Davis, I would fain
write, but space forbids. They were a noble band,
about flfty strong, of the olden, golden days of
1879 to 1883. They were the Light Brigade who
went down to battle as to a festival, nothing
daunted, because they knew that by and by the
sound of hissing bullets would soon be changed to
shouts of victory.
"When can their glory fade?
O the wild charge they made!
All the world wonder'd.
Honour the charge they made!
Honour the Old Brigade,
Noble half hundred! "

153

CHAPTEE XII.
HOW AND WHERE LEADERS ARE MADE.
It does not often fall to the lot of a member of
Parliament during a single decade to observe the
conditions under which members on the back
benches gradually move forward to a more con
spicuous position, till ultimately they sit in the
Premier's chair. As a rule such movements are
the result of many years of hard work in commit
tees, or of strenuous efforts in debate. Every time
a young member presents himself before the House,
he is before a jury of his peers, who are making an
appraisement of his equipment for Parliamentary
honours. His style of speech may not exactly suit
their taste ; he may be too aggressive, or too timid.
He may be pretentious beyond his experience in
public life ; but if he knows his case, if he marshals
his facts and shows resourcefulness in argument
and repartee, he is mentally registered among the
" coming men," and it rests with himself to estab
lish, as time goes on, his claim to be transferred
to the assorted list of " arrivals " when the ship
is docked for repairs, or when the exigencies of the
case require that she shall be manned by a fresh
crew. By a further process of elimination, often slow
and disappointing, deck hands become officers of
different grades, and then some one more for
tunate, but usually more capable, than his fellow
154

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
officers, mounts the bridge amid the cheers of all
on board. Three such navigators were on duty
with me while I tossed to and fro for eleven years
on H.M.S.S. Ottawa, under Captains Mackenzie
and Macdonald. They were Bowell, Tupper and
Laurier. (Being only deck hands at the time, their
subsequent titles are reserved.)
Between the death of Sir John Macdonald in
1891 and the autumn of 1896 the Premiership of
Canada was changed flve times, in the following
order: Sir John Abbott, Sir John Thompson, Sir
Mackenzie Bowell, Sir Charles Tupper and Sir
Wilfrid Laurier. With the flrst two I had no
acquaintance, and therefore they are not included
in this sketch. With the other three I was inti
mately acquainted, and had ample opportunity of
watching their progress from the ranks to the
highest political post in His Majesty's Government
in Canada.
How did these men appear to me as I rubbed
shoulders with them during the eleven years of
my sojourn at Ottawa? Sir Mackenzie Bowell
entered the House of Commons at the flrst general
election after Confederation. He is of English
origin, of excellent constitution, and with all the
dogged determination of the Saxon race. He
began life on coming to Canada when a boy as a
printer's devil, and in the course of time graduated
into a journalist of good repute and considerable
local influence. When I entered Parliament in
1873 Mr. Bowell was comfortably seated on the
Government side of the House and evidently
enjoyed the full confldence of his leader. Sir John
Macdonald. On the acceptance of office by Alex-
155

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
ander Mackenzie he at once assumed a very aggres
sive attitude towards the Government, and no
member on his side of the House was more per
sistent in his attacks. His flrst speech during my
time was on the North-West Eebellion and the
public scandal of allowing Eiel, the leader in that
rebellion, to sit in Parliament. No doubt he was
right in his contention, but it was felt that he was
largely influenced in the course he pursued by his
connection with the Orange Order and his desire
to revenge the death of Thomas Scott, an Orange
man, at the hands of Louis Eiel.
Mr. Bowell was a most industrious member of
the House and of all committees on which he was
appointed to serve. He never spoke without a full
knowledge of his subject, and appeared to delight
in directing his attacks upon the Government in
such a way as invariably to call for a reply. His
manner was quizzical and nagging. He seldom
sweetened his language with compliments and,
although not offensive, there was something in the
tone of his voice which aroused resentment even
when his words did not betray any bitterness.
This quality of the voice is one of the psychological
peculiarities of many public speakers. We have
the dry voice, such as that of Mackenzie, without
resonance, metallic like a javelin ; we have the con
versational voice, like that of Sir John Macdonald,
limited in its scope but trickling on and on, with
its quips and occasional sharp sallies, but on the
whole soft and agreeable; we have the full volume
of Tupper's voice, with something of the roar of
the tempest; we have Cartwright's voice, on a
higher register even when not loud, with a classical
156

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
precision of articulation and a reserve power
quite unmistakable ; we have Paterson's, a full dia
pason, powerful as Niagara and yet never harsh
or grating ; and we had the voice of M. C. Cameron
of Huron and of James McMullen of Wellington,
which went to the very ganglia of your nerve
centres like the touch of a live wire, never to be
forgotten. No member could put in words the irri
tating qualities which these two speakers could put
in their voice — an application of cantharides to
the tenderest cuticle would be balm compared to
their blistering effect. Mr. Bowell's voice was not
soothing nor was his manner calculated to draw
out the better feelings of an opponent; nor did he
seem to care — he intended to draw blood, and gen
erally succeeded.
Mr. Bowell was decidedly frank and open in
debate. He appeared to have nothing to conceal,
never laid a trap for an opponent, but openly
pushed him to the wall if he could. He would
never accept a half statement in reply, but insisted
upon explanation in full, even to the smallest
detail. Tenacity rather than force was the lead
ing characteristic of his style, but it was a tenacity
that never failed in its purpose. I never heard
him on a public platform, and have no idea of his
power over a mixed audience. I assume, however,
that his frankness and directness would carry him
through with reasonable success, although he was
lacking in that freedom of speech and elasticity
of thought which are necessary to stir an audience
to any great expression of enthusiasm. As an
administrator I saw something of him for the five
years I remained in Parliament after his party
157

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
came into power, and it is here that his character
so strongly contrasted with that of his colleague,
Mr. Tupper. The irritating voice was softened, the
belligerent manner was lost in the obliging, con
ciliatory Minister. He was in the Government to
serve the House, and the member of Parliament
who regards a Minister of the Crown as a dignitary
to be approached with bated breath was received
with the same condescension as the member who
believes that " all men are born free and equal."
Sir Mackenzie Bowell was called to the Premier
ship on December 21st, 1894, and remained in office
till April 27th, 1896. His career was cut short by
a variety of causes, for some of which at least he
could not be held responsible. For several years
before he assumed the Premiership the Conserva
tive party was losing its hold on the electors. In
1878 Sir John Macdonald carried the country by
a majority of sixty-eight, and in 1882, when the
National Policy was still a powerful party cry, he
carried the country by sixty-seven. It must be
remembered, however, that 1882 was the year of
the great gerrymander which gave him probably
from fifteen to twenty seats which otherwise he
would not have obtained. In 1887 the Conserva
tive majority was reduced to forty-one, and in 1891
to thirty-one. These figures plainly show that,
notwithstanding Sir John's personal popularity
and his great prestige as a leader, the Conserva
tive party had passed its meridian and was actu
ally in the shadow of its final eclipse. Sir John
Abbott, whose term of office was very brief, did
nothing to arrest its decline. It is very doubtful
if his successor, Sir John Thompson, had he lived
158

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
to face an election would have saved the party from
defeat, although he was a much stronger man. He
was embarrassed by a multitude of political scan
dals which reflected upon the honour of some of
his ministers and greatly shocked the morale of his
own party. He also became involved in religious
controversies arising out of the Jesuits Estates
Bill and the Manitoba School Act, which alienated
not a few of his party followers. And so when Sir
Mackenzie Bowell assumed office he became the
legatee of an accumulation of troubles which might
well baffle the strongest and most sagacious leader.
Besides he was the victim of what he called " a nest
of traitors " within his own Cabinet, which greatly
hampered his efforts and helped to bring about his
flnal overthrow. And as if all this were not
enough, he undertook the vain and hopeless task
of restoring to Manitoba the Separate School Sys
tem which the Provincial Legislature had abol
ished in 1890. In submitting a measure for this
purpose to Parliament I believe Mr. Bowell was
actuated by the conviction that where a Province
had interfered with the rights and privileges of
Separate Schools it was the duty of the Dominion
Parliament, as authorized by the B. N. A. Act, to
provide remedial legislation. He seemed to over
look the fact, however, that the legislation which
he proposed directly interfered with the constitu
tional rights of the Province of Manitoba in regard
to Education. Moreover, as Separate Schools were
considered a peculiar privilege enjoyed by Eoman
Catholics and not by the people of any other creed,
the Eemedial Bill aroused religious prejudices
which were daily making breaches in the ranks of
159

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
his party. Under these circumstances Sir Mac
kenzie Bowell accepted the inevitable and resigned
the Premiership.
Looking over the situation as it existed during
his short term of office, I do not think it would
be fair to accuse him of incapacity or want of
strength as a party leader. It was no fault of his
that through long continuance in office the party
had begun to disintegrate. Time is a great
destroyer of parties as well as of all things mortal.
By a peculiar process it devitalizes party organiza
tion and weakens party enthusiasm. Sometimes the
strong men who ushered a Government into exist
ence and secured for it public confldence retire from
choice or necessity, leaving vacant places to be fllled
by men of inferior strength ; and thus the initiative
which characterized their advent to office fails in
meeting new emergencies. It may be, also, that a
party nurtures a false confidence in its prolonged
tenure of office, believing that any adverse agita
tion will yield to its authority and official influ
ence. Public opinion is still an abstraction, as it
was when I first encountered it forty years ago.
Sir Charles Tupper succeeded to the Premier
ship on May 1st, 1896, on the resignation of Sir
Mackenzie Bowell. He was in a certain sense an
emergency Premier, although by that I do not
mean to question his qualifications. He was
selected as a big policeman would be to enter an
unruly household and restore peace in the family.
As a private member of Parliament as well as
a Minister of the Crown, Sir Charles Tupper
impressed me as the most fearless combatant that
ever sat in the Parliament of Canada. He was
160

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
the " Cceur de Lion " of the House. Whether the
House was engaged in a full dress debate or in
a scrimmage in committee he was always ready to
enter the field and fight his way through. No
doubt it was this quality that earned for him the
title of " The Cumberland Warhorse " — ^Cumber
land in Nova Scotia being the name of his constitu
ency. He never wanted for language. His vocabu
lary was copious but not varied, and was more
torrential than judicial. It was more forceful
than elegant in literary form. It was said, while
engaged in a forensic duel with Joseph Howe on
a warm night, that he spoke with great volubility
and at the same time consumed an enormous quan
tity of water. Howe's first remark on rising to
reply was " that in all his experience he never
before saw a windmill driven by water." But
voluble as Tupper was he was by no means a wind
mill. His knowledge of public questions was
extensive. He had an excellent memory and could
marshal arguments and facts with the greatest
facility. He was always serious ; I never knew him
to perpetrate a joke, not even to interpolate a hum
orous remark. He was equally impervious to the
sallies of an opponent. He took his remarks seri
ously, and no amount of by-play or levity in the
House would Ughten the intense fervour of his
speech. He always spoke from a full chest and
with a splendid volume of voice and wrestled with
his subject as a strong man would wrestle in the
amphitheatre with an antagonist. To dominate
was the uppermost note, the evident purpose of his
speech. He never played with an opponent; he
fought boldly and often fiercely and appeared to
12 161

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
have no scruples as to the extent of the damage
inflicted. His manner was not, however, offen
sive. He never treated an opponent contemptu
ously nor belittled his standing, nor stung him
with " flouts and gibes." To be master of the field
was his only object, and for that his strong right
arm — and every blow from the shoulder — served
his purpose. But with all his dogmatism and
strength his political " assaults at arms " seldom
or ever degenerated into personal animosity.
When the fight was over he would as readily
shake hands with an antagonist when the last blow
was struck as when the battle began. I never
crossed swords with him except in a by-election
in the county of Cardwell in 1876. I was asked
to address a few meetings in the interests of the
Liberal candidate, Mr. Boulton, who contested the
constituency against Dalton McCarthy. Tupper
met me two nights in the riding, and with his usual
force repelled my attacks upon the Conservative
party, and left me wondering if I really had any
definite opinions on public questions or was even
remotely qualified to be a party politician.
During the whole term of the Mackenzie admin
istration Tupper was one of its most destructive
assailants. He directed his attacks mainly against
the Departments of Finance and Public Works,
and many were his encounters with the Minister
of Finance and the Premier during the five years
he occupied the Opposition side of the House.
On the return of the Conservatives to power in
1878 Tupper was appointed Minister of Public
Works, and at different times held the Portfolios
of Eailways and Canals and Finance. As a Min-
162

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
ister Tupper carried to the Treasury benches the
same forceful and resolute spirit which he main
tained in opposition. It usually happens that offi
cial responsibility softens the manner of a Minis
ter towards the Opposition benches. This was not
true of Tupper. To him opposition was as objec
tionable on one side of the House as on the other,
and he laboured as hard to demolish the humblest
member who opposed him as he did when himself
in opposition to demolish the strongest member of
the Cabinet.
In 1884 he was appointed High Commissioner
for Canada in London, but owing to party exigen
cies he retumed to Canada for a short time and
entered the Govemment as Minister of Finance.
He resumed his former position in London in 1888,
which he held until 1896, when he again entered
Parliament, no doubt with the understanding that
Sir Mackenzie Bowell would retire from office —
thus clearing the way for him to the Premiership.
Owing to his force of character and long experi
ence it was confidently expected that he would save
the party from impending doom. But it was all
in vain. The die was cast long before he assumed
office, and notwithstanding the tremendous energy
with which he conducted the campaign his newly-
formed Government was defeated after a brief
existence of seventy-three days. For the next four
years he led the Opposition, but failing to carry
the country in 1900 he retired from public life,
and so arose and fell the second candidate for
Premiership with whose names I began this sketch.
Though Sir Charles Tupper faUed to command
the confidence of the electors of the Dominion he
163

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
was nevertheless a conspicuous figure in the Par
liament of Canada for nearly forty years and was
credited in the inner circle of his party with devis
ing the basis for constructing the C. P. E. under
which it was finally completed. Members of his
own party have admitted to me that the chief
honour of this great enterprise belongs to Sir
Charles Tupper rather than to Sir John Macdon
ald. Faults he had, no doubt, like other men, but
no one will deny him the credit of being one of the
earliest promoters of Confederation. It was
largely through him that Nova Scotia was per
suaded to enter the union in the first place, and
afterwards when, under the leadership of Joseph
Howe, the Province made repeated efforts to with
draw, Sir Charles Tupper's determination and
force of character were instrumental in prevent
ing the anti-unionists from accomplishing their
purpose. The third Premier in the germ to come within
my sketch is Sir Wilfrid Laurier. He entered the
House of Commons in 1874 with the reputation of
being one of the most advanced Liberals from his
Province. Quebec for nearly thirty-nine years was
under the masterful leadership of Sir George E.
Cartier, and at the time of my retirement from
the House of Commons the Liberal contingent was
-weak numerically, and with two or three excep
tions without any particular influence in the coun
cils of the party. Public opinion had been running
against it for some years. In the election of
1878 it was reduced from thirty-three to twenty,
and in 1882 to seventeen — the lowest represen
tation of the Liberal party since Confederation.
164

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
The Dorions were gone ; Geoffrion was disabled by
iUness; Holton and Huntingdon, who represented
English Liberal sentiment, were dead; and the
leadership of what remained of a strong and effi
cient element of the House of Commons devolved
upon Wilfrid Laurier, aided by such men as
Bechard, Einfret, and Casgrain. Up to 1883 Mr.
Laurier was seldom heard from more than two or
three times during a session, but his speeches were
always to the purpose and attracted the atten
tion of the House and the galleries. His manner
was graceful as well as sincere, his language (I
only understood him in English) well chosen. He
never wearied the House nor prolonged discus
sion when the subject of debate was practically
exhausted. He possessed a personality peculiarly
attractive, which seemed to flx; attention in Par
liament as well as on the platform. His voice was
gentle as that of a cloistered student, and in debate
he never posed as Sir Oracle even when expressing
his strongest convictions on the subject; under dis
cussion. In the early eighties, when I parted from
him, he might be described as a tall and handsome
man, with a somewhat delicate frame unsuited to
the strain of political life and without any special
qualiflcations for leadership in Parliament or out
of it. How the Laurier of the early eighties devel
oped into the Laurier of the last two decades is
one of the transformations for which I can offer
no explanation. The retiring young lawyer had
become a bold and aggressive leader of a great
party, the delicate frame a marvel of endurance.
The gentle voice, though still gentle in its diplo
matic tones, had the ring of a marshal when the
165

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
battle is on. The courtesy which bowed to reason
and argument repelled with scorn the sophistries
of an opponent, and the features so mild in repose
hardened into an expression of flrmness and force
under the momentum of debate. Eloquent beyond
his compeers, wary and tactful as Eichelieu, inspir
ing as Gladstone, he ranks amongst the greatest
of his party leaders under responsible government.
The small contingent of seventeen from his own
Province which followed him when I left Ottawa
grew to twenty-nine in 1887, then to thirty-flve in
1891, then to forty-nine in 1896, then to flfty-flve
in 1901, and in 1908 stood at flfty-three out of a
total representation of sixty-five to which Quebec
was entitled. His total following in 1887, when he
assumed the leadership, was eighty-seven; in 1908
it numbered one hundred and thirty-four.
On the platform Sir Wilfrid has the grace, the
pose and the charm of a man of great natural
endowments, accentuated by culture and experi
ence. His speeches are never weighted with the
ponderous arguments of the dialectician; not that
he does not argue a question, but his arguments
are presented in such simple language as to make
that appear self-evident which in a different form
of speech would appear laboured. He has a happy
choice of phrases, which freshen up what otherwise
might be commonplace, and his French accent and
quaint humour and piquancy idealize his treat
ment even of the greatest problems of government.
He never drives his audience before him by the
intensity of his manner or the force of his logic.
He rather leads them as a mesmerist would lead
166

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
the subjects of his art, or as a shepherd would his
flock along the pathway he desired them to take.
Such are some of the characteristics of the third
candidate for the Premiership who leaned upon
his spear while I was shaping arrows in the Lib
eral camp. Laurier's pilgrimage from his place
in the House in 1874 to his place in 1896 was more
than a Sabbath day's journey. For the flrst four
years on the Government benches he was no doubt
radiant with hope. Then came the dark days of
1878, and for the next eighteen years, like the
coureur de hois of the old French period, he
tramped through the forest, forded rivers, paddled
up rapids and camped with his fellow voyageurs
under the twinkling stars in the hope that the
dawn of day in a summer yet to come would bring
him to the happy hunting ground which was his
quest. In this long journey Mr. Laurier took his
full share of the toil and burden of weary marches
and midnight watches around the burning embers
of his lonely camp.
On the retirement of Mr. Blake from the leader
ship in 1887 Mr. Laurier was, with the fullest con
fldence of the party, appointed his successor. And
now the " back bencher " of 1874 is coming to his
own. But not so easily. Let us look over the fleld
to be conquered. He is a French- Canadian and
a Eoman Catholic. To English-speaking Pro
vinces, I am sorry to say, that was no recommenda
tion. Eacial and religious prejudices, even in this
age of toleration, whispered, " Can the new leader
be trusted?" Will his racial and religious pre
dilections overcome his sense of justice? Will
he bow in the temple of Eimmon when he should
167

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
serve the state? True, his public course so far was
one of manly deference and respect towards all
races and creeds. Now he was to be the exponent of
Liberal principles where mere deference was not
sufficient. He must declare himself by acts as well
as words. The test was severe, but Mr. Laurier
was equal to it. Amid the turmoil of debate in
Parliament, as well as under the scrutiny of thou
sands of his fellow citizens, he struck the same
lofty note of equality of privilege for all classes of
His Majesty's subjects before the law. He was of
French origin and proud of his race. He was
British born and gloried in the liberty and protec
tion which his fellow Canadians enjoyed. The
more frequently he was heard the stronger he grew
in the confldence of the people. Prejudices of
race and creed were eclipsed by the frankness and
sincerity with which the young seer from the valley
of the St. Lawrence delivered his message. For
nine years he faced the phalanx on the Government
benches, exposing their weaknesses and denounc
ing in terms not easily misunderstood their inca
pacity and dishonesty. How could they conceal
their neglect of duty when he was in the watch
tower? And so as one leader after another laid
down the weary burden of his high office, it was
evident that the end was drawing nigh. Where
Bowell failed Tupper could not succeed. Long
before either of them had reached the Premiership
public confldence in their party had been with
drawn, and so when the shock of battle came in
1896 the results showed that the new leader had
done his work well. It was a personal as well as
168

HOW AND WHEEE LEADEES AEE MADE
a party victory. The back bencher of 1874 now
occupies the Premier's chair. Salute te.
" We build the ladders by which we rise
From the lowliest earth to the vaulted skies.
And we mount to the summit round by round."
Under its new leader the Liberal party has held,
without any loss of strength or prestige, the reins
of government since 1896. It lost many able men
in these years, but happily was able to replace
them with others of unmistakable ability. The
new Premier maintained without any fluctuation
the unshaken confldence of his followers, and many
acts of constructive statesmanship stand to his
credit. Among the most conspicuous are the Brit
ish Preference, Eeadjustment of the Tariff, the
Transcontinental Eailway, and the addition of two
new Provinces to the Dominion. With such a
record, vindicated four times by the people at the
polls, what greater honour could be desired? Just
one draught more from the Golden Chalice —
Eeciprocity with the United States. This phan
tom, which so allured his predecessors, suddenly
appeared. It is no longer nebulous. It is flesh
and blood. It invites him to banish his fears, for
does it not bear In its hand an olive branch? Then
why not listen to its message? He listened. Oh,
the pity of it !
Early in 1911 the Government of Canada entered
into an agreement with the Government of the
United States for a reciprocal remission of duties,
principally on natural products between the two
countries. This agreement was strongly opposed
169

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
by the Conservative party. The Laurier Govern
ment was so embarrassed by the prolonged debate
which followed and the withholding of supplies
that on July 29th, 1911, the House was dissolved.
At the general election which took place on the
21st September following, the Government was
defeated, and on the 6th October E. L. Borden
(now the Eight Honourable) was called upon to
form a new Government.

170

CHAPTEE XIII.
MY LAST SESSION AT OTTAWA.
The election of 1882 is over and Sir John still
reigns. Too bad ! We thought we had sealed his
fate by our speeches in the House and in the coun
try. What had the National Policy done to com
mand the confldence of the people? The farmer
had to toil late and early as before, the manufac
turer had still to face the competition of the United
States, and the workingman had to work his ten
hours per day to flnd bread for his family. Surely
the National Policy could not have helped in the
elections. Then the Paciflc Eailway was dragging
its slow length along and not likely to be completed
in many years, while the national debt was being
piled up with alarming rapidity — surely the rail
way did not help the Govemment through. And
then the gerrymander, that most infamous attempt
to throttle the electors — surely there was no one
so base as to support the Government on its
account. And the flght of the Opposition, its
exposures of extravagance and bad management
and corruption — surely all that must have counted
for something. Evidently not for much. Public
opinion in 1882 was the same abstraction as it was
in 1871, when it turned a deaf ear to my flrst poli
tical speech, and was still incapable of being
coaxed, placated or bullied, at least by anything the
Opposition could do. Sir John held 131 seats in the
171

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
last Parliament, and now, in spite of hot shot and
flerce assaults by day and night, in spite of Blake's
heavy artillery and Cartwright's cavalry charges
and Mills' philosophical disquisitions, -and all that
the Lauriers and the Charltons and the Patersons
and the Bosses could do or say. Sir John, like a
cherub, was still smiling from the flrst place on the
treasury benches with 133 seats to his credit. He
carried fifty-four seats in Ontario out of a total of
ninety- two, forty-eight seats in Quebec out of a total
of sixty-flve, flfteen in Nova Scotia out of a total
of twenty-one, ten in New Brunswick out of a total
of sixteen, four in Prince Edward Island out of a
total of six and two in Manitoba out of a total of
five, and every seat in British Columbia, or a major
ity in every Province of the Dominion except Mani
toba. What leader would not smile and even hold
his sides lest his delight would be too conspicuous
under such circumstances? We were beaten again
by the National Policy and its incantations.
And now for the fourth term I was ordered by
Her Majesty's writ to appear in Our city of Ottawa
on the 9th of February " to treat, act, do and con
clude," as before, and I reported accordingly, was
" sworn in," was told by the same bowing Gentle
man Usher of the Black Eod to go to the Senate
for further orders, cantered back to my place and
looked on while George A. Kirkpatrick (afterwards
Sir George and Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario)
was escorted to the chair as the Speaker-elect for
a new House of Commons.
As a survivor of the gerrymander it was my
privilege to take stock in the list of survivors gen
erally. What did I find? The Government benches
172

MY LAST SESSION AT OTTAWA
are occupied as before the elections, with Sir John
as jaunty as of old. Behind him a few deskholders,
and more of them than in the previous Parliament.
There is no accession of talent or of Cabinet timber
from Ontario. Mr. George E. Foster appears for
the first time as an Eastern representative. On
the Liberal side the old guard are still to the fore.
They escaped the legislative guillotine and now
ask for no favours from the Jacobins on the
treasury benches. Three new men from Ontario
are noteworthy — Wm. Mulock, J. F. Lister and
James Sutherland; they will be heard from later.
There was no feeling of despondency in the Liberal
ranks. We fought against odds and wepe beaten —
that was all.
The session of 1883 was not very exciting. The
only question of wide significance was a Bill to
take the control of the liquor traffic away from
the Provincial Legislatures and place it under the
Dominion Government. Sir John Macdonald
seemed to think that in Ontario, particularly, the.
Mowat Government owed its strength largely to
the support of the licensed victuallers. In a speech
delivered in Yorkville shortly before the election
of 1882 he declared that he " would teach that little
tyrant Mowat a few lessons in constitutional law
which it was well for him to know, and that he
would pass an Act to take over the licensing of the
sale of intoxicating liquors, as he had a right to
do under a recent decision of the Privy Council."
The Bill of 1883 was the product of this threat.
Our remonstrances that it was unconstitutional
had no effect. The Bill was passed by the
"mechanical majority" of the House, as Cart-
173

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Wright was in the habit of saying. But it was a
false move, and Sir John had to undergo the
humiliation of its being declared ultra vires by the
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The
Opposition kept up the usual criticism of legisla
tion and of the estimates and fully vindicated its
right to the respectful attention of the Government
and the country.
In looking back over the eleven years spent at
Ottawa, supplemented by twenty-four years spent
in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, there are
a few features of Parliamentary life with which
I have been impressed, and prominent above all
others is the tendency to mental dissipation.
Nowhere is the temptation greater to kill time.
The routine of the House soon becomes uninterest
ing. After listening to a few speakers on any
question one feels there is Uttle more to be said.
Why should you not in self-defence, if for no other
reason, go to your room or take a stroll through
the lobbies with some fellow member and avoid
the ennui of a tedious debate — -or, what may be
preferable, go into the open air and recuperate
your flagging energies? Then there is the freedom
of Number Nine, where you can smoke your pipe
or cigar and enjoy the good-fellowship of others
who like yourself have been overcome with the
tedious reiteration of arguments neither new nor
forcible. Or you have some correspondence to
attend to, or an interview from a friend with a
grievance, or business with some Minister in his
private room, or something to look up in the Ub
rary. And so to keep your place in the House for
a long sitting becomes irksome. Nothing but a full
174

MY LAST SESSION AT OTTAWA
dress debate by the leaders commands your atten
tion ; all the rest is " vanity and vexation of spirit."
As a consequence days and weeks are spent to very
little purpose; you have added nothing materially
to your knowledge of public questions, you have
marked time, that is all. Now, to a young man, a
few sessions spent in this way is fatal to his career.
His brain becomes atrophied for the want of sys
tematic exercise. His knowledge of the business
of the session is fragmentary, and it may require
no little ingenuity to conceal his ignorance from
the more intelligent electors of his constituency.
I have known many members of Parliament who
drifted through a whole term with a very imper
fect knowledge of the business transacted, except
in the case of a strenuous controversy between the
opposite sides of the House.
On the other hand, when a member determines
to equip himself for his proper share of service
there is nothing insuperable to his doing so. He
watches the routine from day to day to get famiUar
with the rules of the House ; he reads carefully the
authorities on points of order — on the proper
course to take in directing a Bill through the
House, the limits of Parliamentary courtesy, the
privileges of members in Committee — and when
he speaks he has no fear of being told by the Chair
that his speech is irrelevant either as to matter or
time. Parnell was once asked how he came to know
so well the rules of the British House of Commons.
His answer was, " By breaking them." A much
more comfortable way to the average member of
keeping the rules is by knowing them.
17.5

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Then the young member should read carefully
the Departmental Eeports and all official papers
laid on the table of the House. Disraeli's advice to
a young member was to live, for the first three
years at least, on blue books and biscuits. There
are many members of Parliament, I fear, who
never open a blue book unless it concerns some
matter which they propose to bring before the
House. This is a mistake. Unnecessarily volum
inous as many of them are, and useless for public
purposes as much of the information they contain
may be, they show the transactions of the Govern
ment from year to year, and this knowledge may
be required at any time. This is particularly true
of all statistical reports, whether of trade or
commerce or finance or railways.
Then when a Bill is introduced to amend a
Statute, or to initiate some new mode of deaUng
with any matter of public interest, the new mem
ber should at once inform himself as to the effect
of the change by comparing existing statutes with
the amendments proposed. He should not even
wait for the exposition of the Bill by its sponsor.
The best time to criticize the principle of a Bill
is on its second reading, and the only members cap
able of doing this effectively are those who antici
pate the reasons that may be given for its intro
duction. In the same way, when any great question
of public policy is foreshadowed, as it always is
for many days before it is opened for debate, the
young member should at once inform himself with
regard to it. Was it ever discussed in a pubUc
assembly before? If so, let him read what has
been said upon it. Has it been the subject of a
176

MY LAST SESSION AT OTTAWA
magazine article, or the more exhaustive produc
tion of some author of repute? Consult him at
once; be prepared for the debate. Many points
will be raised requiring verification or further
research. To the library, and learn for yourself
— why should you take opinions at second-hand?
It would help greatly in the career of the young
Parliamentarian if he specialized his field of inves
tigation and criticism. John Stuart Mill said the
truly educated man was the one who knew some
thing of everything and everything of something.
A good specialist in medicine is usually fairly good
all round professionally. But there are always
some subjects which appeal to the taste and judg
ment of the average member of Parliament more
than others. To such subjects let his attention be
given particularly, so that in the course of time
he may become an authority upon them among his
fellow members. PlimsoU made the deck loading
of ships a special study, and ultimately impressed
his views on the House as no other member less
familiar with the subject could have done. Par
nell and Home Eule became almost interchange
able terms, and so did the words Cobden and Free
Trade. Lord Shaftesbury made a special study of
the tragedy of child labour, and rescued England
from the disgrace of centuries. Wilberforce did
the same with slavery and Gladstone with the
injustice of the Irish Church as established by
law. Cartwright long before he became a Minister
was an authority on banking and finance, MiUs
one on constitutional law, Charlton on trade and
commerce, and Holton on rules of order. It is
easy to have at least as many specialists as there
13 177

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
are Ministers; and to know one Department thor
oughly is more profitable than to merely dip into
the business of every Department.
The new member may raise an issue at any time
by a substantive resolution containing some pro
position, not yet ripe for legislation, on wliich he
may desire to arouse public interest. Here he has
the opportunity of presenting his views in all the
fullness and freshness of original study. It was in
this way that the Confederation of the British
Provinces of North America was inaugurated, and
also the National Policy, and Preferential Trade
with Great Britain, and the extension of our privi
leges with respect to commercial treaties. Merely
academic propositions are unprofitable and lead to
no results. A substantive resolution should point
to legislation, to a remedy for some wrong or to
the adoption of a certain Une of action that would
redound to the public benefit.
The young member should make himself familiar
with the constitutional history of the mother coun
try. The British North America Act is based upon
the principles of the British Constitution, and a
rule interpreting the one interprets the other, save
and except where varied by the federal principle
of government. The political history of Great
Britain is the greatest storehouse of practical poli
tics in the world, and her great statesmen are the
best models for the young man who wishes to write
his name large on the scroll of Canadian history.
To be as highminded as Peel, as resolute as Palmer
ston, as conciliatory as Salisbury, as progressive
as Gladstone, or as self-sacrificing as Chamberlain,
is to rank among the master builders of free Par-
178

MY LAST SESSION AT OTTAWA
liamentary government. To know British states
manship as represented by its services to the
Empire notwithstanding occasional lapses, to be
instructed by its manliness, its courage, its
patience, its prescience, its patriotism, is to know
the secret springs of British sovereignty and the
forces which are still shaping the destiny of the
Empire. To be a student is the only safety of the young
member. Time is the greatest asset of the Parlia
mentarian. By the proper use of his time he may
become the best informed member of the House, he
may shape legislation, he may direct public opinion,
he may break down opposition, he may become a
leader in some great movement for the public weal,
he may win a marshal's baton. This may mean
self-denial; so does the accumulation of wealth, so
does professional success, so does a majority at the
polls. " An ounce of brains with a pound of
energy," said Professor Matthews, "will accom
plish more than a pound of brains with an ounce
of energy." Application is energy disciplined and
regulated by judgment and discretion.
Then how many members of Parliament lose
caste with their constituents because of mental tor
pidity. Their weakness at their first election was
tolerated because of inexperience. In their next
election it was excused as still capable of remedy,
but beyond that it is almost certain to prove their
ruin. Even when a member is not endowed with
great gifts of speech, it is easily seen whether he
has used his opportunities for increasing his use
fulness. To be unable either to defend or expound
the policy of his party is to proclaim his own
179

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
unworthiness for a renewal of confidence, and he
falls by the way as a weakling unfitted for further
service. The " glad hand " has its charm, the gen
erous benefactor has his friends; but the man of
knowledge, of initiative, of strength in exposition
and debate, commands an influence which even his
opponents are bound to recognize; and in spite of
all the weaknesses of human nature such a man,
unless disqualified in other respects, will hold a
constituency long after the " glad hand " has lost
its grip.

180

CHAPTEE XIV.
THE ONTARIO LEGISLATURE.
Translated from Ottawa to Toronto by the
grace of the election courts and the Liberals of
West Middlesex! What a freak of fortune, and
it came about in this way. My election for the
House in 1882 was protested, and I was summoned
by Her Majesty's writ to appear before the
Honourable Mr. Justice Armour, Chief Justice of
Ontario, to answer for sundry corrupt practices
alleged to have been committed by myself and
agents during the election, contrary to law and
the statutes in that behalf. What could be more
annoying! I had fought the severest battle of
my life. A gerrymandered constituency, and
the influence of a hostile Government, had to be
overcome. It took me days and weeks to accom
plish the task, and now I was to be dragged into
court to answer for every irregularity that might
have occurred with or without my knowledge dur
ing the campaign. But such were Her Majesty's
orders, and I had no choice — I appeared. The
Judge looked stern as was his wont. The court
room was full of eager listeners — I was to be
unseated and my political career brought to an
abrupt close. Did not one J. M. Harper of the vil
lage of Wardsville corruptly pay one Joseph Sewell,
a blacksmith, the sum of one dollar and flfty cents
for the time spent by the said Sewell in going to
181

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
the polls to vote for the respondent? To all of this
the said Harper swore on the Holy Bible as being
"the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
truth." The court declared that the said Harper
had broken the law, and as he was acting on my
behalf, though without my knowledge or consent,
my seat was declared vacant, and I was no longer
a member of Parliament. How true what Cowper
says: "An earthquake may be made to spare the
man that's strangled by a hair." I could stand a
gerrymander and the shock of battle, but I could
not stand Harper's consideration for the needs of
a village blacksmith. By the avenging angel, under
a similar process of law, the seat for the Legisla
tive Assembly was also opened. Sir Oliver Mowat
asked me to be his Minister of Education and take
the vacant local seat. Not having any other I took
it, by a regular tour de force, and that is how I
became a Minister of the Legislative Assembly of
the Province of Ontario.
The Parliament of Ontario was as strange to me
as that of Ottawa on my flrst introduction in 1873.
My duties as Minister of Education were so
engrossing that I gave little thought to my legisla
tive duties ; they would keep till the Assembly was
called. I had not long to wait. Parliament was
called to meet on the 23rd day of January, about
a month after my election. Obeying Her Majesty's
summons as a loyal subject " to meet at Our city
of Toronto," this time, " to treat, do, act and con
clude upon those things which in our Legislature
of the Province of Ontario may by the favour of
God be ordained," I presented myself along with
the other duly elected members to be sworn in and
182

THE ONTARIO LEGISLATUEE
await the opening of the Assembly. Although well
acquainted with Toronto and its public institu
tions, this was the first time I had ever looked upon
the Parliament Buildings, and certainly they were
not much to look at. They appeared to be a ramb
ling, irregular pile of red brick, without any archi
tectural beauty, purpose or design, except to
enclose so much space within their walls. But as
I was about to extend my mental criticisms I
bethought myself, "These buildings should not be
judged by the standards of to-day. They were
begun fifty-five years ago (1829), when Toronto
was a mere village, and the population of Ontario
probably did not exceed 250,000 souls." Their
estimated cost was $40,000, slightly exceeded by
changes in the plans, but certainly a very moderate
sum according to present-day standards. Besides,
this was the third building erected by the Parlia
ment of Upper Canada for legislative purposes.
The first, erected under Governor Simcoe on Par
liament Street, was burned down during the War
of 1812 by the Americans, and the mace and a
British ensign carried away as trophies. The
second building, on the corner of King and
Berkeley Streets, was burned down accidentally
in 1824, and then with its limited resources a third
effort was made by the Province to accommodate
its Legislature. I must not therefore be too exact
ing in the matter of architecture.
. But as there is still half an hour to spare before
His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor is to appear,
let me look within. The Legislative Chamber is
fast filling up ; new members, like myself, are look
ing for their seaits; a few ladies are seated in the
183

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTEE
front row (where else should they sit?) waiting
for the arrival of His Honour. There is no display
of millinery or jewels such as I have witnessed at
Ottawa, as the opening ceremonies are too simple
and unostentatious to attract the fashionable world
of Toronto.
I sat at the desk assigned me, to the right of
the Speaker's chair, and thought myself on historic
ground. The Legislative Chamber, I observed, is
no more attractive in its fittings and decorations
than the building is architecturally. The throne
has no crimson hangings or gilded ornaments, like
the throne at Ottawa. The gallery is small and
dingy-looking, the ceiling low and the walls dis
coloured. Simplicity and economy have joined
hands in resisting the meretricious and extrava
gant. Upper Canada sixty years ago loved the
simple life.
But these walls, so plain and sympathetic-look
ing, I thought, could a tale unfold of great interest
if they became articulate. On that throne sat Sir
Francis Bond Head, who saw the Eebellion of 1837
at close range ; Lorcl Durham, whose classic report
on the discontent in Canada paved the way for
the union of the two Provinces in 1841 — a forecast
of the great federation of 1867; Lord Elgin, whom
neither mobs nor threats of personal violence could
intimidate in the discharge of his public duties;
and Sir Edmund Head, who, if not directly a party
to the " Double Shuffle " of 1858, refrained from
using his prerogative in preventing it. What the
thoughts of these distinguished occupants of that
throne were as they looked upon the representatives
of Upper Canada, many of them clad in homespun,
184

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
assembled to " treat, act, do and conclude " for the
good govemment of the Province, it is hard to say.
Some of them have left a record on the Journals of
the House which recalls the strife of debate or the
higher purposes of legislation. There were the
Boultons and the Sherwoods and the MacNabs and
the Eobinsons, representing the arrogance and the
exclusiveness of the " Family Compact." There
were the Baldwins and the Eolphs and the Bidwells
and the Perrys, and lastly the most eruptive and
aggressive of his race — William Lyon Mackenzie.
As in a reverie I heard Mackenzie denounce the
Family Compact as the enemy of responsible gov
ernment, the mainstay of corruption and the
shameless patron of nepotism. I saw his enemies,
stung by his invective but unable to answer him,
rise one after another and denounce him as a
traitor to his country and a disgrace to the Assem
bly, and I heard the roll called as it was proposed
to expel him from the House; vain wrath — it was
Athanasius contra mundum. He was the herald
of constitutional liberty, with the fiery cross in his
hand, denouncing prescription and privilege and
the insolence of office. And as in the case of other
heralds of freedom, he had to bear the scorn of his
enemies and suffer persecution while the chariot-
wheels of freedom were being delayed.
" Does the road wind up hill all the way?
Yes, to the very end.
Will the day's journey take the whole long day?
Prom morn to night, my friend."
Again in my reverie I saw these seats being filled
with a new race of legislators. Men with a wider
185

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
outlook have come upon the scene, for it is the
Parliament of Canada that is meeting, and not of
Upper Canada as before. The representatives of
two races are now within these walls. George E.
Cartier and A. A. Dorion, Hector Langevin and
other descendants of seigneur and cavalier and
peasant from La Belle France, are jostling the
Celts and Saxons of Upper Canada as they are
looking for their appointed places. There looms
up the tall form of George Brown, the champion
of the rights of Upper Canada, with the much
beloved A. A. Dorion at his side. John A. Mac
donald, not yet starred and spurred, and George E.
Cartier, are in the centre of a group of admiring
friends. A. T. Gait and Sandfield Macdonald are
exchanging courtesies; Eymal is whispering his
latest joke into the ear of Langevin ; D'Arcy McGee
is hobnobbing with Archibald McKellar. It is a
notable occasion, Greek meeting Greek, a gather
ing of gladiators ready to prove their love for Can
ada by slaying each other. I can hear these dingy
walls echo with cheers as steel strikes steel and
strong men fall in the fray.
But the booming of the cannon as the Lieuten
ant-Governor enters with his military staff breaks
my reverie; the past shrinks back into history; the
seats of the mighty have new occupants.
His Honour speaks, and everyone is attention.
" Honourable Gentlemen of the Legislative Assem
bly," he says — ^no Senate here — " It gives me great
pleasure to welcome you to your legislative duties
as members of a new ParUament convened for the
first time since the general election of the past
year " ; and so on through many paragraphs.
186

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
My duties as a member of the Government, omit
ting for the present the administration of the
Education Department, were varied and often
arduous. The short Parliamentary term of four
years and the frequent recurrence of by-elections,
forced me to the platform far too often for my com
fort, and although the questions discussed had not
the wide sweep of those claiming the attention of
the House of Commons, they nevertheless afforded
ample scope for the exercise of all the qualities of
platform efficiency which anyone could desire. In
the early eighties the Ontario Legislature raised
issues fundamental to the success of Confederation.
If the British North America Act was to serve the
purpose intended by the " Fathers of Confedera
tion," the Provinces that surrendered a large meas
ure of their powers in accepting the Act must
not be deprived of any part of their statutory
autonomy. In championing the cause of Provin
cial Eights the Legislature of Ontario was not only
defending its own rights as against the Dominion,
but was also settling the constitutional limita
tions of the British North America Act for all
time to come. And fortunate indeed it was that
the Legislature had as its Attorney-General a man
possessed of the keen intellect and sound knowledge
of constitutional law of Sir Oliver Mowat. Sir
John Macdonald's quarrels with Ontario over the
question of Provincial Rights alienated many Con
servatives, particularly in elections to the Assem
bly, where their votes did not affect his Govern
ment; while Sir Oliver Mowat's success in the
courts of Canada, and particularly before the Privy
Council, raised him greatly in the estimation of the
187

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
whole people of Ontario. Were it not for these con
flicts with the Dominion Government I doubt if Sir
Oliver would have survived the general election
of 1883.
The next movement against the Government was
racial, religious and educational. It was said that
too much indulgence was shown towards the use
of the French language, particularly in the French
schools of Eastern Ontario, and that the young
generation of French-Canadians who desired to
acquire a proper knowledge of the English lan
guage was greatly disadvantaged thereby. The
ground was even taken that the French language
should not be used in school for any purpose of
instruction whatsoever. In conjunction with this
complaint it was said that Separate Schools were
favoured to the great detriment of popular educa
tion. Not only were they inefficient, but the time
of the pupils was mainly occupied in receiving
religious instruction, which developed religious
bigotry and a religious and racial cleavage injuri
ous to the best interests of the country. This
charge against the Government supplied most
interesting material for platform discussion. The
Government stood for liberty, equality and fair
play, for a generous treatment of races and creeds,
and followed the policy of British statesmen in
dealing with similar problems in every part of the
Empire. In the nineties, the conflict was with the Patrons
of Industry, a farmers' organization, widespread
and intense in its views on class legislation. So
strong was its influence that in 1890 it sent seven
teen members to the Assembly. Since many of
188

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
these were Liberals as well as Patrons, they sup
ported the Government except on questions con
cerning their own organization.
Besides these distinct lines of attack upon the
Government there were many minor issues requir
ing discussion and explanation, such as textbooks,
school examinations, the status of the Provincial
University and high schools, municipal legislation,
the cost of public institutions, grants for local
improvements, railway subsidies, appointment of
public officers, election laws, the extension of the
franchise, and so on. Confronted as the Govern
ment was by an active and capable Opposition,
there was no truce in political agitation or party
warfare. Indeed, from my experience, I found it
more difficult to keep informed on all the details
likely to arise in Provincial than in Dominion poli
tics. The reason is obvious. Provincial questions
are largely domestic and local. They relate to
educational, municipal or legal matters that affect
the daily life of the electors. The expenditure of a
few hundred dollars on a bridge, the grant of a few
extra dollars to the public schools, or the change
in a textbook is almost a personal matter and quite
within the judgment of the most ordinary elector;
whereas questions of tariff, transcontinental rail
ways, foreign commerce, steamship subsidies and
canals affect the elector only remotely, and he is
disposed to follow — perhaps in wonder if not in
admiration — the party having the courage to
grapple with them. The comparatively narrow
groove in which legislation moves in a Provincial
Legislature and the limited area which it affects
necessarily restricts the larger outlook which per-
189

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
tains to Dominion politics. To be parochial in
your attention to the wants of the electors, and
national in your conception of the ultimate benefit
you are conferring upon the whole country, is a
difficult task — few persons are both near-sighted
and far-sighted. For that reason I always held
that the members of Provincial Assemblies should
identify themselves actively with Dominion legis
lation, not necessarily for party purposes or even
on party lines, but for its educational value to
themselves. Sir Oliver Mowat, who directed the policy of
the Ontario Government from 1872 to 1896, was
a happy combination physically, mentally and
morally of the qualities which make for leadership.
Though not quite of medium size, he was never
theless of more than average bulk and had conse
quently great strength and endurance. He pos
sessed unique powers of appUcation, and in his
office or in the House never seemed exhausted or
fatigued. He rarely left his seat during the long
est sittings, and I have on several occasions walked
home with him as the street lights were being
extinguished, without hearing him even complain
of being tired. His splendid health enabled him
to do a full day's work long after he was three score
and ten.
Morally Sir Oliver certainly bore " the white
flower of a blameless life." He had no youthful
escapades to live down, no shady business transac
tions t(j) explain or conceal ; and no Canadian public
man more fully deserved the title of " Christian
statesman." His high character was one of the
great assets of his party, as no one, not even those
190

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
who differed from him, except in the frenzy of a
campaign, ever charged him with dishonesty or
political corruption.
As a leader he was patient with both friends and
foes. If time was wanted for a full discussion of
any measure, he was always ready to make his per
sonal convenience a secondary matter. In debate
he was argumentative and incisive. Mild though
he might appear in repose, he was a Mameluke
when roused, and struck his opponent with the full
purpose and intent of disabling and disarming him.
He was quick in repartee and was seldom checked
by an interpolation. He was, however, courteous
even to his severest critics, and only when it was
apparent that the criticism was purely vindictive
did he take his critics by the throat. In consider
ing a Bill of which he had charge, he encouraged
the fullest examination and listened with patience
to the remarks of the most obscure member of the
Assembly. On the platform he was not uniformly
successful — I have heard him when his audience
hung upon his lips and applauded him enthusi
astically; and I have heard him speak with such
hesitation and want of fire that all appeared
pleased when he had finished. His voice was not
adapted for public speaking; it had no vibrant
tones, no reserved power, no glow of passion ; it was
evidently trained in the courtroom, and was much
more effective before a small than before a large
audience. As a leader he was exceedingly tactful,
never allowing his rival to take him on the fiank.
He had an instinctive knowledge of what the man
with an honest purpose would think of him, and
he rested his case on his judgment, believing it
191

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
would prevail with others less honestly disposed.
His sagacity in judging how far he could advance
on any question without alarming the public mind
was remarkable. Naturally conservative, when the
psychological moment arrived, howeyer, he would
cast his idols to the moles and bats and lead a pro
cession of the most advanced radicals with all the
enthusiasm of a new convert. Political science
with him was not a set of rigid aphorisms or crys
tallized theories; it was rather a force to be used
for this purpose or that when some object was to
be accomplished, or a sort of storage battery whose
latent forces were to be expressed in legislation
when required in the public interest. Sir Oliver's
attitude towards the public was always concilia
tory. No matter how insignificant the appeal of a
deputation, it was never met with a rebuff. The
soothing effect of his promise to take a request
" into his most serious consideration " became
proverbial. Sir Oliver Mowat had, when I took office under
him, several colleagues of unquestioned ability.
His 'fidus Achates, T. B. Pardee, possessed fully
all the shrewdness of his leader. He was not a
frequent speaker, but he always watched the game,
and no one was better able to take advantage of a
false move than he was. He had a great faculty
for conciliating opponents and retaining the
unbounded confldence of his friends. He usually
kept his own counsel, but nobody could mistake
the master touches of his skilful generalship in
many of the actions of the Government.
Mr. C. F. Fraser was among the early accessions
to Sir Oliver's Cabinet. He was the titular repre-
192

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
sentative of the Eoman Catholic minority, and no
representative could have maintained the position
with greater fairness or impartiality. While always
ready to ask for his co-religionists what he believed
they were entitled to, I never knew him to press
for special privileges at variance with sound public
policy. He laboured to make Separate Schools
efficient, not on religious but on educational
grounds, assuming that the Church would not
neglect the religious factor, providing the state
discharged its full duty educationally. He had no
sympathy with that form of bigotry which would
ostracize any creed that was tolerated by law, and
never claimed more for his own people than he was
willing to concede to all the rest of the com
munity. He was without question in his best days
the most powerful debater in the House. His logic
was irresistible, and his irony corrosive as acid.
The expression of his countenance when flaying
an opponent was as withering as his words. He
feared nobody, salaamed to nobody, but went his
way strong in his own convictions of what was
right and wilUng to defend them at the hazard of
his political life. He was capable of much higher
service than his position demanded, and it was
evidence of his greatness of character that he was
willing to serve wherever duty called him.
Hon. A. iS. Hardy was a man of unique charac
ter. Among all my acquaintances in public life
I have never met his double. He had little method
or continuity of argument in debate, and yet no
man was more destructive and few more dreaded.
He was a master of irony and ridicule, and had a
full and well-chosen vocabulary which flowed, now
14 193

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
in a rush of stinging invective, then in short
staccato sentences, which pricked and punctured
and prodded an opponent till he doubted his own
identity. No man could more easily provoke the
ranks of Tuscany either to cheer or to howl. He
delighted in the whirlwind and could command it
at pleasure. He was a very capable administrator
and legislator; though not over-sensitive to public
opinion he was progressive, and true to all the tra
ditions of the Liberal party. He was somewhat
timid in council but was by no means wanting in
sagacity and foresight.
Sir William Meredith, the leader of the Opposi
tion, was a protagonist worthy of his party. He
too had great power of application, and, like Mr.
Blake, he applied himself to the improvement of
the general current of legislation. His criticism
of a Bill was illuminating, even when not con
curred in, and although anxious to make legiti
mate capital out of the defects of a Government
measure, he appeared to be more anxious to make
the measure distinctly useful than politically pro
fltable. Though a Conservative, he was more radical
than the leader of the Government. His objection
was seldom that a Bill went too far; had he his
way, it would go much further. In debate he
was forceful but somewhat turbulent. He never
attained a good Parliamentary style, and always
appeared to be speaking to his followers rather
than to the whole Assembly. His sanguine tem
perament was not conducive to a judicial style of
debate, and his temperament was master. On the
public platform, which lends itself to animation
even when occasionally superheated, he was always
194

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
acceptable. He had the advantage of a fine pres
ence and physique, and had he only been more delib
erate he would have been much more effective. His
greatest defect, however, was want of skill in the
game of politics. More than once he allowed him
self to be placed in a false attitude towards the
public opinion of the Province. This was notably
the case on the Boundary Award and on French
and Separate Schools. In the former case he was
no doubt infiuenced by his loyalty to Sir John Mac
donald, and in the latter by the clamours of the
Protestant Protective Association. He had the
respect of the Government benches for his ability,
and of his own followers for the personal sacrifices
which for many years he made to serve them. He
had a loyal following who co-operated ably with
him both inside and outside the Assembly.
The Ontario Legislature is a good school for a
preliminary course in politics, but it lacks the
stimulus of the larger sphere at Ottawa. In my
early days it was under the spell of Sandfield
Macdonald's economic fatalism. To propose an
increase of the estimates or an advance in the
salary of a clerk in the Civil Service was a high
crime and misdemeanor. Sandfield's surplus was
a sacred legacy, and must not be reduced, no mat
ter what interests starved or stagnated. If a
motion were made for reducing an appropriation,
members seemed to shiver at the calling of tbe
" yeas " and " nays." It is true the income of the
Province was fixed, and deficits were not desirable,
but to make economy a scarecrow when a more lib
eral expenditure would yield an hundred-fold was
tantalizing. So much for the power of a tradition.
195

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Then the Legislature, perhaps unconsciously,
was inexcusably conservative. It nearly always
made two bites of a cherry. To extend the fran
chise, except in the most begrudging manner, or
to erect a public building until driven to it by the
direst necessity, would mean a prolonged discus
sion or a vote of want of confidence. It is true
progress was made, perhaps all the more substan
tial because gradual, but life is short and measured
by decades — it is better to tempt the fates and
" breast the blows of circumstance " than sit in the
shadow of progress when another step would admit
you into the sunlight. The aloe that is said to
blossom only once in a hundred years may produce
beautiful fiowers, but I prefer the annuals of less
rarity but of more frequent efflorescence.
Notwithstanding this chronic conservatism, the
members of the Ontario Legislature were men
above the average of their class in ability. As a
rule they were conspicuous in their respective con
stituencies as members of County Councils, as
agriculturists or as professional men of good
standing who had acquired wealth and social posi
tion. Although not powerful debaters, or familiar
with the procedure of Parliament, they were in
the main men of excellent judgment and capable
of expressing their views intelligently on every
question that came before the House. The Ontario
Legislature was not given to debating public meas
ures to the same extent as the House of Commons.
It was rather a deliberative body, not easily moved
by party appeals and not easily diverted from its
legislative duties. It followed its leaders with
little of the partisan loyalty which usually divides
19'6

THE ONTAEIO LEGISLATUEE
political bodies, and, while not mistrusting them,
it left the impression that leadership consisted in
legislation for the public good, and administrative
efficiency, rather than in following party plat
forms. I have been associated with six Parlia
ments, and during that time had the opportunity
of ascertaining the viewpoint of perhaps over
three hundred members, and except as to the objec
tion already stated, were I making a choice myself,
I am confident I could not select in the Province
men to whom its interests might be more safely
committed than to those with whom I associated
from 1883 to 1905.
Another feature of the Ontario Legislative
Assembly not to be overlooked was the high aver
age (omitting the writer) of the members of the
Government that directed its administration from
Confederation down to 1905. (By this time limit
I do not wish to be understood as reflecting upon
the present administration.) Space will not per
mit of any reference to the great mass of legisla
tion which passed through the hands of the dif
ferent members of the Ontario Government during
that time, nor to the many evidences left of their
efficiency in the administration of the different
Departments which they directed. To follow the
career of those who served as Ministers in the
Ontario Government since Confederation, and who
by virtue of that service to a large extent were
called to discharge important duties in other
spheres of influence and responsibility, affords
some evidence of their character. To wit: Two
became Lieutenant-Governors of the Province — 'Sir
Oliver Mowat and Sir John Gibson. One became
197

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
Premier of Canada — Alexander Mackenzie. Five
served as members of the Dominion Cabinet — ^Mac
kenzie, Blake, Carling, Mowat and Graham. One
was appointed Chief Justice of Manitoba — E. B.
Wood. Three others were appointed to the High
Court of Ontario — Sir Matthew Crooks Cameron,
F. L. Latchford and J. T. Garrow. Nine held at
one time a seat in the House of Commons — Sand
fleld Macdonald, Mackenzie, Blake, Young, Wood,
Stratton, Harty, Graham and Eoss. Four were
appointed to the Senate — Mowat, Carling, Scott
and Eoss. Seven were appointed to public posi
tions of trust. Five were honoured by His Majesty
with a special mark of distinction for public ser
vice. Of the remainder four withdrew from
public life and proved successful in their various
vocations. I cannot close this chapter without bearing testi
mony to the efficiency of the public service of the
Province during my connection with its adminis
tration. The Government was fortunate in being
able to avail itself bf professional men of great
ability for the heads of the various public institu
tions and such other services as required special
professional attainments. Both in the inside and
outside service it would appear to be the desire as
well as the ambition of every officer to retain the
confidence of the Government and discharge his
duties in such a manner as to satisfy the Legislative
Assembly and the public.

198

CHAPTEE XV.
MINISTER OF EDUCATION.
The week following my election — that is, in
December, 1883 — I was in my place in St. James
Square as Minister of Education. I knew the posi
tion was beset with many difficulties. I felt, how
ever, that my ten years' experience as a teacher
and sixteen as Inspector, nine of which I had also
acted as Inspector of Model Schools, would be
helpful. Was that experience sufficient, however,
I asked myself, to enable me to grapple success
fully with the many complicated questions which
naturally arise under such a comprehensive sys
tem of education as had grown up in Ontario?
When I was appointed Minister the Education
Department was in a state of transition. It had
been administered for about forty years by Doctor
Eyerson as Chief Superintendent of Education.
On the retirement of Doctor Eyerson it was con
sidered expedient to constitute the Education
Department a branch of the Executive Govern
ment, and so Doctor Eyerson's successor became a
Minister of the Crown under the title of Minister
of Education and with a seat in the Legislative
Assembly. This change made me responsible to
Parliament and to the electors of the Province in
a very different sense from a Chief Superintendent.
A Superintendent of Education had no political
affiliations. He was a public servant appointed to
199

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
discharge certain duties according to the best of
his judgment and was vindicated or condemned on
the merits of his administration. A Minister occu
pies a quasi-political position, and must expect his
administration to be subjected to the criticism of
the political arena. If a new textbook is author
ized, or a change made in the courses of study, or
a teacher's certificate suspended, or the school
grant withheld for a violation of the School Act,
or if a pupil or teacher failed to pass a depart
mental examination, some interested member of
Parliament is likely to make it a matter of com
plaint on the floor of Parliament and perhaps stir
up his constituents to avenge at the polls the wrong
done. Notwithstanding this apparent disadvan
tage, however, there is no doubt as to the pro
priety, on constitutional grounds, of investing the
head of a great department like that of Education
with ministerial responsibility. The large amount
of money at his disposal for educational purposes
and the power which he exercises on a matter of
such paramount importance as the education of
the youth of the Province for future citizenship,
are too great to be entrusted to any bureau, no
matter how intelligent or impartial.
The many subjects which engaged my attention
as Minister of Education I shall not attempt to
review. Most of them are briefly tabulated in the
Appendix. The position of the Provincial Univer
sity as the copestone of our educational system
was, however, so peculiar that a statement of the
difficulties which surrounded it might be worthy
of some account in detail. Although a university
for the higher education of the youth of Upper
200

MINISTER OF EDUCATION
Canada was foreshadowed by Sir John Colborne
as far back as 1829, it was not till 1844 that the
University of King's College (the original name
for what is now the University of Toronto) was
opened, practically on the foundation recommended
by Sir John Colborne. Though ably and efficiently
conducted according to the standards of the times,
it would appear that the country did not appreciate
the value of a University either intrinsically or as
a factor in the development of a general system of
popular education. It was said to be the rich
man's school. The ordinary citizen could not hope
to do more for his children than to give them a
public or grammar school education. If its endow
ments were insufficient, let those who were bene-
flted by it make up the difference. It is humiliat
ing to think that such a narrow view could be
taken of higher education at any time in Ontario,
but I found it prevailed to a disappointing extent
as late as the early years of my administration.
There was another difficulty quite as formidable
to be overcome before any progress could be made
in aiding the University through the public treas
ury. Colleges in the interest of different denom
inations were founded throughout the Province
with the power of granting degrees, but without
any endowments by the state. These colleges were
dependent upon the beneflcence of the denomina
tions they represented, and were nearly always in
a state of comparative destitution. For several
years they received a small grant from the Gov
ernment as a recognition of the value of the general
educational service they rendered. These grants
were withdrawn by Sandfield Macdonald's Govern-
301

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
ment and thus their eml^arrassment was stiU fur
ther increased. They regarded with some jealousy
the position of the University of Toronto, with its
magnificent quarters in the Queen's Park and its
generous endowments in which they were not per
mitted to share. They still claimed, although cut
off from all state aid, that they were contributing
to the general education of the Province entirely
outside their theological courses, and while they
ceased to hope for a renewal of state aid, they were
not prepared to consent that any additional aid
should be given to the favourite of the state. Mem
bers of the denominations on which they were
dependent who had seats in the Assembly natur
ally shared the views of the college authorities.
To aid the University, therefore, involved the
removal of this feeling of denominational antagon
ism. A direct grant to the University as matters
then stood was impossible. To bring the colleges
into such relationship with the University that aid
to one was practically aid to all was the problem
to be solved.
Acting on the advice of Sir William Mulock,
Vice-Chancellor of the University of Toronto, I
invited Dr. Nelles, Chancellor of Victoria Univer
sity, President MacVicar of McMaster Hall, and
Sir Daniel Wilson, President of Toronto Univer
sity, to meet me for conference as to the possibility
of some sort of union for the benefit of all con
cerned. The conference was subsequently enlarged
to include all the universities of Ontario.
The attitude of the conferees of the different
universities towards a federal union varied with
202

MINISTER OF EDUCATION
their traditions and financial needs. Queen's, Vic
toria and Trinity Universities felt that closer rela
tion with the Provincial University would weaken
their hold upon their respective denominations and
their religious influence over the young members
who looked forward to a professional career. More
over, they claimed that to surrender the power they
possessed of conferring degrees in Arts would be
a loss of prestige which would redound to the
advantage of the state university, for which the
Province should recoup them by a substantial
grant from the treasury.
The conference was also affected for some time
by the unsympathetic attitude of Sir Daniel Wil
son, President of Toronto University. Sir Daniel
Wilson feared that the increased representation
of the colleges on the Senate of the University, to
which they would be entitled, might injuriously
affect the non-sectarian character of university
education and destroy, or at least impair, its char
acter as a state university.
From the outset of the negotiations the Govern
ment refused to consider any form of federation
which would involve direct flnancial aid to denom
inational education, as the Legislative Assembly
was on record against all aid of this kind. If aid
were needed to perfect or extend . the courses of
study in the state university, the Government
would not hesitate to provide it. But under no
circumstances could it be expected, either directly
or indirectly, that aid would be granted for instruc
tion in the theological courses of denominational
colleges. 203

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
Dr. Nelles, with whom negotiations began, appar
ently came to the conclusion that federation was
impracticable, and so withdrew early from the
deliberations of the conference. His place was
taken by Dr. Burwash, who with great judgment
and patience applied himself specially to the
solution of the educational problems involved
in federation. The scheme he proposed for this
purpose, and which was practically accepted, was
to subdivide the Arts course into two sections,
retaining for all federating colleges certain sub
jects which would constitute a substantial part of
an Arts curriculum, and leaving the remaining
subjects to a staff of professors and instructors
under the control of the state, to be known as the
University of Toronto. The course of study
assigned to the University was to be open to all
the colleges free of charge and maintained by the
Province, while the denominational colleges would
maintain their portion of the Arts course at their
own expense. Under this method the denomina
tional colleges were under no restraint as to
instruction in theology, or any other subject con
sidered important in the religious education of
their students. At the same time the University
of Toronto preserved its non-sectarian character
and provided instruction in the sciences for all
federating colleges free of charge. This dual
arrangement enabled the federating colleges to
share in the endowment of the University, greatly
to their relief, while at the same time maintaining
their strictly denominational character. By sur
rendering their right of conferring degrees in Arts,
304

MINISTER OF EDUCATION
their graduates enjoyed all the prestige which per
tains to a university recognized by the state,
and whose educational standing was universally
acknowledged. Conspicuous among those who gave much time
and labour to the formation of public opinion for
the proposed scheme, in educational and denomina
tional circles, I should mention Dr. Burwash, Dr.
Dewart, Dr. Potts and Dr. Briggs of the Methodist
Church; Dr. Caven of Knox College. Dr. Grant,
of Queen's University, though approving of the
scheme theoretically, found such a strong public
opinion in the city of Kingston against removal to
Toronto, that he decided to maintain Queen's Uni
versity upon its old foundation. The representa
tives of McMaster Hall had expectations of a large
endowment from its founder, and this, together
with the conscientious scruples of the Baptist
denomination (from which it received its chief
support) against any alliance with the state, turned
the scale against federation. Trinity University
also, for flnancial and other reasons, held aloof for
a time. Although the outlook was not very encouraging,
the Government, to show its approval of the fed
eration scheme, submitted to the Legislative Assem
bly in 1885 a Bill embodying the decision of the
conference, leaving it with the denominational
colleges to accept or reject its terms. In 1887 the
Methodist Church, as the guardian of Victoria
University, was the first to accept the terms of the
Govemment Bill and to place itself in direct rela
tion with the University of Toronto. In 1904
305

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
Trinity University reconsidered its earlier decision
and also came under the terms of the Federation
Act. It is not my purpose to discuss the effects of the
Federation Act upon the University of Toronto or
upon the federating colleges. Anyone who has
observed the progress of higher education during
the last twenty years cannot fail to have noticed
its remarkable progress. When I took charge of
the Education Department in 1883 the teaching
staff of the University consisted of twenty-one
persons. Sir Daniel WUson, in addition to his
duties as President, was also Professor of Ancient
and Modem History, Professor of Rhetoric and
English Literature and Professor of Ethnology in
the School of Science; D. R. Keys was lecturer in
Professor Wilson's subjects and also lecturer in
Italian. The Classics, including Latin and Greek,
were under the sole charge of Professor Hutton,
with Mr. Vines as Tutor, aided by two Fellows.
Oriental Languages, including Hebrew, Chaldee,
Syriac and Arabic, were in charge of J. M. Hirsch-
felder as Lecturer, who single-handed dealt with
these abstruse languages. German and French
were in charge of W. H. Vandersmissen and John
Squair, with the rank of Lecturers. Logic, Meta
physics and Ethics were in charge of George Pax
ton Young, with the rank of Professor, assisted by
A. S. Johnston as Fellow. Mathematics and
Physics were in charge of Mr. James Loudon, now
ex-President, with the rank of Professor, Alfred
Baker as Tutor, W. J. Loudon as Demonstrator,
and two Fellows. In Mineralogy and Geology Pro-
206

MINISTER OF EDUCATION
fessor Chapman was sole instructor; in Zoology
and Botany, Professor Ramsay Wright and one
Fellow; in Chemistry, Professor Pike and one
Fellow. In 1903-4 the teaching staff had grown to 120,
the undergraduate^ in Arts increased from 320 to
1,209. In 1903-4 the students in attendance at
Toronto University and affiliated and federated
colleges numbered 4,825.

207

CHAPTER XVI.
PREMIER OF ONTARIO.
In 1896 Sir Oliver Mowat retired from the Pre
miership and entered the Liberal Government at
Ottawa, under Sir Wilfrid Laurier, as Minister of
Justice. He was succeeded by the Honourable A. S.
Hardy. In October, 1899, Mr. Hardy retired on
account of ill-health, and I was called by His
Honour the Lieutenant-Governor to take his place.
Although greatly honoured by the call, I felt my
tenure of office according to all political precedents
would not be long. The Liberal Party had already
nearly doubled the ordinary span of political life.
At the end of twenty-seven years symptoms of
declining vitality might be expected. In the elec
tion of 1898 we carried the Province by the narrow
majority of eleven. Judging by the results of the
elections in the House of Commons, in which Party
lines were strictly drawn, Ontario was evidently
becoming more Conservative. The urban popula
tion was increasing more rapidly than the rural
population, from which the Liberals derived their
chief support. And even in the rural districts the
agitation which gave the Patrons of Industry seven
teen seats in 1894 had not entirely subsided. Then
there were cross currents produced by the discus
sion respecting Separate Schools, by the advocates
of Prohibition, and by various other infiuences,
which, though not very violent, might at any time
208

PREMIER OF ONTARIO
become strong enough to overcome the narrow
majority in the House and country.
But dangerous as these cross currents were, other
subtle influences not so apparent were weakening
the party. There was the cumulative effect of dis
appointed expectations. There was the depressing
influence of irregularities disclosed in the election
courts. There was the insidious appeal that it was
time for a change. And, more dangerous still, there
was the feeling of perfect security in the possession
of power so long maintained without any necessity
for the usual activity to secure success.
As to the loyalty of the party in the main I had
no doubt. I had a Cabinet* of undoubted ability
and equally anxious with myself to maintain the
record of past achievement. But we knew the poli
tical mill could not be run by the water that had
already passed over the wheel, and so we asked
ourselves where we could flnd spheres of operation
which would satisfy the public that we had the
courage and the initiative to maintain the record
of our predecessors. In legislation there was little
to do except to advance with the growing demands
of each case. In education, municipal law, the
jurisdiction of the courts, public institutions, agri-
*My flrst Government was composed of Hon. J. M. Gibson,
Attorney-General; Hon. E. J. Davis, Commissioner of Crown
Lands; Hon. Richard Harcourt, Minister of Education; Hon.
John Dryden, Minister of Agriculture; Hon. J. R. Stratton,
Provincial Secretary; Hon. F. L. Latchford, Commissioner of
Public Works, and Hon. J. T. Garrow and Hon. William
Harty, without portfolio. In 1904 Gibson, Davis and Stratton
retired; their places were filled as follows: — Hon. F. L. Latch
ford, Attorney-General; Hon. A. G. McKay, Commissioner of
Crown Lands; Hon. G. P. Graham, Provincial Secretary; Hon.
W. A. Charlton, Commissioner of Public Works, and Hon. A. E.
Evanturel, without portfolio.
15 209

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
culture, there was a natural growth, arising out of
changing conditions of society and local interests,
which could be easily satisfied by ordinary prudence
and forethought. Vital as many of these matters
were, however, they did not appeal to the vivid con
ceptions of Government which attract the masses.
They were but the daily routine of the political
household, which, in the aggregate, though most
important to the comfort and well being of the
family, were not calculated to win either distinction
or applause. There was only one field for enter
prise, though not entirely new, which was likely
to command public attention and benefit the Pro
vince, that was the development of the district be
tween the Canadian Pacific Railway and Hudson
Bay, now known as " New Ontario." Accordingly,
in the first year of my administration, I directed
the Commissioner of Crown Lands to fit out a party
of sufficient strength to explore thoroughly the
lands lying between the boundary of Quebec on the
east, and Lake Nipigon on the west, with instruc
tions to report upon the soil, the timber, the geo
logical formation, waterways, etc. To carry out
this scheme, ten parties were organized, each party
consisting of a surveyor, a geologist, an expert on
soil and all necessary help for portaging and canoe
ing. The party, after several months' exploration,
reported, among other things, that they found a
" Clay Belt " extending from near New Liskeard to
Lake Nipigon, comprising an area of sixteen million
acres of good arable land, and also that the dis
trict contained an almost unlimited quantity of the
best spruce for the manufacture of pulp and paper.
210

PREMIER OF ONTARIO
With such a storehouse of wealth lying at the
door the duty of development was obvious, and so
the following year ( 1902 ) we carried a Bill through
the Legislature for the construction of a railway
from North Bay northwards, to facilitate the settle
ment of the Clay Belt and adjoining lands, and to
furnish an outlet for the timber and other forest
products which they contained. Work on the rail
way, known as the Temiskaming and Northern On
tario Railway, was begun at once, and nearly one
hundred miles completed before we retired from
office. Although the original intention in building
a railway was as above stated, upon the projection
of the Trancontinental across New Ontario from
east to west, it was decided to push the provincial
railway still further north to connect the railway
systems of Old Ontario with the Western Provinces,
thus converting what was simply intended as a
colonization railway into one of the great highways
for the commerce of Canada. I hope it may soon
become a highway to Hudson Bay.
As an incident of the construction of the T. & N.
O. Railway, enormous discoveries of gold and silver
have been made within or contiguous to the district
through which it passes. The silver mines at Cobalt
have already yielded over $60,000,000 of silver, and
the gold mines at Porcupine recently discovered are
very promising.
The next most important undertaking of the Gov
ernment was to endeavour to open a market for the
electric power which was being generated at Nia
gara Falls. When Lord Dufferin was Governor-
General of Canada he pressed upon the attention of
the Government the desirablity of establishing a
211

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
public park at the Falls which would be a source
of attraction to visitors and which, under proper
supervision, would relieve travellers of many of the
annoyances to which they were subjected by the
importunity and rapacity of those who served as
guides and carriers. To establish a park involved
the expropriation of a large amount of property
and the laying out and decoration of walks and
lawns. To meet this expenditure and make the
park self-sustaining the Government assigned the
right of using the waters of the Niagara River for
generating electrical power to three different com
panies at an annual rental based upon the amount
of power produced. Early in my term of office the
companies had completed their works, and were
ready to meet the demand for power and light. And
so in, 1903, we asked the Legislature to authorize
the municipalities interested in securing electricity
for industrial purposes, to form a Commission of
representatives of their own choice to take such
steps as they might deem expedient for the trans
mission of electricity from the Falls to any point
where required — the municipalities concerned to
be liable for all charges in so doing. The Commis
sion made its first report just before the Govern
ment retired from office. On the change of
Government a new Act was passed authorizing the
Government to substitute a Commission of its own
appointment in lieu of the Commission appointed
by the municipalities known as the Hydro-Electric
Commission. As a result of our pioneer work two
things have been accomplished: (1) the develop
ment of electric energy at the Falls on a gigantic
scale, under the Liberal Government, and (2) its
212

PEEMIEE OF ONTAEIO
transmission to the chief centres of industry within
the power zone, under the new Commission.
The next enterprise in which we were concerned
was the preservation of the industries established
by F. H. Clergue, at Sault Ste. Marie. Acting in
behalf of a number of capitalists in New York and
Philadelphia, Mr. Clergue undertook the develop
ment of the water powers on the St. Mary's Eiver,
at the foot of Lake Superior, for the purpose of
manufacturing pulp and paper. Finding that he
had developed more power than was necessary for
the pulp industry he conceived the idea of erecting
rolling mills for the manufacture of steel rails and
other products of steel. To supply his pulp mill
with raw material the Government made him a
large concession of forest land in the Algoma dis
trict, on the condition that he should build a railway
to open up the country contiguous to his concession
and also secure the settlement of the land within
a specified time. He was also allowed certain min
ing rights in the ore which might be discovered on
the land conceded as a basis for the iron and steel
works which he proposed to establish. In carrying
out this scheme, Mr. Clergue built thirty-five miles
of railway and graded about sixty more. When he
had expended about $25,000,000 on the erection of
the necessary buildings and plant for the projected
rolling mills, and had made substantial progress
in the development of the iron mines which he had
acquired on the east end of Lake Superior, the
capitalists in the United States on whom he de
pended for funds were overtaken by the financial
panic of 1903, and the whole project brought to the
verge of bankruptcy. To the Government such a
213

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
prospect was discouraging We expected the pulp
mills to pay a royalty on the pulp wood manufac
tured. We expected to see the hidden wealth in the
iron mines turned into a marketable product. We
expected the steel plant to employ many thousands
of skilled labourers and to supply a new market for
the products of Old Ontario. Moreover, we were
warned that the United Steel Trust would only be
too glad to get control of the enterprise, as it was
likely some day to become a dangerous rival in the
manufacture of steel rails for Canadian railways.
In view of all these circumstances the Govern
ment agreed to assume the obUgations of the Com
pany to the extent of $2,000,000, on the assurance
that the development originally proposed would be
carried out, and its liability in due time discharged.
Happily all these assurances were fully imple
mented even beyond the most sanguine expecta
tions. In recalling our anxiety in dealing with this
matter I realize now perhaps more fully than I did
at the time the risk we had taken and the precedent
we were establishing. But on the other hand, I
have the satisfaction of knowing that without loss
or injury to the credit of the Province we accom
plished our purpose and kept afloat a great enter
prise which has since invested many additional
millions in the development of Western Ontario.
Turning to the older settlements of the Province,
the Government was impressed with the urgency
of improving public highways, particularly those
leading to county market towns. To stimulate as
well as to assist counties in such improvements we
appointed a Good Eoads Commissioner and set
314

PEEMIEE OF ONTAEIO
apart a fund of $1,000,000 to be paid out to County
Councils in proportion to the amount raised by
assessment for the betterment of leading highways,
according to a standard flxed by the Government.
Although there was some hesitation at flrst in
accepting the offer, the necessity for better roads
was becoming yearly more apparent and the Gov
ernment proposal more acceptable. Already seven
teen counties have taken advantage of the Highway
Act, greatly to the comfort and profit of all con
cerned. In order to give variety of employment and pro
mote an industry that was found in other countries
exceedingly profltable to the agriculturist, we set
apart a fund of $225,000, afterwards increased by
$150,000 for the encouragement of the manufacture
of beetroot sugar. On account of the large amount
of capital required for the necessary plant, only two
factories have been established — one at Wallace-
burg and one at Berlin, both of which now yield
a handsome dividend to promoters and producers.
Needless to say that in projecting these schemes —
all new and largely experimental — we encountered
much opposition. This we expected. The best proof,
however, that they were well considered and oppor
tune is to be found in their success. Not one has
failed in fulfilling the purpose intended. While
feeling more than ordinary responsibility in ventur
ing out of the beaten path, we had confidence that
there was business enterprise enough in the country
to cope with all of them. The outline was all we
could give — the details were for the capitalist and
the investor. Neither has failed. Let me briefiy
recapitulate results: — 215

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
1. The exploration of New Ontario has greatly
encouraged settlement and the investment of capi
tal in the pulp and paper industries.
2. The Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Eail
way has led to the establishment of many prosper
ous towns and villages, and to the discovery of gold
and silver mines of incalculable value, and has
opened a new highway to the West.
3. The preservation of the Sault industries has
secured for Ontario one of the largest enterprises
of its kind on the continent.
4. The electrical energy developed at Niagara
Falls has become one of the chief sources of light
and power for nearly half the population of the
Province. 5. The improvement of highways has added to
the comfort of the agriculturist and to the value of
the products of his labour.
6. The beetroot sugar factories have yielded
a substantial dividend to promoter and producer.
While these are some of the larger measures pro
jected by the Government during my Premiership,
and for which I am far from claiming personally
the credit, I may add that in regard to general legis
lation I know of nothing to which attention was
called that we neglected. The five volumes of the
Statutes of Ontario, containing 221 public and 389
private Acts, show reasonable activity by every
member of the Government and in every Depart
ment of the public service. My only regret is that
within the limits of a chapter and the patience of
my readers, I cannot directly associate each of my
Ministers with his respective share of service and
legislation. The greater part of that legislation
316

PEEMIEE OF ONTAEIO
has been justified by experience — and very little
repealed as ineffective.
Among the most perplexing subjects which en
grossed the attention of the Government and its
supporters during my term of office was the total
prohibition of the liquor traffic. My personal views
on the subject were well known, and I was fully
aware that temperance advocates generally ex
pected much from me. The Government under
former Premiers had greatly improved the license
laws, one result of which was the reduction of the
number of hotels from over 6,000 to 3,000. It was
urged that the time was ripe for the total abolition
of the remaining licenses and for the closing of all
shops and clubs in which intoxicating Uquors were
sold. So far, the Liberal party had not adopted
prohibition as a plank of its party platform,
although it was well known that many strong Lib
erals favoured such a policy. I had no mandate
either from the party or the country to make it a
political issue, as it would be, if I introduced a
prohibitory liquor law for the sanction of Parlia
ment. However, I was quite ready to take all the
party and poUtical risks involved, provided I
obtained the sanction of my supporters in the
House. Accordingly a caucus was called to con
sider the question, not so much as a party question,
but to ascertain, if possible, whether public opinion
in the constituencies represented by Liberal mem
bers would sustain such a measure. The caucus was
very fully attended, and the question considered
without prejudice or hostility. All admitted its
importance and their respect for the various organ
izations engaged in its promotion. But out of the
317

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
fifty-two members present only fourteen had any
confidence that they would be supported by their
constituencies if prohibition were made a poUtical
issue. Such an expression of opinion from men who
believed in temperance and the reform of the license
laws as strongly as myself, could not be ignored.
And so instead of a Bill for prohibiting the sale of
intoxicating liquors by direct legislation, I intro
duced a Bill to submit the question to a referendum
with the proviso that if a majority of all the electors
on the voters' lists for the Province voted "yea,"
the total prohibition of the liquor traffic would take
effect in due time by Eoyal Proclamation. The
condition required was, I think, most reasonable,
as no Government could hope to enforce prohibition
without the support of at least a majority of the
voters of the Province. The vote polled under the
referendum was not sufficient, however, to bring the
Act into operation. My temperance friends were
disappointed, and the Government severely cen
sured for not attempting to pass a prohibitory
liquor law by a minority in the House, and at the
instance of an apparent minority of the electors of
the Province.
I have already stated that I entered on my Pre
miership in 1899 with a majority of eleven on a
straight party vote. In May, 1902, Parliament
expired by efflux of time, and at the general election
whifch followed the Liberal majority was further
reduced to four. This did not look as if my Admin
istration was very acceptable to the country. The
idea of resigning, weak though we were, would not
be entertained by party friends. Public opinion
was fickle and might soon turn in our favour. In
218

PEEMIEE OF ONTAEIO
the meantime, the King's Government must go on,
and no easy task it was to keep it going. The absence
of one or two members through illness or on urgent
business was embarrassing. On one occasion a
debate had to be continued to an early hour in the
morning till a member who had inadvertently left
without a pair was brought from his home one
hundred miles distant by special train. But all this
anxiety had its compensation in the loyalty and
unselfish devotion of my supporters. Never once
did that valiant band quail before the enemy or
threaten desertion, and never was party allegiance
purchased by any favour or demand of a question
able character. What was done in every emergency
was regarded as the best that could have been done
under the circumstances, and there were no regrets
as to party tactics or public policy.
For two years I grappled with my evil star. But
in 1904, with the uncertainty of pending by-elec
tions and the uncomfortable feeling that the Gov
emment did not represent a majority of the
electorate I decided to dissolve the House. The
25th of January following was the day fixed for
the election. When the polls closed there was no
doubt as to the result. The time for a change so
long predicted had come.
We had our day. For thirty-three years we stood
in the limelight of public criticism. Beginning with
1872, when the Federal Constitution was largely an
experiment, our work for many years was prin
cipally constructive. Ontario, for the first time in
its history, had a free hand. We were no longer
obliged to consult a partner with whom we could
not always agree, and whom we, perhaps unjustly,
219

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
regarded as a political encumbrance. We had to
meet the expectations of a young, virile and pro
gressive Province, that felt the pulsations of enter
prise and development in all its industries, and to
whom the future beckoned with a broadening smile.
Old foundations had to be removed for the deeper
and broader foundations of the new era on which
we had entered. The swaddling clothes of childhood
had to be cast aside, and the young giant fltted for
an arena of larger activity in which he was to
show his prowess. Transportation for the products
of the farm and the lumbermen had to be provided.
Asylums and hospitals and reformatories were
required for suffering or degenerate humanity. The
agriculturist called for scientiflc instruction in the
management of farm and dairy; the educationist
for the regeneration of our school system from the
log school-house to the university; the lawyer for
the removal of ancient forms which delayed justice
and confused the court; the social reformer for the
protection of the life and health of the toiler who
earned his bread amid the dust and roar of smoking
factories. These thirty long years of constructive
legislation demanded the utmost vigilance and fore
thought. What we achieved is an open book, and
he who runs may read. We had our full share of
honour and many tokens of public confldence. We
gave to the public years of service, most of which
was gratefully appreciated. We attempted no spec
tacular flights in flnancial legislation. We made no
pretence to personal superiority because we were the
chosen leaders of the people. We neither considered
ourselves indispensable as public servants nor more
competent than many whose names were on the
220

PREMIER OF ONTARIO
waiting-list. We had our day, and there was no
sadness of farewell when we stepped back into the
ranks of private citizenship. On the 5th of Feb
ruary, 1905, by appointment, we waited upon Sir
Mortimer Clark, Lieutenant-Governor, at Govern
ment House, and were received with the cordiality
which always characterized the attitude of His
Honour towards his Ministers. It was a brief call,
but long enough for the purpose.
THE ROUND TABLE IS DISSOLVED.

331

CHAPTEE XVII.
THE SENATE.
In 1907 I graduated into the Senate of Canada
to complete my political education. I had studied
statecraft for eleven years in the House of Com
mons, and had twenty-four years' laboratory prac
tice in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. If
long training was a qualiflcation for advancement
I had a right to promotion honoris causa. I cannot
say that it was a position to which I aspired.
From temperament as well as from association I
preferred the more public flelds of politics to what
I assumed was a modifled activity in comparative
retirement. In the Senate I would no longer be
an exponent of party politics on the platform or
from my seat in Parliament, for the Senate was
by its constitution non-partisan. The joy of battle
such as a debate across the floor of the House
afforded was to be exchanged for the deferential
criticism of a quasi- judicial forum. From an officer
fully mounted and Uving in camp with his troops,
I was merely to attend on review days and give
my opinion as to how the staff officers in the ser
vice did their duty, and offer advice, when called
upon, for improving their efficiency. Per contra,
there would be much less stress and strain in the
performance of this task than in the more strenu
ous duties of the camp, and I would still have a
voice, though a less sonorous one, in directing His
222

THE SENATE
Majesty's forces how to flght the battles of their
country. I accordingly tendered my resignation
as member for West Middlesex, as dual representa
tion had long since been abolished, and waited for
His Majesty's commission to be sworn in as an
honourable member of the Senate of Canada.
Parting with West Middlesex was a terrible
wrench. It was there, in comparative boyhood,
that I entered on my political career, and it was
there I had formed friendships personal and poli
tical that could never be forgotten. There was
scarcely an elector on the list on either side of poli
tics that I had not seen and conversed with. In
the flercest contests of these thirty-flve years,
though there may have been moments of tempor
ary estrangement in the heat of party warfare,
there were no personal animosities to distress the
memory. I had received the votes of three gen
erations, and had rocked the cradles of some of
my most active supporters. Then I was to part
with the veterans of 1872, the men who trusted
me as a young man, untried and inexperienced;
with the stalwarts of 1878, noble men whom the
National Policy could not seduce from their
allegiance; with the avenging scouts of 1882,
whose blood was stirred by the gerrymander spe
cially directed against me; and with the serried
battalions that stood by me during the twenty-four
years I held a seat in the Legislative Assembly.
What a tumult of associations rushed to my mind
— ^meetings protracted till the stars could scarcely
twinkle ; debates in halls and schoolhouses, by drip
ping candles and smoky lamps, sometimes closed
in darkness amid hootings and empty coats; long
223

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
drives over highways of primitive design, and
worse than Hannibal encountered in crossing the
Alps; turnpikes, corduroys, muskegs, terrible in
their variety and multiplicity. On the bright side
the hospitable homes; the generous welcome of
host and hostess; the abundance of those things
for which we reverently asked the Lord to " make
us truly thankful " ; the shelter for the night, and
the morning benediction as we parted, repeated for
thirty-flve years without fee or reward. How could
I sever these silken cords, into which were twined
the dearest memories of my life, without the most
painful feelings of regret?
" still o'er these scenes my memory wakes.
And fondly broods with miser care;
Time but the impression deeper makes.
As streams their channels deeper wear."
But the die is cast. Back to Ottawa, but not
this time through the main tower to the left. 1
am now privileged to tread the crimson-carpeted
vestibule which I had profaned with my shod feet
thirty-four years ago, and to enter the crimson
door through which I had looked like the Peri
gazing into Paradise, to be sworn in that I might
occupy by right and not by sufferance one of the
crimson-covered chairs on which I fastened my
ravished eyes, little dreaming then that my rail
way joumeys to Ottawa would be rounded up at a
senatorial terminal.
The Senate, the replica of the House of Lords,
with its throne, its Speaker, its robed officers, its
mace, its sergeant-at-arms, its gentleman usher of
the Black Rod, its pages and messengers, its eighty-
224

THE SENATE
seven members, its decorum, its calm! Am I the
victim of some phantasmagoria? Is it a case of
the transmigration of souls and bodies too? Am
I still the same person who listened to Lord Duf
ferin in 1873 as he doffed his cocked hat and
addressed " Honourable Gentlemen of the Senate,"
and then, dropping his voice, " Gentlemen of the
House of Commons," and told us " to treat, do, act
and conclude " for the good of the realm? I looked
at the label on my desk; yes, I am still the same
person, by name at least, and there must be others
of the tribe here as there were in the House of
Commons in 1873. But we are now only three —
then we were six — and one of the six had preceded
me. But are these Senators strangers? Let me
count over those I sat with in the Commons — one,
two, three, . . . nineteen, twenty, twenty-one,
myself twenty- two. What! So many transferred
to this delightful chamber by Eoyal commission
or by the grace of God! Surely wonders never
cease ; and my own transfer is as wonderful as any.
I am glad I am not, as I was on my entrance to
the Commons, entirely among strangers, although
in a strange land.
Well, who are they, anyway, and have they any
pedigree? How many with the blood of the proud
Percys in their veins? How many can claim that
their ancestors were ennobled by the great Tudor
kings or queens, or sat among the swollen courtiers
of Queen Anne or of the House of Hanover? How
many with the thistle or the cross of St. Patrick
on their escutcheon, or how many thronged the
palace of Versailles when Louis XIV flung coro
nets at the feet of admiring courtiers? Not one!
16 225

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
The members of the Senate have no aristocratic
pedigree. They were bred from pioneers whose
armorial bearings were a crest of a log cabin
and a pair of toilworn hands. No ancestral hall
echoed to their footsteps; no servants in livery
bowed sycophantishly before them; no gilded
coaches waited on their pleasure. They toiled
under God's clear sky by day and slept the sleep
of the just at night. With stout hearts they made
life one grand triumphal march through privation
and toil to its heroic close, and " many blessings
with them went to their little green tent, whose
curtains are never drawn aside."
Years have passed away. The log cabin has
become a tradition. The spirit of the pioneer
hovers in the air. Their sons have broken invidi
ous bars and have ennobled themselves in the ser
vice of the country. Who are those occupying
these crimson chairs? One has been Premier of
Canada, seven have been members of His Majesty's
Privy Council, thirty-seven have been members of
the House of Commons, two have been Premiers of
Provincial Governments, seventeen have been mem
bers of a Provincial Legislature and one a Judge
of the Superior Court. The others have been a
dynamic force in the commerce and the industries
of the land, or professional men of good repute. In
the face of such men, let purple blood be poured
into the sea. The Senate of Canada requires no
other pedigree ; it is its own college of heraldry.
" What would ennoble slaves or cowards?
Not all the blood of all the Howards."
But I must get the atmosphere of my new envir
onment, for the Senate has its own traditions.
226

THE SENATE
First, I flnd that the Speaker is almost a negligible
quantity except to direct routine. In the Com
mons it is the duty of the Speaker to call members
to order if they are transgressing the rules of
the House. In the Senate the Speaker had no such
authority when I entered it, although under the
new rules he is invested with the same authority
as the Speaker of the Commons. Again, Senators
never address the House through the Speaker ; they
speak directly to the honourable members of the
Senate, the Speaker of course included, but not as
Speaker. When a question is put from the chair.
Senators who are in favour of the motion are asked
to say " Content," and if opposed to say " Non-
content," instead of yea and nay. All this sounded
strange, but precedents must be followed.
Then I noticed when the Speaker left the chair
he bowed flrst to the right, then to the left, then
to the throne, and, preceded by Black Rod and
the mace, he made a dignified exit. What a
world of bows! And this, I learned, was also
according to precedent. I found, too, that Sena
tors were less formal and less rhetorical in debate
than members of the Commons. Every question
was treated as a practical business proposition.
Having no constituents to call them to account, it
was not necessary to adapt themselves to local con
ditions or to weigh their words so as not to give
offence to any faction whose hostility might
imperil their future career. While amenable to
public opinion, they were not its slaves or flunkeys,
and though they might err in judgment they could
not err in declaring the whole truth on any ques
tion as they understood it.
227

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
Then I brought to the Senate a few prejudices
which must be removed if its deliberations are to
be a source of pleasure. Does the Senate really
perform any useful public service, or is it a mere
recording office for the other chamber? On this
point my prejudices were quickly settled. I found,
both by its committees as well as by its frank and
practical debates, that many amendments were
made to Bills sent up from the Commons by which
their usefulness was enhanced and sometimes pub
lic injury avoided. The promoter of a Bill in the
House of Commons has often a purpose to serve
of a local or a political character, and this local
view of a measure often obscures its ultimate con
sequences. The Senate, I found, is less influenced,
if influenced at all, by local considerations, and
so becomes the guardian of all the interests con
cerned. In acting in this capacity it sometimes
incurs the odium of the specialists. But the whole
is greater than a part, and the broader the basis
of legislation the more valuable to the country.
Another prejudice was that the Senate treated
public questions in a perfunctory way, and took
no pains to inform itself fully as to their merits.
A few weeks' experience of its committees dispelled
that prejudice also. In a long experience on com
mittees on almost every conceivable public ques
tion, I never found anywhere a greater desire to
consider every aspect of any proposition under
consideration. No matter how influential its advo
cates, the other side was heard patiently, and final
action taken only after the fullest deliberation.
Its conclusions might be wrong, but its intentions
seldom or never. 238

THE SENATE
During the first two sessions of my experience
of the Senate, the Hon. R. Dandurand, of Montreal,
presided over its deliberations. Before he entered
the Senate he had established himself in the confi
dence of the people of his native Province, and as
a presiding officer was dignified and capable. In
the next two sessions the chair was filled by the
Hon. J. W. Kerr, whose political record goes back
to the days of George Brown and the political
unrest of that transition period. In shaping pub
lic opinion for the successful working of our Fed
eral Constitution he bore a prominent part, and
the Speakership of the Senate was an honour well
deserved. Of my fellow Senators it would be impossible to
speak at length. To say that they are men of
mature judgment who feel the responsibility of
their position would be a mere truism and without
any special significance. That they always divest
themselves absolutely of their political predilec
tions in dealing with public questions is not to be
expected, nor would it be reasonable to require
that they should do so. While their duties are
mainly judicial, they are responsible jointly with
the House of Commons for the good government of
the country, and that duty has necessarily its poli
tical aspects. Party government claims an equally
lofty purpose, and the Senate should not be sub
ject to censure if its views harmonized sometimes
with the majority or even with the minority in
the other Chamber. But to adopt or reject a
measure solely on party grounds would be to
degrade the functions of the Senate and to render
it all but useless as a Court of Appeal from a
229

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
forum where popular clamour or party exigencies
may precipitate action whose main purpose is to
give effect to legislation unwarranted by experi
ence or the best usages of constitutional govern
ment. The Senate for three years after I entered it was
under the Leadership of the Hon. R. W. Scott,
now Sir Richard W. Scott. Mr. Scott is the old
est Parliamentarian in public life in Canada. He
entered the old Parliament of Canada in 1857,
where he sat till 1863. In 1867 he was elected to
the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and in 1874
was called to the Senate. He has just completed
his jubilee as a legislator, and is still constant in
his attendance upon the Senate, although in his
eighty-ninth year. In the old Parliament of Can
ada he laboured for the selection, of Ottawa as
the capital of the united Provinces, and its ulti
mate selection by Her Majesty may have been due
to the means which he adopted to prove its fitness
for the purpose. In 1863 he succeeded in passing
through Parliament a Bill for establishing Roman
Catholic schools on a working basis. This Bill is
known as the " Separate Schools Act of 1863." It
furnished material for sectarian discussions in
many political contests for thirty years after
wards. For the first four years of his term in the
Ontario Legislature he supported the Sandfield
Macdonald Administration, and was appointed
Speaker at the first session of Sandfield's second
Parliament. On the defeat of the Sandfield Mac
donald Government he became Commissioner of
Crown Lands under Mr. Blake, and so continued
until called to the Senate in 1874 by the Mackenzie
230

THE SENATE
Government. In 1878 he carried through the
Senate a Bill known as the " Temperance Act,
1878," but better known as the " Scott Act," after
the name of its author. I was a member of the
House of Commons when this Bill was under con
sideration, and can testify to the sincerity and
earnestness with which he laboured to make it a
real instrument for the restriction of the liquor
traffic. On the defeat of the Mackenzie Govern
ment in 1878, Sir Richard Scott served as Leader
ot the Opposition till the return of the Liberal
party to power in 1896. Since 1896 the Leadership
of the Senate has been held as follows: Sir O.
Mowat, Hon. D. Mills, Sir Richard Scott, and Sir
Richard Cartwright. In 1911, owing to the change
of Government, the Hon. Mr. Lougheed became
Leader of the Senate and Sir Richard Cartwright
Leader of the Opposition.
The leadership of the Senate is beset with fewer
difficulties than that of the Commons. Usually
not more than one-fourth of the legislation of a
session originates in the Senate. When Bills come
up from the Commons, they require much less
labour to perfect them, even when revision is neces
sary, than to consider them as originally drafted.
And so the duties of a leader in this respect are
comparatively light. As to Bills originating in
the Senate, much greater labour is involved, and
Mr. Scott never failed to give them the most care
ful attention. He was always a fair and reason
able critic, and when a Bill passed through his
hands its passage by the Commons was compara
tively easy. Mr. Scott always received the criti
cisms of his fellow Senators with courtesy. Occa-
231

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
sionally, however, when pressed hard he would
reply to his critics with warmth, but in no case
with personal bitterness. His style of debate
was easy and conversational. Even his prepared
speeches indicated the business habits of his mind,
and not a moment was wasted in sentiment or per
siflage. When it is considered that he had to
examine probably over one hundred and fifty Bills,
many of them Government Bills of the first
importance, it is easily seen that his position was
no sinecure. In fact, he stood sponsor for the legis
lation of all his colleagues and had to meet the
criticisms of an active and capable Opposition at
every stage of the Bill.
Mr. Scott at no time in his career assumed the
rOle of an active platform speaker, and yet his
speeches were well arranged, full of information,
and presented with clearness and in well-chosen
language. He never appealed to sentiment or pas
sion. His own convictions were of the head, not of
the heart, and he considered that an appeal to the
candid judgment of his audience was more effec
tive than any appeal to their prejudices could be.
The leadership of the Senate Opposition is
equally free from difficulties as the leadership of
the Government. The Hon. James A. Lougheed
had been appointed by his party friends to that
position a few days before I entered the Senate.
Mr. Lougheed is a lawyer of much more than ordin
ary ability, and his knowledge of law enabled him
to criticize proposed legislation with effect. I have
never known him to assume a distinctly party atti
tude towards any measure of the Government. His
examination of public Bills was apparently more
233

THE SENATE
for the purpose of improving them than to make
political capital out of them. Only when review
ing the course of the Government on any question
of public policy or when discussing the Speech
from the Throne did he disclose his political pre
dilections. His criticisms in such cases were
pointed and even severe, though always fortified
by arguments or facts which from his standpoint
warranted his invective. At public functions he is
always interesting; he has a good vocabulary, a
racy and quiet humour, and the faculty of appro
priateness, which holds attention as well as wins
applause. If he gave himself up to the political
platform he would rank high among the speakers
of his party.
By reason of the constitutional limitations of the
Senate, some of the larger questions which fix the
character of political parties are practically beyond
its purview. It may criticize the financial manage
ment of the Government, but it cannot alter the
Supply Bill to the extent of a single dollar,
although it may reject the whole Bill. In the same
way it cannot amend the tariff proposed by the
Government, although it may discuss theories of
taxation ad libitum. The Senate of the United
States has greater latitude, both in regard to
appropriations and rates of taxation, and conse
quently its discussions attract greater notice and
its range of legislation is greatly widened. The
Canadian Senate has, however, spheres of useful
ness not yet cultivated to any great extent, which
if entered upon would increase its influence and
make it a more powerful factor in the body politic.
The conservation of our natural resources, the
333

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND APTER
improvement of the sanitary conditions of our
cities, the development of our fisheries, the exten
sion of our commerce with foreign countries, the
cultivation of better international relations, and
kindred subjects, are all within the purview of its
constitutional functions and are worthy of the
attention of all its members. To form public
opinion is just as useful as to direct it.
My appointment to the Senate brought me into
somewhat intimate relations with His Majesty's
representative in Canada — the Governor-General.
I had formed casually the acquaintance of every
Governor-General since Confederation, but more
particularly of the last three — Lord Minto, Earl
Aberdeen and Earl Grey. Canada has been highly
favoured in the distinguished statesmen that so far
have held the post of Governor-General. All of
them were men of experience in the service of the
Crown, and scrupulously just and impartial as con
stitutional Governors. On no occasion have they
come into conflict with pubUc opinion, or
attempted to usurp the authority of their respon
sible advisers. With the advent of Lord Elgin in
1847 Canada has enjoyed Responsible Government
and all that it implies without interruption as
fully as the mother country.
So long as Canada maintains her present rela
tions with the British Empire the Governor-Gen
eral must necessarily represent the opinion of the
Imperial Government in Colonial affairs. Wliile
I am democratic enough to accept a Governor-Gen
eral born and educated in a Canadian atmosphere,
it is quite apparent that the appointment of a
Citizen of a colony as the representative of His
234

THE SENATE
Majesty would weaken the supremacy of the
Imperial Government in Colonial aflairs. That
supremacy may be practically nominal, as in Can
ada, but whatever forpe it possesses is distinctly
Imperial, and would lack in significance and effect
if conveyed through a Colonial rather than an
Imperial medium.
As an Imperial officer or representative the Gov
ernor-General is responsible only to the Imperial
Government in the administration of his office. No
matter how obnoxious he may be to the colony over
which he presides, he is officially beyond its con
trol. Any remonstrance against his conduct is
subject to the judgment of the Colonial Office, and
from that judgment there is no appeal except to
the Parliament of Great Britain. If the Colonial
Office objects to the action of the Governor-Gen
eral, as it did in the case of Lord Durham, he is
recalled. If public opinion in the colony is adverse,
as it appeared to be for a time in the case of Lord
Elgin, when the ParUament Buildings in Montreal
were burned, the Governor-General has to rely
upon the Colonial Office for support and for a
vindication of his conduct.
But while the Governor-General is an Imperial
officer in the sense above indicated, his administra
tive powers are exercised through such advisers
as he has called to his assistance. He may reject
their advice at his pleasure, which is equivalent to
their dismissal, or he may suspend judgment until
he consults the Colonial Office. This was the course
taken by the Marquis of Lome when his advisers
recommended the dismissal of Letellier. In regard
235

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
to Bills that have passed both Houses of Parlia
ment the practice of reserving any of them for the
approval of the Colonial Office has been abandoned
— the Colonial Office, however, retaining its power
of disallowance.
Speaking of the office of Governor-General Lord
Elgin said : " Placed by his position above the strife
of parties, holding office by a tenure less precarious
than the Ministers who surrounded him, having no
interests to serve but those of the community whose
affairs he is appointed to administer, his opinion
cannot fail, when all cause for suspicion or jeal
ousy is removed, to have great weight in Colonial
councils, while he is set at liberty to constitute
himself in an especial manner the patron of those
larger and higher interests — for example, as those
of education and of moral and material progress
in all its branches — which, unlike the contest of
parties, united instead of dividing the members of
the body politic."
Lord Lytton, once Secretary of State to the Col
onies, thus writes of the duties of a Governor-Gen
eral : " Remember that the first care of a Governor-
General in a free colony is to shun the reproach of
being a party man — give all parties and all the
ministries formed the fairest play. After all, men
are governed as much by the heart as by the head.
Evident sympathy in the progress of the colony,
traits of kindness, generosity, devoted energy where
required for the public weal, a pure exercise of
patronage, an utter absence of vindictiveness or
spite, the fairness that belongs to magnanimity —
these are the qualities that make Governors pow-
336

THE SENATE
erful, while men merely sharp and clever are
detested." The Governor-General is the only visible expres
sion now remaining of the bond between Canada
and the Empire. So long as Canada was a military
station, with her Majesty's soldiers under orders
in any part of the Dominion, we were conscious
of the direct exercise of Imperial authority. The
transfer of the citadel at Halifax and the naval
offices at Esquimalt to Canada has removed the
last vestige of Imperial authority by virtue of her
military power. Theoretically the Governor-Gen
eral is the only link now binding Canada to the
Empire. His withdrawal is all that is necessary
to constitute us an independent nation. Will this
link ever be severed? It is for posterity to say.
The strictly constitutional duties of a Governor-
General are very limited. Bagehot has said that
" the Queen is the signet-ring of the British Con
stitution." This definition is correct as far as it
goes. But the sovereign, whether king or queen,
can without any violation of the constitution exer
cise a powerful influence in stimulating all the
forces which contribute to the prosperity and glory
of the nation. The " divinity which doth hedge a
king" gives a sanctity to that infiuence not pos
sessed by any other person and increases its power
and efficiency. The Governor-General is also a
" signet-ring," but, like the sovereign he repre
sents, he is capable of widening his sphere of influ
ence far beyond the four walls of the office where
his official signature gives potency to the decisions
of his advisers. Granted that he is a statesman of
wide experience, that he has imbibed the spirit of
337

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
British institutions, that he delights in the evolu
tion of human liberty, that he has high conceptions
of the ideals to which a nation should aspire, and
who can place a limit upon the influence which he
is capable of exerting in shaping public policy and
in calling into play the best activities of the people
over whom he presides? As the symbol of supreme
authority, his presence suggests obedience to law;
as a representative of the sovereign, he reflects the
dignity which becomes his exalted position; as a
statesman of experience, his counsel in matters of
state may be of inestimable value; as a constitu
tional ruler, his respect for constitutional methods
deprives the demagogue of influence and makes
anarchy impossible. The fact that he is precluded
from the strife of party and the intrigues of aspir
ing partisans adds to his influence. Outside the
contentions of the caucus and the blatant nos
trums of party platforms he has an almost
unlimited sphere of influence. The ever-increas
ing importance of international comity, the stimu
lating influences of international commerce, the
forces which make for ideal citizenship, the educa
tional equipment for national service, the cultiva
tion of a well-founded national optimism, the
humanizing effect of national philanthropy, the
priceless value of national self-respect, and kin
dred subjects, are peculiarly fltted for exposition
from the exalted position held by the head of the
Government. The social influence of his family should also be
considered as an incident of his usefulness. Their
ideas of reflnement, of the proprieties of social life,
of the service which their position requires them
338

THE SENATE
to give to the public, of the courtesy to be extended
to those with whom they associate officially or
otherwise, have their effect in restraining vulgarity
and in establishing higher standards of social life.
I admit there is the danger that a servile imitation
may be substituted for genuine reflnement, that
affectation may take the place of native-born dig
nity, that pride may usurp the seat of becoming
modesty; but these are weaknesses which attach
themselves to every sphere in life, and which we
must accept as the universal tendency of the human
race. It is not my intention, nor am I able, to make
an analysis of the special services of each of the
occupants of Government House. I have quoted
from the speeches of Lord Dufferin and the Mar
quis of Lome to show their attitude towards the
" Greater Canada " which was then appearing on
the horizon. His Excellency Earl Grey, the late
occupant of Government House, came to us when
we had fully entered upon the young manhood of
our national career. We had completed several of
the schemes projected to give vitality to our com
merce and the swing of power to our industries.
The Canadian Pacific was a herald to the great
prairies of the milUons who would find them an
Eldorado of wealth and a veritable Utopia of citi
zenship; our deepened canals brought directly to
our own ports the commerce of the " seven seas " ;
our financial institutions had become strong from
the industry and frugality of our people; and our
manufacturers reached out to foreign lands for a
share of the great markets of the world, where
efficiency is the only basis of success. Moreover, we
239

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER I
were obtaining recognition in the councils of the
Empire, and being welcomed as the coadjutor of
its greatest statesmen in promoting its unity and
solidarity. Not only were we permitted to " treat,
do, act and conclude at Our city of Ottawa " in
regard to internal affairs, but we were permitted
to negotiate with Europe and America for the
exchange of commodities on our own terms. It
was under these favourable circumstances that
Earl Grey entered upon his career as Governor-
General of Canada, and to which he brought his
experience as an administrator in South Africa
and the ripened statesmanship of many years in
the British House of Commons.
From the very inception of his career Earl Grey
identified himself actively with all the varied
interests of Canadian life. He is probably as well
acquainted with Canada geographically and topo
graphically as any of its most active citizens, and
would feel almost as much at home in Halifax or
Vancouver as in Ottawa. His trip down the Nelson
Eiver to Hudson Bay and along the coast of Lab
rador gave him a knowledge of sub- Arctic Canada
possessed by very few. A man of less energy and
less interest in the resources of Canada would have
indulged in the leisure and repose of Rideau Hall.
An active life appears to be his native air.
Earl Grey has been seen and heard at all public
functions of a national character which his official
duties permitted him to attend. He was more than
a guest by courtesy, he was welcome for the mes
sage which everybody knew he had to deliver ; and
few men could deliver a message with more grace
and dignity. Although he -does not possess the
240

THE SENATE
oratorical gifts of Lord Dufferin, he always speaks
with clearness and from a mind well stored with
his subject. The strong feature of his speeches is
their, practical good sense. He never flies kites or
indulges in the full-chested gush of the promoter.
He prefers to keep within easy range of his audi
ence and to interest rather than to dazzle.
Earl Grey imbibed thoroughly the Canadian
spirit — no Governor-General more so. To get the
perspective of a people and their institutions is
the only way to understand them. The politics of
the day or its activities only partially represent
the sentiment of the people. Sentiment has its
historical associations; it is not sufficient to know
its present-day aspects. To grasp its qualities and
significance one must know how it was evolved
and what are the sources from which it derives
inspiration. These Earl Grey grasped early in his
career. He learned that we are Canadians with a
past as well as a future; that we are British not
merely by heredity or devolution, but that we are
British because we believe in British traditions
and British institutions, and that it is impossible
for us to have any other national creed. To build a
new nation on a distinctly new foundation he found
was not our object. We may have our preferences
for certain details in national architecture — that
is immaterial. But what we aimed at was to adapt
British institutions to the conditions which a new
environment rendered necessary. And our success
in this respect will be the measure of our success in
nation-building. Earl Grey was also fully alive to the cleavage
caused by duality of races. To admit that it is
17 241

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
within the power of any Parliament by legislation
or concession to eradicate national preferences, is
to deny heredity and all that it implies. The
French-'Canadian may be as faithful in his
allegiance to Great Britain as his fellow citizens of
British origin; he may be as ready to fire the first
gun as to fire the last gun in her defence; he may
do so out of a sense of duty or for the preservation
of her honour as well as for his own protection. He
may entertain the highest respect for British insti
tutions, for British statesmanship and for British
civilization, and may to all intents and purposes
be a true Canadian, whose honour or loyalty no
one can impugn; but to expect that his loyalty
would have the same sentimental qualities as that
of his British fellow citizen would be to expect the
unnatural and impossible. He cannot eliminate
from his blood his racial instincts any more than
his racial temperament. And why should he, if he
could? To allow every citizen to indulge personal
or national idiosyncrasies not incompatible with
the public weal is liberty. Anything else would be
mediaeval tyranny.
The Tercentenary celebration of the founding of
Quebec, which was inaugurated by Earl Grey, was
a recognition of the honour due to the French race
in laying the foundation of a greater Canada. No
one questioned their loyalty to Britain as they
assembled on the heights of Quebec or on the
Plains of Abraham. And yet everybody knew that
their thoughts were not upon Britain, but upon
Brittany and the home of Champlain and Cartier
and of the religious Orders which gave their lives
to their self-exiled French compatriots. But did
242

THE SENATE
this renaissance of the Old Regime in speech and
pageant affect their loyalty to Canada? Earl Grey
did not think so. On the contrary, he evidently
believed that to honour the heroic souls of their
race, whose services history had embalmed, was not
necessarily inconsistent with true loyalty to a com
mon sovereign. A nationalism that would exclude
the larger obligations of citizenship no one would
deplore more than Earl Grey, but a nationalism
that makes its traditions secondary and subordin
ate to the cultivation of a generous Canadian spirit
is legitimate and wholesome.
Earl Grey greatly assisted in strengthening the
relations between Canada and the Mother Country.
He was charged in certain quarters with being too
much of an Imperialist. What that means I can
not say. That he believes in a Colonial Empire,
welded together by a community of interest and
sentiment, no one who reads his speeches can for
one moment doubt. His Imperialism, whether
excessive or not, is not one-sided — a Colonial
Empire to which the Mother Country dictated the
terms of colonial relationship is not his ideal.
Each colony to him was independent, self-govern
ing, self-poised, but an integral part of the Empire.
There could be no colonies without the Empire,
and there could be no Empire without the colonies
— they were independent as well as inter-depend
ent. The honour of one was the honour of all ; an
assault upon one was an assault upon all. As they
rose together to a position of superior sovereignty,
so they should stand together to maintain that
sovereignty, and it was this voice of a great and
still greater Britain that Canadians loved to hear.
343

CHAPTER XVIII.
ELECTIONEERING AS A FINE ART.
Electioneering is not recognized in the text
books as a fine art, but those who have been
engaged in election campaigns and know how much
labour and skill and tact are involved, will agree
with me that genius of a very high order is neces
sary to conduct an election campaign successfully.
I do not say this because I have passed through so
many campaigns myself, or because I am pre
eminently qualified for electioneering purposes ; but
when one considers all the details of a campaign
— the number of men who have to be consulted and
seen and the subtle influences which interpose and
neutralize one's best efforts; the reticence and
indifference of the electors; the impulses by which
they are moved for or against you, and all the con
tingencies, intrigue, misrepresentation, deprecia
tion and falsehood which so often prevail — the can
didate who in spite of all these sinister influences
flnds himself in the majority is either a lucky man
or has the genius to circumvent every plan laid
for his defeat. I count myself among the lucky
ones rather than among those who have suc
ceeded either by energy or foresight or superior
intelligence. During the thirty-flve years in which
I represented West Middlesex I ran (to use the
common expression) eleven elections. In one I
was elected by acclamation, and a happy day it
244

ELECTIONEERING AS A I^INE ART
was. In flve the contest was close and severe, and
in the other flve the opposition was weak and
easily overcome.
When I entered the fleld in 1872 I had every
thing to learn in campaign work. I had never
organized a committee or addressed a meeting on
my own behalf for any public position, or solicited
a vote, nor had I been initiated into campaign work
by service in the ranks. I was therefore face to
face with public opinion, which, as I found at the
convention in North Middlesex in 1867, was some
thing that had to be coaxed or persuaded or jollied
into favour, and were it not for the larger experi
ence of the leaders of the party, by which I was
assisted and guided, I would have inevitably failed.
I have said that electioneering is a fine art. It
has rules and methods peculiar to itself which it
is difficult, if not impossible, to define. The artist
may say that he follows certain principles in draw
ing and colour ; but it is not by these alone, as com
monly understood, that he achieves success. It is
the indefinable element of genius that gives the
vitality which time cannot destroy. In successful
electioneering, personality is the indefinable ele
ment which no formula can express. It is the
dynamic force which, like an electric current, may
not be visible, and yet it moves everything it
touches. It organizes committees, it controls pub
lic meetings, it stirs the indifferent and warms
every hand it grasps. Let no candidate divert this
vital current from the ganglion of the brain to the
ganglion of the selfish propensities.
In successful electioneering the candidate has to
consider the temperament and convictions, or want
345

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
of convictions, of the electors with whom he has to
deal. The greater number of these may be classi
fied as follows : First, those whose sympathies are
entirely with him; second, those whose votes are
likely to be recorded but whose political opinions
are not strong enough to make them active
workers; third, those who are indifferent about
voting at all; fourth, those who claim to be inde
pendent of all party affiliations; fifth, those who
say they will vote when the time comes but who
conceal their party inclinations; sixth, those who
have personal objection to the party candidate;
seventh, aliens and others who never voted at a
previous election.
Now the problem before a candidate is how to
reach and influence favourably these different
classes of voters. To lose the support of any class
may be fatal. Somebody with intelligence and tact
must see them, and this is only possible through
organization and the personal attention of the can
didate; but seen they must be, and without delay.
Unconsciously even to themselves they drift
towards one side or the other. The old adage
that " the early bird catcheth the worm " means
a great deal in electioneering. To define all the
details and intricate machinery of organization,
its numerous committees and their duties, would
be to furnish a guidebook to efections. This is
not my purpose. Suffice it to say that complete
organization, from the revision of the voters' list
to the registration of the last available vote at the
polling-booth, is of supreme importance. Every
candidate should feel that a large share of the
246

ELECTIONEERING AS A FINE AET
responsibility and the labour of such organization
is sure to devolve upon himself personally.
(Supplementary to the duties of organization, a
candidate should consult the active party workers
in the constituency on every opportunity, and
through them ascertain where his personal atten
tion to undecided voters could be given to the
greatest advantage. In my own experience I found
it exceedingly profitable to see the electors at their
homes. Personally to solicit a vote, or even to call
upon an elector incidentally, is accepted as a com
pUment. It often changes a " doubtful " into a
supporter, even without direct solicitation. Where
the friendly attitude of the elector would warrant
pressing him for his vote, it would be well to get
his promise of support. A promise often tells at
the ballot box.
A personal canvass of the electors should not be
left undone because it is laborious. It is really
the most diverting part of a campaign, and, like
trout fishing, requires great skill and patience.
According to Isaak Walton it takes time to become
a " compleat angler." The elector may be bluff
and surly and disinclined to take any bait you
offer, or he may swim around the hook, giving a
gentle nibble and no more, or he may play with
your fishing tackle so cunningly that you become
discouraged and give up the game. Eemember,
however, that electors, like trout, have their moods
and tenses. Eenew the sport at an early oppor
tunity. The trout is there and you may be sure
somebody will catch him if you do not. Eemember,
too, that although Mr. Trout is not so easily caught,
Mrs. Trout may like your bait and tackle and
247

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
may prefer to see her husband in your silken net
rather than to see him dangling at the end of your
rival's hook and line.
But electioneering has its big drum, and the
roar and excitement of the platform and the pub
licity of the press as well as its organization and
its personal call and "glad hand." And in this
department no more than in any other should any
thing be done at haphazard. As the primary object
of a public meeting is to enable the candidate to
present his views on public questions to the elec
tors, and to persuade them if possible to think as
he does, he should remember that he owes it to
himself as well as to his audience not to abuse the
privileges which it affords. It should never be
used as a medium for scandal or for fomenting
religious hatred, or for denouncing in violent and
intemperate language political opponents. The
public meeting was in old Saxon days the local
Parliament of the shire, where the business of the
shire was settled by discussion and deliberation,
and as a candidate at a public meeting is the leader
of discussion and deliberation, to excite the pas
sions or prejudice of his audience is sure to react
upon himself.
In my early days in ^Vest Middlesex the candi
dates almost invariably held joint meetings for the
presentation of their views on public questions,
and I cannot say that the result of these meetings
was always satisfactory. There was no want of
interest in the speakers, judging from the roar of
the pit an^ the crowding of the aisles and plat
form. But the interest was not owing always so
much to a desire for instruction as to applaud the
248

ELECTIONEEEING AS A FINE AET
fighting qualities of the candidates. They were
a sort of cockpit around which the electors gath
ered more for sport than for edification, and not
infrequently a small knot of mischief-makers
would destroy all their value to both candidates.
When, however, joint meetings are conducted with
decorum, and the speakers and audience are both
intent upon the same purpose, namely, to give and
receive instruction, they become a form of trial by
jury to which each side submits its case, and as
in trial by jury the aim of counsel is to obtain a
verdict on the evidence, they may be productive of
the best results ; and woe to the candidate who has
not prepared himself for the fray.
A wise debater prepares his brief like a wise
lawyer. He not only knows his own case and its
weaknesses, if any, but he has studied the case
from the viewpoint of his opponent. In a Mara
thon race muscle and endurance count ; in a debate
information counts. How easily an opponent is
discomfited who " mixes and muddles." Turn on
him the X-ray of superior knowledge for ohe
moment and everybody will see that he is mentally
impoverished, and disqualified for public service.
In a public debate official documents and incon
trovertible evidence as to accuracy of statement
are invaluable, and if questioned the candidate
should be able to refer to them at a moment's
notice. A speaker's ipse dixit carries little weight
compared with the exact words slowly and delib
erately read from the official text. " What says
the bond?" It was the answer to that question
which convicted Shylock, and not Portia's speech,
great and sympathetic though it was.
249

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
As an illustration of the value of documentary
proof I might mention an episode in my flrst elec
tion. My opponent brought into the riding one
A. W. Lauder, a somewhat active member of the
Provincial Assembly, to speak for him. Mr. Lauder
was a fair speaker, and as a stranger was received
with special courtesy. He supported McDonald,
my opponent, with the usual stock Conservative
argument, and called upon the electors to vote for
him as a follower of Sir John Macdonald. I saw
at once if I could discredit Mr. Lauder politically
his mission would be a failure. At a meeting in
Delaware Village he was particularly ardent in his
advocacy of Conservative principles, and so I took
him to task for having changed his allegiance to
the Liberal party and asked facetiously what
brought about the change. He at once declared
that he never was a Liberal, and so gave me the
opportunity I wanted. I then stated that there
were nine members of the Legislative Assembly
who abandoned their Liberal principles in the
election of 1867 and went over to the support of
Sandfield Macdonald's Government, and he was
one of the nine. On being attacked by the Liberal
press for desertion of their party they pubUshed a
protest over their signatures, which earned for
them the title of the " Nine Martyrs." " Now," I
said, " I haye this protest in my hand, taken from
the Tory press, and if the honourable gentleman
does not object I will read a few lines of it." Of
course he could not object. So I said to the audi
ence : " You remember that Mr. Lauder said on
this platform that he never was a Eeformer. What
does he say in this manifesto over his own signa-
250

ELECTIONEEEING AS A FINE AET
ture? These are the words: 'Though we were
elected as Eeformers we did not consider ourselves
bound to oppose the Sandfield Government,' and
so on. What are we to believe, the oral statement
of the A. W. Lauder of to-day or the written state
ment of the A. W. Lauder who confessed that he
was made a martyr for his change of party
allegiance, and signed his name to his confes
sion?" These three lines were more effective than
three hours of argument would have been, and Mr.
Lauder and I parted company for the rest of the
campaign. As the party challenged in a duel has the choice
of weapons, so the speaker who opens a debate has
the choice of the ground to be taken in the argu
ment that is to follow. He may think it wise to
present a defence of his own position, or he may
open his batteries on his opponent's position. In
the former case he is on the defensive — not the
best position as a rule in debate. In the latter case
his opponent is on the defensive. It is easier to
thrust than to parry. It is not good form to say
your opponent talked nonsense — ^your audience
may think differently and is likely to prefer its
own opinion to yours. Do not dismiss an argu
ment by alleging that you have no time to answer
it; this is tantamount to a confession of your
inability to do so. If an argument can be refuted
by quoting an official document, quote it. To dis
credit an opponent in two or three instances is to
destroy confidence in every statement he has made
whether answered or not, and that is just retribu
tion for his ignorance or dishonesty, as the case
may be. And it is here that aggressiveness is
251

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
amply justifled. Carry the war into Africa. Han
nibal is in retreat — pursue him, smite him on the
flank, and if well done the cheering audience will
award you the laurel of debate. Above all things,
never let the umpire rush you off the ground
because of foul play or unsportsmanlike language
or conduct.
It fell to my lot, why I can hardly say, to have
my full share of the stress of platform debate. I
have been overmatched more than once; I have
been in a few debates that were inconclusive ; but I
know of no better training for a Parliamentary
career than the " rough and tumble " of a joint
debate. Scars you may get, and discolorments
that may be embarrassing in polite society, but
the practice gives nerve, strength and coolness, and
that is full compensation for its uncertain honours.
In all my elections (except that of 1874, when I
was elected by acclamation) nomination day was
a battle royal. To vanquish the enemy was thought
to be a prelude to victory at the polls a week later.
It was often what Aunt Chloe in " Uncle Tom's
Cabin " called " clarring-up day." Any rumour
considered injurious was exploded; any statement
made by the opposing candidate that could be suc
cessfully controverted was denied point-blank
before his face; any matters in which the electors
were specially interested were duly emphasized,
and a strong appeal made to rally to the polls for
the sake of good government and the honour of the
country. And now the time for testing the efficiency of
the electioneering methods adopted is at hand. The
candidates are soon to see the results of organiza-
252

ELECTIONEEEING AS A FINE AET
tion and speechmaking. They have toiled night
and day to impress themselves on the electors ; they
have called upon the " doubtfuls " to obtain a deci
sion in their favour ; they have met the " waver
ing," to establish them in the faith of their respec
tive parties; they have made forced marches to
rouse the " stalwarts " into greater activity ; they
have sweltered in crowded halls to prevent the
enemy from sowing tares; they have seen the stars
grow dim in the light of approaching day as they
retumed to their homes to snatch an hour of fev
erish repose. It has been a great campaign, with
its commanders-in-chief, its fleld-marshals, generals
and captains, its great camps for training, its
reserves, its commissariat, its standards and its
camp followers who love war, not for glory as
much as for its spoils. Several thousand men have
mobUized, some of them veterans of many flghts,
some of them raw recruits drilled and equipped for
the flrst time. The forces have been kept in a state
of great activity. To-day they assemble to meet
the commander-in-chief or one of his staff officers
for review or instruction; another day it is an
order from the captain to muster for roll call or
target practice. But, whatever the occasion, they
must be " aye ready." Is the enemy crowding in
upon them? Then out with the skirmishers and
let him be driven back. Is he attempting to out
flank them? Out with the siege guns and the
Maxims and let him know that his efforts will be
fruitless. Is time required before the gauge of
battle can be taken up? Then fall back on Torres
Vedras till reinforcements have arrived. And so
captains and lieutenants keep burnishing their
353

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
arms and studying the plan of campaign and keep
ing the rank and flie in good cheer. Is there any
discontent with the rations? Then they must be
improved in quantity and quality. Is any one
incUned to desert to the enemy? Then he must be
placed under guard and shown that the enemy has
nothing to give which his own captain cannot
supply. And so the preliminaries of a great battle
are arranged. But this cannot go on indeflnitely;
the shock of arms must come sooner or later.
Sooner, did I say? It has come now, for this is
polling day. " Hark ! it is — it is the cannon's
opening roar!" Through street and highway all
hasten to the company headquarters for flnal
orders. Now -they are ready for the fray, and
steady as Wellington's squares at Waterloo. The
captain's orders must be obeyed, and there is none
" to ask the reason why." Out to the open plain
they go — it is no Indian warfare sheltered by the
forest. All day the battle rages. Now it is a raid
upon the enemy's forces in the country; then it is
an attack upon a village or upon a fortified town.
Here and there a prisoner is taken into camp as a
trophy of the war. There are no Sundays in war.
Neither is there pause for refreshment at the can
teen, even if it were open. It is an all-day battle,
and the air resounds with cheers as a deserter is
captured or some of the enemy's guns are spiked.
But the roar of the musketry is gradually subsid
ing. The smoke is clearing away. At length the
battle is over, and the vanquished retire to their
tents, cover up the flres and discuss in tones of
repressed rage the causes of their defeat. It was
the captain's fault, some say; others say it was
254

ELECTIONEEEING AS A FINE AET
the fault of the commander-in-chief for not choos
ing a more favourable position, and then, " Oh, for
a Eouget de Lisle with a new Marseillaise!"
The victors, however, stir up their campfires and
spend the night in carnival and song. " What a
famous victory! How we scattered them like
chaff before the whirlwind! What a noble com-
-mander-in-chief ! How well the battle-ground was
chosen! Cheers for the field-marshal! And what
a captain ! He was in the thickest of the fight and
escaped without a scar. Cheers for the captain,
three times three and a tiger! Then how we
scaled the walls and took prisoners right under the
muzzles of the enemy's guns ! Three cheers for the
boys in khaki! They did it. More cheers. Out
with the faggots prepared for the bonfire in view
of victory! Out with them! Let them blaze to
the highest heavens. Out with the torches! Let
us march through the public streets. And the big
drum, where is it? And the fireworks and the
Union Jack and the admiring crowds!" Cheers
and cheers again, till exhausted nature cries a halt,
and the light of bonfire and torch has paled beneath
the midnight stars and the streets are deserted and
silent. " Something attempted, something done,
has earned a night's repose."
What won the election? Organization — not a
public meeting without complete arrangements for
notifying the electors; not a polUng subdivision
without an active and competent committee; not
a " doubtful " who was not visited by the candidate
or some member of his committee; not a voter in
the polling subdivision entitled to vote who was
355

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
not brought to the polls ; not a " suspect " who was
not sworn ; not a polling-booth without its comple
ment of scrutineers.
What lost the election? Poor public meetings,
no personal canvass, indifferent committee-men,
apathetic electors, absentee voters, want of scru
tineers, want of organization, dry rot, and what else
deponent sayeth not.

256

CHAPTEE XIX.
THE POLITICAL PLATFORM.
The platform in English-speaking countries is
a modern institution. A little more than a hun
dred years ago its power was first used for the
abolition of slavery, and next in the agitation
which culminated in the Catholic Emancipation
Act of 1829. It was at the back of the Eeform BiU
of 1832, the Chartist Movement of 1837, and the
Eepeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. In later years
the platform has become almost a fifth estate of
the realm, so powerfully does it influence public
opinion on all the questions of the day.
The platform is the most democratic force in the
state. It stands for anything and everything that
attracts public attention — -/or every grievance no
matter how humble the complainant, for every
reform no matter how extreme or revolutionary.
The secret of its power is its freedom from regu
lation. It debars no one from declaring his opin
ion in any form of speech which his hearers will
receive. Neither Church nor State flxes any limi
tation to its courses of study. It is everybody's
school, and anybody, male or female, may use it
for teaching purposes. It is in session whenever
required, and adjourns, sine die, as its purposes
have been served.
Great teachers have used the platform for the
moral elevation of their fellow men and for the
18 257

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
safety of the state. Wilberforce used it to expose
the horrors of negro slavery and to instruct the
people of England in the comprehensiveness of
human liberty — " There's a wideness in God's
mercy like the wideness of the sea." Daniel O'Con
nell used it to proclaim religious toleration and
liberty of conscience. Lord John EusseU used it
to broaden the basis of the British Constitution.
John Bright and Cobden used it to destroy privi
lege and to sweeten the lives of those who toiled
for their daily bread. Brougham used it to teach
the masses that the companionship of books would
give them strength and fltness for the duties of
citizenship. Gladstone used it to destroy ancient
prejudices and to show that a government not
founded on morality was treason to the state.
Webster used it to show that liberty and the union
of the States were one and inseparable. George
Brown used it to create a new nation in North
America, which would attract the attention of the
whole civilized world.
But time would fail to speak of its multitudinous
teachers in Church and State whose disciples went
forth to the uttermost parts of the earth as the
torchbearers of a higher civilization, the flrst rudi
ments of which they acquired through the teaching
of this great forum of human liberty.
Canadian platform oratory twenty-two carats
flne has not yet been issued from the mint. The
speeches of Joseph Howe are by far the flnest in
circulation. He had the imagination of Burke,
but not his power of sustained eloquence. In some
of his speeches he was more brilliant than Glad
stone, but not so robust or intense. I heard him
258

THE POLITICAL PLATFOEM
in the House of Commons in 1873, his last session ;
but the streams of his eloquence barely trickled.
" The wheel was broken at the cistern " — what
could he do? D'Arcy McGee was of Irish birth,
and although Canada was the richer because of his
wondrous gift, she could not claim him as her own.
But it is the glory of the platform that effective
service can be rendered by the man of two talents
as well as by the man of ten. There are great
mountains that are not Himalayan in bulk or
height, but are nevertheless crowned with the
whitest snow. For the present it is my purpose
not to consider the heights to which oratory has
reached, but rather, in the light of every-day
experience, to consider what " platform efficiency "
means; and efficiency, after all, is the truest test
of usefulness.
The questions for discussion on the political
platform at any one time are usually few in num
ber. In the last British election, one question, the
veto of the Lords, superseded Home Eule and the
Budget and all other questions. In every cam
paign there is usually one supreme question, and
perhaps three or four minor questions, which
engross public attention. The political speaker
should consider in what order these should be pre
sented and how much of his time should be given
to each; but to address a meeting without dealing
with the main question at issue would be as proflt-
less as " ploughing the sands." In some localities,
owing to the idiosyncrasies of the electors, their
national traditions, or their sense of proportion,
every topic constituting the corpus delicti of the
election is not of equal interest. I made it a rule
259

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
in my political itinerations to ascertain what sub
ject was uppermost in the minds of the electors,
or what part of the policy of the party I repre
sented was most severely criticized. It is the sick
that need the physician. It is where the enemy
is directing his flre that the walls must be strength
ened and guarded. There are two advantages in
these taqtics — time is saved to both speaker and
audience, and the attention is more easily sus
tained when discussion is directed to subjects
which everybody is thinking about.
A political speech should be an ascent in plan,
in warmth of expression, in sentiment and in illus
tration. The mental horizon of the audience
should be widened as the speaker proceeds, both
by the expansion of his subject and the growing
power of his personality. Bossuet said of Wilber
force that when he stood on a table to address a
meeting he appeared like a shrimp because of his
diminutive stature, but before he had concluded he
looked like a whale. A speech that fails in making
in some degree a similar transformation is inher
ently defective. The speaker must grow and glow
with his subject, until he is the living embodiment
of its purpose ; and his audience, like the guests at
the marriage feast, should be made to feel that the
last draught is the best of all. Henry Ward
Beecher said : " If you can't put flre. into your
speech you should put your speech into the flre."
The speaker should also consider the mental
attitude to be assumed towards the audience.
" Shall I be aggressive, or deferential and concili
atory? Shall I state my case as one that does not
look for an answer, or shall I by an interrogative
260

THE POLITICAL PLATFORM
style call for the mental assent of the audience
upon one topic before proceeding to the considera
tion of the next? How can I keep my audience
interested? How much spice or humour will be
required to quicken their perceptions and prevent
mental stagnation? And if I have no gifts in that
direction, what substitute shall I offer?" The
one thing needful is attention; without it, the
meeting will be profltless — again " ploughing the
sands." Now as to the speech: (1) It must, above all
things, be instructive. It is possible that there
may be a few in the audience who attend for
pastime, but the majority go to hear what Mr.
So-and-So has to say — that is, to learn something.
But whatever may be the motive of your hearers,
you have only one object — so to instruct them that
they will think as you do, and believe as you do;
and that is the surest way to get their votes. And
here the speaker must consider how much his
audience will absorb and retain — what detail can
be omitted without weakening his case, what mould
ering branches can be cut off without loss or
injury to the tree. The Duke of Wellington
advised a young peer, if he ever addressed the
House of Lords, to say what he had to say without
preface or apology, never to quote Latin, and when
he was done to sit down. Short measure is safer
than long measure. Excess of detail was Edward
Blake's great weakness. His speeches were more
of a treatise than a popular address, and were
exhaustive of his subject and his audience. English
Parliamentarians are models of conciseness and
brevity. They prefer a balance sheet to an invoice,
261

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
a flnancial or commercial summary to the details
of a statistical year book, a dividend to the list of
the transactions by which it was earned. Details
may be held in reserve to be used if called for, and
only then. At the close of every meeting the
speaker should ask himself, " Was my statement
clear, was it full enough, was it interesting, was it
convincing?" And the answers to these questions
should be the reflected impressions of his audience.
(2) A political speech must be positive. It will
not do for a speaker to say that he believes so-and-
so, but he must show that no other belief is consist
ent with the facts in the case. It is " guilty " or
" not guilty," and not the Scottish verdict of " not
proven," which suggests guilt. Positiveness, how
ever, must mean more than the mere ipse dixit of
the speaker, which is valueless without evidence.
In the mouth of two or three witnesses, not one
(and they must be disinterested), shall anything
be conflrmed. And herein consists the difference
between discussing questions of policy and ques
tions of fact. A question of fact rests upon an
official document or some record of the transaction
considered. A question of policy is to be defended
or condemned by abstract reasoning, or by mar
shalling established facts to lead to a certain con
clusion. If the Grits are " hived," and that is
shown by the election records, the conclusion is
that it was premeditated for some purpose. To
establish this case the speaker must show how the
constituencies stood before the hiving, how the
hiving did not produce a better equiUbrium of
voters than previously, how the geographical con
tour of the constituencies was altered, not for the
262

THE POLITICAL PLATFOEM
convenience of the electors or for the symmetry of
the constituencies, and that the effect will be to
the advantage of the opposite party. No need to
give all the details of how the results were arrived
at. There is the one indisputable fact that it was
done. Do not let it slip. Nail it to the counter.
It means wrong-doing, injustice, a moral revulsion
and then votes.
(3) A political speaker must be fair and candid.
Not all the virtues of the calendar or all the wis
dom of the sages is to be found on one side. A
speaker who rails at the opposite party for incapa
city and dishonesty forgets that, no matter how
partisan his audience may be, it will take extreme
statements with more or less mental reservation.
Until the day of judgment there is no flnal separa
tion or even identification of the sheep and the
goats. Besides, no party, no matter how pure and
lofty its purpose, can claim absolute infallibility.
The inherent weaknesses of human nature assert
themselves in spite of party designations and party
platforms. Mental strabismus may be caused by
a mote or a beam, and who can say that he is abso
lutely free from either? Nor is it necessary, in
order to show one's own fairness, to pronounce
eulogies upon opponents. Such a bourse would
only excite suspicion of insincerity and would be
quite as objectionable as partisan rancour. The
surest way to show your fairness to an opponent
is to quote his words. While the memory may be
trusted to do this accurately, the effect upon the
audience is much greater if the words are read as
reported in the press or in the official debates of
Parliament. The chapter and verse method of the
263

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
theologian is equally useful for the politician. In
this way the speaker avoids the suspicion of garb
ling, and his comments are more effective because
resting on a foundation of fact. It will be his own
fault if he weakens his position by unfair inferences
or sinister comments.
The political platform has its own unwritten
constitution, and whether the opposite party is
personally present or not, depend upon it unfair
ness, if not openly resented, will be silently con
demned. Among the fairest speakers (within the
circle of my acquaintance), and one of the most
influential in making votes, the Hon. T. B. Pardee,
Commissioner of Crown Lands in the Mowat Gov
ernment, deserves the highest place. Mr. Pardee
had no needless compliments for his opponents, but
he was equally free from needless gibes. If they
failed to be convinced they had no occasion to be
offended. There were no rankling words to embit
ter or to resent, no sweeping charges to intensify
their party hostility, or to arouse a spirit of retalia
tion. At the same time Mr. Pardee, while cour
teous, was never apologetic. While he believed his
viewpoint on public questions to be correct and
beyond doubt, he was so fair to his opponents that
they could not fail to revise their opinions, to see
if they could be squared with his arguments. Such
speeches make votes. On the other hand, I have
known instances where a speech made a sensation
because of its flery denunciations of the utter
worthlessness of the political opinions of an oppon
ent and the moral degeneracy of all his practices.
And yet such a speech did nothing more than
arouse party feeling and trouble the waters with-
264

THE POLITICAL PLATFOEM
out imparting to them any healing virtue. The
chasm between the parties was widened, and, even
if any were inclined to cross over, the difficulties
were increased rather than diminished.
(4) A political speaker should be impersonal.
I do not mean that an opponent should not be held
strictly to account for all his public acts, and, if
a member of Parliament, for all his votes. In such
cases he should not be allowed to escape responsi
bility on party or on any other grounds. If he
gave a vote in Parliament which you condemn, he
and not the party is responsible. The rebuke of
Nathan the prophet in such cases applies — " Thou
art the man." But to belittle an opponent for his
want of education or for some peculiarity of man
ner, or to hold him up to ridicule for personal
defects, or to reflect upon his personal honour, is
a mistake and sure to react upon the speaker. The
party whose nominee he is will resent it, as they
are his sponsors; and even party friends are more
than likely to regard such attacks as foreign to
debate and hard to justify.
Sometimes a personal attack reflects upon the
speaker to his disadvantage. The Honourable
Archibald McKellar related the following to me
as his painful experience in one particular case.
He had engaged to address a meeting of the elec
tors of the county of Peel at the town of Brampton,
and Mr. E. King Dodds was present as the repre
sentative of the opposite party. The meeting was
composed largely of farmers from the surrounding
townships, and Mr. McKellar thought that a run
ning criticism of Mr. Dodds in advance would
weaken his standing with the audience. Mr. Dodds
265

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
was a man of good physique and invariably well
dressed. He had all the personal distinction of a
well-to-do city gentleman of leisure. Mr. McKellar,
who, by the way, was a most effective platform
speaker, referred to the meeting as composed of
the solid yeomanry of Peel, who had come to hear
public questions discussed by men in sympathy
with their vocation and who had some experience
of the toil and sweat of a farmer's Ufe. He was
a farmer himself and knew what demands a
farmer's life made upon a man's energy and
strength, and so could speak as one of themselves.
" But whom have our opponents sent to address
you? Not a farmer. Look at him and you can see
by his soft hands and his fashionable attire that
he never stood behind the plough or handled the
scythe or rake. Did you ever know a farmer who
adorned himself with jewellery as Mr. Dodds is
adorned? What means that chain of shining gold
that hangs around his neck, or that jewelled ring
which he wears upon his hand? Can he be trusted
to direct you, a community of farmers, how to vote
in this election? His place is in the city, among
the fashionable men who attend balls and pubUc
dinners," and so on. For the moment it seemed
like an effective attack. Mr. Dodds was called
upon to speak. He arose as if suffering from some
painful feeling, and his voice was restrained.
" Gentlemen," he said, " I am sorry that Mr.
McKellar has not conflned himself to public ques
tions. They are far more important to you than
a dissertation on my personal appearance or the
jewellery that I wear. Why should I, because of
these simple and to me sacred ornaments, be held
266

THE POLITICAL PLATFOEM
up to ridicule? He has noticed the chain that
hangs from my neck. Do you think I wear it from
any sense of superiority or pride or from personal
vanity? That chain, Mr. Chairman, is a family
heirloom. It was given to me by my dead father,
to be kept and worn in remembrance of him, as I
bear his name. Why should I not wear it? Was I
to disobey him and cast it away? And that ring
to which Mr. McKellar referred was placed upon
my hand (sobs) by my dying mother, with a
request that I should wear it for her sake and as
the last token of her affection. Now, why should
I not do as I have done and why should my love
and reverence for my parents be held up to ridi
cule?" and so on. Mr. McKellar frankly admitted
that he had the worst of it, although he believed
that Mr. Dodds' story was purely fictitious and
made up to meet the emergency.
In my election in 1878 I nearly got into trouble
by a personal remark which I was provoked to
make in self-defence. My opponent, Mr. Currie,
was a farmer, and insisted that as West Middlesex
was a rural constituency it should be represented
in Parliament by a farmer, which I was not. The
farmers, he said, were the " bone and sinew " of
the country and they should look to their own
interests. These references to " bone and sinew "
were repeated till I began to feel they had some
effect. Accordingly in my reply I modestly
admitted the claim of the farmer to due repre
sentation in Parliament, but it did not follow that
another person not of their own profession could
not properly represent them. And then I said:
" If the farmers wanted to be represented by bone
267

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
and sinew only, then I know of no person better
fitted to be their choice than Mr. Currie." It was
rather a vicious thrust at a hard fighter and worthy
opponent, but the tongue is an unruly member and
will sometimes misbehave itself.
Another instance of the danger of a personal
attack is also from my own experience. There was
a by-election in the county of Lennox, at which Mr.
George Hawley and Mr. G. T. Blackstock, K.C.,
were candidates. It was in the summer months,
and the speeches after the nomination were to be
delivered in the Opera House. There was a good
audience, and after the two candidates had
addressed the meeting I was called upon, as a
member of the Govemment, to speak on behalf of
the Liberal candidate. Mr. Blackstock, instead of
discussing Provincial politics, as he was well able
to do, attacked the Government, particularly the
Premier, Mr. Mowat, and Mr. Pardee, for their
maladministration of Provincial affairs, but made
no specific charge and did not attempt to show
from individual cases wherein this maladministra
tion consisted. His language was strong and some
what irritating. In replying to him I took the
ground that his conduct was not only unfair, but
contrary to the practice of his profession. I said
no person is put on his trial, much less condemned,
without the offences for which he is indicted being
specifically mentioned. " Now," I said to the
audience, " such a charge is not simply unfair, it
is cowardly. If Mr. Blackstock has charges to
make let him make them, and I will give him his
answer; but how can I answer blind charges that
are intended to hurt, but which he has not the
268

THE POLITICAL PLATFOEM
courage to formulate? I repeat, his conduct is
cowardly, and no one but a coward would shelter
himself behind general terms which admit of no
answer." My language was strong and not quite
Parliamentary in its directness, and in a twinkling
Mr. Blackstock was on his feet, and, in a menacing
attitude, challenged me to settle the personal
affront out of doors. For a moment the situation
was exciting. Mr. Blackstock, however, sat down
immediately and I resumed my address as if noth
ing had happened. And there the matter ended,
as I was not offered a second invitation and the
previous one had expired by lapse of time.
(5) A political speaker should aim at being
strictly accurate. I exclude from this the idea of
being untruthful. Nowhere is a falsehood more
dangerous than on the platform. Apart from the
moral equation, it is sure to embarrass and, in the
end, -to defeat the purpose for which it is used.
Even exaggeration of statement, though not the
equivalent of an untruth, is a weakness. Sir
Charles Tupper, who was a Eupert in debate, often
weakened his case by highly-coloured phrases.
Indeed, so much was this the case that his state
ments latterly were never taken at their face value,
although it might not be shown that they were
untrue. Exaggeration never strengthens an argu
ment. Its want of proportion to the topic in hand
is readily detected, and the habit of inflating every
flgure of speech till it loses its identity only makes
the speaker ridiculous in the estimation of his
hearers. But assuming that the speaker aims at being
truthful, he must nevertheless guard against
269

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
inaccuracies. To have any of his statements con
troverted would cover him with deserved confu
sion and very probably lead to the charge of
untruthfulness. His opponents are always ready
to take advantage of any shortcomings, and not
always charitable enough to give him the benefit
of the doubt. He should carefully verify all his
notes and figures before using them, and be able
to refer to the sources of his information if chal
lenged. I flatter myself that in forty years of
active platform and Parliamentary life, the
accuracy of my quotations or flgures was never
even questioned. My opponents might say I did
not reflect their opinions precisely in the way they
had intended, but they never charged me with
attributing to them a meaning inconsistent with
their evident construction. One feature of Sir
Oliver Mowat's pubUc career was his accuracy of
statement, whether it was a legal opinion or a
citation in conflrmation of his argument.
(6) A political speaker should be aggressive.
Aggressiveness should be free from temper. It is
most destructive when most playful. It should
be directed against your opponent's policy, not
against himself personally. The traditions of the
political platform demand fair play. Though its
constitution is unwritten, it is as binding as the
rules of Queensberry. To strike below the belt is
unpardonable and sure to be resented. Play fair,
play up and force the goal, but do it with a smile.
Sir William Meredith, leader of the Opposition
in the Ontario Assembly for many years, was a
strong speaker and decidedly aggressive. He had
a flne presence, at once prepossessing and attrac-
370

THE POLITICAL PLATFOEM
tive; but, apparently without intending it, his
voice had a rasping note which suggested irrita
tion out of keeping with his argument. His man
ner was unmistakably belligerent and overwrought.
He was always on " double quick " with fixed
bayonet, whether the enemy was in sight or not,
and he invariably left the impression upon an
opponent that if he did not leave him a mangled
corpse, to be carried to the morgue as a subject
for a coroner's jury, it was a miscarriage of- justice.
Aggressiveness does not consist in vociferation
or in violent gestures or in thumping the furniture
on the platform. Mackenzie and Cartwright were
as destructive as a Maxim gun, but cool as the
bullets which rain from its muzzle. The calmest
speaker I ever knew, whose words burned like
Greek flre, was Thomas Scatcherd, for many years
member for North Middlesex. Mr. Scatcherd's
voice was thin and far from robust, but it cut like
a scimitar. He was never personal, never angry,
but with the coolness of a stoic he carved up an
opponent as deftly as an expert in a public abat
toir. There was no malice in his manner, no sinis
ter sting in his voice, and his opponent, though
discomflted, never cherished feelings of personal
revenge. He never kicked an opponent when he
was down, but down he must go and assuredly
did go.
(7) A political speaker should aim at clearness
of expression. John Bright preferred simple Saxon
English to Latinized English. Much time would
be saved to both speaker and audience if state
ments were so clear as to render their repetition
unnecessary. Indeed, much of the repetition
271

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
which a speaker inflicts upon his audience arises
from the consciousness that a statement is not
clearly expressed and must be repeated in another
form to be understood. This is a fault to be
avoided. No better method for becoming tedious
and for wearing out the patience of an audience
could be adopted than by exasperating repetition.
Douglas Jerrold said of the Bishop of Exeter:
" What a brain he has for cobwebs ! How he drags
you along through sentence after sentence till your
head swims!" Avoid cobwebs — they shut out the
light. Daniel O'Connell said : " A speaker should
always know what he is aiming at, for if he aims
at nothing he is sure to hit it." Clearness is also
aided by the use of short sentences. Use the
period frequently in oral composition. You are
running a local train, not a limited express. It
relieves your audience to slow up occasionally. It
is said that Pitt carefully considered his sentences
before he uttered them, but that Fox threw him
self into the middle of a sentence and left it to
God Almighty to get him out again. Do not trust
such help too much. Be independent and flnd your
own way out.
But I am not writing a thesis on platform speak
ing. My own practice varied too often from the
qualities of good speaking herein barely outlined.
But let no one despair of making himself easily
understood if he knows his subject. Let every
speaker study his defects and limitations. The
race is not always to the swift nor the battle to
the strong.

372

CHAPTEE XX.
SPEECH-MAKING.
No doubt every speaker has his own way of pre
paring his speeches. If the mind is already stored
with the information required on any subject,
nothing remains to be done except to arrange it
in logical order and with due regard to effect.
Gladstone said that when his matter was in hand,
he liked to plough a mental furrow through it, to
aid his memory when the time came for using it.
When the mind, however, is not already stored
with the subject, no labour should be spared in
collecting the material for its elucidation. As a
preliminary to this task, there should flrst be a
mental survey of the whole fleld which it is pro
posed to consider! " What material do I need for
the purposes of my argument? What information
is necessary to elucidate this or that point of my
case? What are the facts requisite to strengthen
it?" — and so on. Then, having laid out the plan
of his speech as clearly as an architect prepares a
plan for a house, he proceeds to gather the material
necessary for the purpose. He betakes himself to
the library, to official documents, to newspaper
files. These are the quarry, the lumber yard, from
which his building material is selected. And right
carefully and with judgment must his work be
done, for there are many qualities of lumber and
stone. He takes abundant notes of what he flnds
19 373

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
— notes of historical facts, quotations from the
authorities he has consulted, memoranda of
required information — and then sits down to the
work of classiflcation and co-ordination, taking
care to reject all irrelevant matter and assuring
himself that every argument is fully strengthened
by evidence which cannot be gainsaid. All this is
done with his audience mentally before him. " Is
this conclusive?" he asks, as he reviews each argu
ment. " Is it clear? Will it need to be repeated
to be understood? Would a wayfaring man, though
a prejudiced partisan, understand it? Is it over
loaded?" and so on. Eobert Louis Stevenson's rule
in composition applies with equal force to speech-
making — " Eevise, recast, rewrite, reject." Yes,
revise many times. It is said that Lord Brougham
wrote the peroration of his speech in defence of
Queen Caroline flfteen times. Sir Oliver Mowat
told me that Edward Blake, who had charge of
the appeal in the St. Catharines Milling Co. before
the Privy Council, admitted that he revised and
rewrote his argument six times. That was prepara
tion. Ian Maclaren, speaking of Dr. McClure, said
that so great was the confidence of his patients
in his medical skill that " the vera sicht o' him was
victory." Preparation means victory for a speaker
as well as for a doctor.
As incidental to preparation it is legitimate and
proper to consider what illustrations, if any, will
be helpful in clinching an argument. An illustra
tion may either be the cement to hold the brick and
stone in place, or it may be a mullion or gargoyle
to give effect. For whatever purpose it is designed,
it should form part of the plan and should be
374

SPEECH-MAKING
inserted in its proper place; otherwise it may be a
deformity, and so weaken rather than strengthen
the argument. Illustrative anecdotes should be
used sparingly. They are often evidences of the
poverty of argument — pure padding which ham
pers and diverts the current of thought and lowers
the status of the speaker in the estimation of his
audience. I remember hearing an address by Dr.
De Witt Talmage which was reduced in quality
from what might have been a first-class to a third-
class speech because of superfluous and irrelevant
anecdotes. And now begins a very important part of pre
paration, too often overlooked. Lord Dufferin
said that to make a good speech one must soak his
brains in it. That is, he must " cogitate, cogitate,
cogitate." It must be present in his thoughts on
every convenient opportunity, must walk with him
on the street, must converse with him on the train,
must peradventure sleep with him if any bedfellow
is to be allowed. A story is told of Disraeli's wife,
that, as the footman closed the carriage in which
she was accompanying her husband to the House
of Commons where he was to deliver his flrst
Budget speech, her finger was caught in the door
of the carriage and badly bruised, but she made no
complaint, as it might have diverted her husband's
attention from the speech which was then simmer
ing in his mind. "Simmering" is a good word,
and many speeches would be greatly improved by
passing through several stages of this culinary
process. When the speech is ready for delivery the mem
ory should be tested as to its power to reproduce it
275

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
with the fewest possible notes. It is bad taste
for a speaker to be constantly adjusting his glasses
to find out what next to say. Notes not too cum
brous, however, may be a source of strength, as
they relieve the speaker from a certain nervous
strain, and are reassuring that any important point
which he has premeditated will not be forgotten.
They also impress the auditors with the idea that
the speech to which they are listening is the pro
duct of reflection and study. To memorize a
political speech, even if it could be accomplished
without any great effort, would rob it of its fresh
ness, and would prevent the speaker from adapta
tions to the audience often necessary for effect.
And now as to delivery — and here I do not pro
pose to give such instruction as will be found in
the textbooks on elocution. Nor should it be
assumed that I disparage such instruction. The
gold dust of books is assayed from experience, and
not to be despised because the bookbinder has put
his stamp upon them. A public speaker should
regard himself in a certain sense as the guest of his
audience, and present himself looking his best. Any
departure from good taste that would be unworthy
of a guest in a private family is equally offensive
on the platform. Eudeness has no charm even for
Bohemia. No one should attempt the rdle of Doctor
Johnson without Doctor Johnson's ability, and
such men are very rare. An easy manner, with
out any assumption of superiority or any affecta
tion, wears the best. There should neither be
timidity nor bravado. You have a message which
will speak for itself shortly. The message and the
376

SPEECH-MAKING
speaker should be worthy of attention, and shallow
pretensions will not serve for either.
The speaker's voice should reach his audience
without an apparent effort. If too loud it will
have a distressing effect, if too low the message
is lost. Nineteen out of twenty political speakers
are extravagant of vocal energy. Shouting is not
speaking. The full round tones of conversation
are quite loud enough for an audience of several
hundred, and much more restful to all parties con
cerned. Besides, the speaker must remember that
the voice is one of his greatest assets if engaged in
an extended campaign, and the utmost care should
be taken to conserve its efficiency. To that end, it
should never be strained beyond its normal regis
ter. If it is naturally weak, forcing it will soon
disable it altogether. If it is strong, be not too
prodigal of its powers.
But a speaker should be as careful to use his
voice sparingly off the platform as well as on it.
He should avoid speaking while riding on a train
or driving in the open air. Unconsciously he is
apt in such cases to speak in a high key, and before
he is aware his vocal elasticity has departed. I
remember an experience of mine in the campaign
of 1890. I was billed to speak at Alvinston, and
had to drive late in the afternoon a distance of
eleven miles, after the arrival of the train at Wat
ford. My driving mate was the candidate for the
riding. He had no power of restraining what Sir
John Macdonald called in John Hillyard Cameron
" a fatal volubility of speech." What was I to do?
I had many meetings still before me, and a cracked
voice cannot be repaired in a day. I must not
377

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
appear to be uncivil, but I must not be vocally
ruined. I buttoned my overcoat under my chin,
assumed a look of resignation and answered in
monosyllables. I never repeated the words " No "
and " Yes " as often in the same space of time
before or since.
The greatest danger of vocal relaxation, how
ever, is when the speaker emerges into the street
after a meeting. Then he is brought into contact,
particularly in winter, with a temperature perhaps
flfty or sixty degrees lower than the temperature
from which he has escaped. The only remedy is
to keep the mouth shut — it has been open for two
hours, perhaps. Give it a rest, and substitute some
other means for purposes of respiration. But still
more important is the change of underwear as soon
after the meeting as possible. Half an hour spent
in wet or even damp flannels may prove fatal to
the voice, and equally dangerous in other respects.
There should be no neglect of this precaution. In
1875 John B. Gough was my guest on the occasion
of his lecturing in Strathroy. These were the days
of lyceum lectures at high flgures, and the " stars "
had to take care of themselves. Mr. Gough retired
to his room as soon as he arrived, and refused to
be seen by anybody before the meeting. He even
declined to come downstairs to dine with some
gentlemen whom I had invited to meet him. He
was simply saving his voice and his nervous energy
for the public • meeting. After it was over,
however, he was willing to see anybody, and
was as animated in conversation as could be
desired. He also changed all his clothing, even
to his shoes, on returning from the meeting, and
378

SPEECH-MAKING
no doubt had a good rub from " Mary," as he con
stantly addressed his wife, who was his constant
attendant. Every public speaker, particularly in
an extended campaign, should follow his example.
Then it often happens in the life of a politician in
the rural districts that he is obliged to take long
drives after a meeting is over. Nothing is more
dangerous unless due care is observed. On the
public highway at night is the last place where a
speaker should be found, and no precaution can
fully obviate its dangers.
Now I may be asked what value I attach to the
various elocutionary devices usually recommended
for the platform. These devices I never studied
and never practised consciously. I know what is
meant by emphasis, gesture, inflection, and so forth.
I believe the rules by which they are governed are
sound, and there is no doubt as to their value.
Ordinarily any speaker who is deliberate, calm,
earnest and persuasive, will not fail to use all
needed gestures and to be as emphatic as the sub
ject requires. Gesture is a mere incident of speak
ing power, rather than a quality, and if not spon
taneous is worse than useless. Practical, every
day political platform speaking is the easiest,
simplest form of speaking. It requires no flowers
of rhetoric or no special elegance of diction. If
the man " behind the gun " knows his subject and
expresses himself with reasonable accuracy and
force, he will be effective. Call it homespun if
you choose ; but there may be more attractive goods
in the market than those produced on the domestic
loom that do not wear as well. Good plain speak
ing will never be a drug in the market.
279

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
But it must be remembered that every grade of
speaking has its own atmosphere, its vocality, its
diction, its psychological interpretation. A speech
in which sentiment largely prevails will be couched
in language of its own and will have a note or ring
or flavour entirely different from a speech of a
business character. That is to say, the grade of
the speech determines to a great extent its vocabu
lary, its rhythm; just as styles of poetic composi
tion call for a different measure and a different
form of thought. You could not put " Auld Lang
Syne" into hexameter verse — the metre is not
adapted to the sentiment. Do not let me be under
stood as saying that the higher qualities of speak
ing are unsuited for the poUtical platform. Far
from it. What I mean is that such platform speak
ing as every man of average attainments can suc
ceed in is both easy and simple, just because it
calls mainly for knowledge and articulation. Go
higher, and you are met with other considerations.
If a speaker can add to his knowledge sentiment,
elegance of diction, grace of delivery and a reflned
rhetoric, then he goes beyond the range of the
ordinary political platform and requires a greater
variety of talents. The finest steel is not the
smelted product of one mine; it is the product of
many different qualities of ore, blended and refined
and carbonized, till it emerges from the crucible
— a fitting texture for a Damascus blade. But this
brings us from the plains, where dwell the great
multitude, to Olivet and Horeb, where only the
prophets dwell.
What is oratory? Goldwin Smith has said
" Oratory is the fusion of reason and passion."
380

SPEECH-MAKING
Good. Edmund Burke has said " Oratory is half
poetry and half prose." Not so good. But what
is it? You may as well ask what is lightning, or
what is a storm at sea, or what is an English land
scape, or what is a flower. Wordsworth has
described poetry as
" A sense sublime
Of something far more deeply interfused.
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns and the round
ocean,
And the living air and the blue sky and in the mind of man."
Does any one know what poetry is from that
definition? Poetry cannot be defined, neither can
oratory. It must be heard and felt. Though you
may shout with Archimedes " Eureka ! Eureka !"
you are still unable to convey to any other its full
significance. I have heard nearly all the great
speakers of my generation. Of Britain, I have
heard Gladstone, Rosebery, Chamberlain, Sir
Edward Grey, Balfour, Lord Salisbury, Bryce, the
two Churchills (father and son), Dufferin, Lans
downe, Spurgeon, Doctor Parker. Of America, I
have heard Henry Ward Beecher, Conkling, Chaun
cey Depew, Wendell Phillips, J. B. Gough, W. H.
Evarts, De Witt Talmage, Robert Ingersoll, and
many educationists besides. All were men of great
platform power; but only two, Rosebery and
Beecher, appealed to me as fully endowed with
the gift of oratory. Both were possessed of a
picturesque style; both had a lofty diction and a
cadence like the waves of a mighty sea breaking
on the shore — now lashed into foam as it beat
against the rocks, then swelling over the beach
281

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
higher and still higher with a power which nothing
could restrain.
Happily there is, however, between the highest
flights of the eagle and the earth much space
wherein birds of weaker wing can fly. It is in
these middle spaces that most speakers must be
content to try their wings. For eagle flights
greater gifts are required, and greater attention
must be paid to language, to literary flnish, and
to preparation. Lord Chatham read Bailey's Dic
tionary twice to enlarge and perfect his command
of English. John Bright said his practice was to
write and commit to memory his exordium that
he might prepossess his audience favourably. The
body of the speech, he said, was mainly devoted to
argument and instruction and not memorized. The
peroration was always carefully prepared so as to
polarize in a few sweeping sentences the substance
of the speech, and send it sweeping over his
audience with the power of the whirlwind.
Good speaking presupposes good reading and
clear thinking. You cannot pump water out of a
dry well. Even springs are fed from some hidden
source. And so the mind of the speaker must be
fertilized from many springs and with the purest
literature. The great masters of oratory should
be studied, if perchance their spirit still hovers
near. History should be ransacked for illustra
tions and metaphor, and the poets should be daily
companions. To be great like Caesar you must feed
at Caesar's table. Burke has said that " a great
Empire and little minds ill become each other."
A great theme and a halting, vapid speech are
as badly mated. 383

SPEECH-MAKING
The thoughts of a great speaker are gathered
from near and far. Daniel Webster said that the
passage in one of his speeches so often quoted, in
which he spoke of the martial airs of England sur
rounding the whole world in; one continuous and
unbroken strain, was suggested to him on hearing
a British regimental band playing on the ramparts
of Quebec, and was lodged in his memory for
twelve years before he used it. Tennyson made
notes, as he travelled, of any object that impressed
itself upon his mind, if peradventure it might be
a garland for a poem. Disraeli made long quota
tions from speeches of other men that their ideas
might become familiar to htm, and in his eulogy
on the death of Wellington unconsciously repeated
the substance of an oration delivered in the French
Assembly on the death of St. Cyr.
The student of oratory should read, as a miser
makes money, to hoard it, or as bees store honey
before the flowers have faded, that he may bring
out of the treasure-house of memory " things new
and old." The more rare and beautiful their form
the more will they delight and edify. Nor should
he trust to the inspiration of the moment. A
modern author has said, " It is preparation that
piles the wood and lays the sacriflce, and then per
chance the celestial fire may descend." Edison
has said that inspiration is ninety per cent, per
spiration. Did Chantry's sleeping babes spring
from the marble in the night or did the sculptor
toil over them " with the unconquerable patience
of the artist"? Did Landseer paint his great pic
tures as a reporter sketches the proceedings of the
Police Court — a few pencil marks and it is done?
283

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
The speaker must not only strike the iron when it
is hot, but he must strike it hard enough and long
enough to make it hot. Then see him shape it to
his will. It is a dart, a javelin, an Excalibur, which
in his hands will cleave the helmets of opposing
knights in tournament or war.
A speaker should feel that while on his feet he
is the leader of public opinion — not its echo. He
should present to his audience only the highest
motives of action. He should never crawl — God
made him only a little lower than the angels. He
should do honour to his origin. Whoever fails, he
should not fail in taking high ground on all ques
tions of public and private morality and on every
thing that concerns the honour of the race or the
nation. To cringe or fawn or bully should be
equally offensive to him. " Whatsoever things are
pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever
things are of good report; if there be any virtue,
and if there be any praise, think (and speak) on
these things." The honour of the platform is in
his keeping for the time being. To be true to its
best traditions requires the exercise of all that is
best and noblest in human character. I know of
no idol so dear to the heart of the populace as
the man who can inspire and charm by his powers
of speech. It is deep answering to deep. It is the
thoughts of many thousands inarticulate until the
interpreter appears. It is the still small voice con
taining a divine message never so clearly under
stood before, and which calls forth a response as
joyous as an angelic song.
Do the public men of Canada realize what |his
power means for good, for the safety as well as
384

SPEECH-MAKING
the development of our institutions? " Oratory,"
said Morley, speaking of Gladstone's speech on
Home Eule in 1886, " is action, not words ; char
acter, will, conviction, purpose, personality." And
if it is true that like begets like, what a glorious
progeny oratory should produce. " Action, char
acter, personality " — think of it, ye young men
who are to-day standing under the illuminated
ceiling of the House of Commons. Is your oratory
action rather than words? How much of it is con
viction well reasoned and conclusive, and how
much a conglomeration of bastard views whose
paternity is unknown? How much of your own
personality — of your own noble, manly, heaven-
born self — is in your oratory, and how much of it
is plausible untruth, gilded insincerity, craven
surrender to prejudice and expediency? How
much character does it contain — character tested
in the crucible of public service, pitted against
temptation and meanness and cunning and still
unsmirched? Character that has stamped itself
upon your conversation, your profession, your
business — how much of these qualities pulsates in
your speeches? I cannot answer. Time will tell.

385

CHAPTEE XXI.
THE FRENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS.
Despite the tolerant feeUng which I desired to
cultivate when I entered public life, I went to
Ottawa with certain preconceptions of the French-
Canadians which I have found on wider acquaint
ance and investigation to be neither complimentary
nor just. These preconceptions were formed by
the public press of the early sixties, when public
opinion was agitated over Separate Schools and
Eepresentation by Population, and when political
speeches were rounded off by a vehement denuncia
tion of priestcraft and French domination. Was
it not the religious fanaticism of the French-Cana
dian, I was told, that projected Separate Schools
into our admirable system of education, and was
it not his desire to dominate Parliament that led
him to refuse to Upper Canada representation
according to population? Intermingled with these
denunciations, vague hints were given of racial
inferiority, of servile submission to clerical influ
ence, of mediaeval ideas of Ufe, of universal illit
eracy, and, last and worst of all, of doubtful loyalty
to British rule in Canada.
With these ideas it necessarily followed that I
should look upon my fellow members of the French
race with some degree of suspicion if not of dis
trust. They were to my mind different from the
people with whom I had associated all my life.
386

THE FEENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
What these peculiarities were I would now be able
to judge for myself. But to my great surprise I
found that as a member of Parliament the French-
Canadian was a gentleman of courteous demean
our, respectful in conversation, attentive to his
duties, and in no sense different in dress or man
ner from his Saxon fellow members. When he
entered the House he bowed to the Speaker with
a courtly air; when he arose to speak he did so
without any greater pretensions than other mem
bers of the House. He was amenable to the rules
of debate, and though perhaps more inflammable
than his colder-blooded colleagues of Saxon stock,
he was seldom the object of censure from the
chair or his fellow members. Outside the Cham
ber he was also like other men — he was fond of
the smoking-room, he knew his way to the res
taurant and was reasonably familiar with its con
tents; he cultivated the barber and the tailor,
generally wore his hair black and cut short, never
carried a cane, never swaggered, and never profaned
in the English language. In stature he varied from
the herculean proportions of Captain Fortin of
Gasp6, who stood six feet three or four and would
turn the scales at three hundred pounds, to men of
my own medium stature, of good Scottish blood
though I was.
But the modern, unassuming French-Canadian,
as he appeared in Parliament, was surely not the
French-Canadian of whom the press of my early
days had spoken in such furious terms. In appear
ance he might be unobjectionable — Papineau, the
great rebel, was a very handsome man, so his
biographer says, and it might be possible that the
387

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
ancestors of the men who sat around me were as
inflammable as Papineau and as violent in their
attacks upon British institutions. So I proposed to
study his history and ascertain his true place as a
factor in the politics of Canada. In this enquiry I
passed over his attitude during the Eevolutionary
War and his loyal defence of his country during the
War of 1812. This feature of his character is fully
set forth in every textbook on Canadian history,
and entitles him to a kindlier consideration than
he has often received for his devotion to a Govem
ment which, by force of arms, separated him from
the land of his forefathers.
It has often been asserted by the thoughtless
critic that the French-Canadian allows his racial
instincts and his partiality for his Church and lan
guage to dominate all his actions as a citizen and
a legislator. And in this connection the Quebec Act
of 1774 is recited as evidence that the French-Cana
dian wrested from the British Government conces
sions with regard to the Eoman Catholic Church
and the privileges and customs which he enjoyed
under the French regime which are incompatible
with the conditions of our more modern British in
stitutions. But the Quebec Act is not the first
instance in which racial predilections were recog
nized by the Parliament of Great Britain. We
have only to look to the terms of the Act of Union
between England and Scotland, passed in 1707, or
nearly 70 years before the Quebec Act was passed,
as an illustration of this peculiar form of racial
jealousy. The Union Act shows that before Scot
land parted with her own Parliament she carefully
guarded her reUgious and educational interests, her
388

THE FEENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
courts, her laws as to inheritance, and numerous
other matters of a national character, to a far
greater extent than the Quebec Act guarded the
privileges claimed by the French-Canadians. For
instance, it was provided by the Union Act as fol
lows : —
(1) That the Established Church of Scotland,
its worship, discipline and govemment, should be
unalterably secured in all succeeding generations
according to the Confession of Faith and the stan
dards of the Presbyterian Church. This clause
simply anticipated the Quebec Act, which guaran
teed to the Eoman Catholics of Quebec the free
exercise of all the rites of their Church.
(2) That the professors, principals, regents and
masters, or others bearing qffice in any university,
college or school within Scotland, in order to hold
office should subscribe to the Confession of Faith
and agree to conform to the government and dis
cipline thereof as prescribed by the Presbyterian
Church. There was no such obligation imposed
upon the principals of the schools or colleges of
Quebec. (3) That the laws with regard to inheritance
and the right of property which prevailed in Scot
land at the time of Union should remain inviolate.
This clause corresponds to the concession in the
Quebec Act which permitted the French-Canadians
to enjoy the privileges of citizenship which they
possessed before the passing of the Quebec Act.
(4) That no appeals were to be allowed from the
courts of Scotland to Westminster Hall. The Que
bec Act placed no such restrictions upon the courts
of Lower Canada.
20 389

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
(5) That the Eoyal Boroughs were to remain
intact for all time to come. No such protection
was extended to the French seignories in Lower
Canada. (6) That citizens of Scotland were not required
to take any oath of which their conscience did not
approve. The French population of Quebec were
relieved from the Act of Supremacy as a qualifica
tion for office because of its denunciation of the
Roman Catholic religion.
Then what were the aspirations of the French-
Canadian under his new charter of citizenship — the
Quebec Act? As to his religion and his ancient
privileges and customs it was acceptable, but in all
matters of self-government he was helpless. Until
1791 he was obliged to submit to the decrees of a
Council of State on which he was only partially
represented. He had also to submit, in all judicial
matters, to judges and officers of British training,
who were unfamiUar with the practice of the old
French courts to which he was accustomed, and
who did not understand his modes of thought or
his ideas of justice. No wonder that he protested
against the authority of a Council in the appoint
ment of which he had neither lot nor part. And
so the Constitutional Act of 1791 was accepted
joyfully as the dawn of better days. In a certain
measure it gave him what he wanted — a Parlia
ment composed of representatives of his own
choice. It gave him the freeman's right of pre
senting his grievances at the foot of the throne,
and so far as its powers permitted he was the
master of his own political fortunes. He soon
found, however, that the Constitution of 1791,
390

THE FRENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
though a great advance over the Council of State
which it superseded, was too narrow for the full
enjoyment of the political privileges to which he
believed he was entitled. His complaints were:
(1) That the popular branch was subject to the
negative of the nominated branch of the Assembly ;
(2) that the taxes which he paid into the treasury
were applied by the Executive as it saw fit with
out the consent of Parliament first had and
obtained; (3) that he had no voice in the manage
ment of public services, such as the Post Office and
the Customs; (4) that he was not consulted in the
disposal of patronage; (5) that his race was dis
criminated against in appointments to office; (6)
that the Executive Government was not responsible
to Parliament.
It does not require very close scrutiny to per
ceive that these demands of the French-Canadian
were the basis of popular government in Great
Britain, and of every other country where the
power of the Government was entrusted to the
people; and it is no matter of surprise that the
refusal of the Imperial Government to meet his
wishes in this regard aroused all the democratic
instincts of his nature and ultimately culminated
in a rebellion so violent that the constitution which
he ignored was suspended and a Council of State
re-established until quiet could be restored.
If we pause to get a clear conspectus of the
French-'Canadian as a factor in politics during this
period, what do we find? Is it that he is restless
under legitimate authority? So were the people
of Upper Canada at the same time. Is it that he
demanded constitutional checks upon an arbitrary
391

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
Executive? So did the people of Upper Canada;
so did the people of Great Britain before the Revo
lution of 1688; so did the people of France when
the present RepubUc was founded in 1871. Did
he lose patience with the delay of the Imperial
Govemment in redressing grievances and conced
ing to him political privileges enjoyed under
Responsible Govemment? So did the people of
Upper Canada ; so did Hampden and Oliver Crom
well. Did endurance cease to be a virtue and did
he resort to arms as the final court of appeal? So
did the insurgents of Upper Canada, and so they
would probably do again did they suffer similar
wrongs and injustice. The history of this long
period of eighty-two years from 1759 to 1841 shows
that the French-iCanadian, like all other advanced
races, believed with Bolingbroke in government
" by the people, for the people and through the
people," and that in blazing his way towards that
end he displayed no more impatience, no more
unreasonableness and no more disregard of consti
tutional methods than other races. If to be demo
cratic in his modes of government is an offence,
then he belongs to a world-wide community of
offenders. The discontent arising from the limitations of
the Constitutional Act of 1791 led to repeated con
flicts between the Parliament and the Executive
Government, and in 1837 culminated in open rebel
lion against the Government. As a similar con
dition existed in Upper Canada which threatened
the relations of Canada with the mother
country, the Imperial Government commissioned
Lord Durham, an English statesman of great
392

THE FEENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
repute, to visit Canada and to make full enquiry
into the causes of the discontent, to report thereon,
and to make such recommendations as in his
opinion would promote the future peace and har
mony of the two Provinces. The Eeport submitted
by Lord Durham is in some respects one of the
ablest documents in the British archives. But
coming from a man with his knowledge of the
political history of his own country, and his experi
ence in diplomacy, it is rather a surprise to find
him attributing the troubles in Lower Canada to
racial rather than political causes. He had only
to look across the Ottawa Eiver to Upper Canada
and he would find troubles of precisely the same
character where no racial jealousies or animosities
existed, although possibly in Lower Canada politi
cal injustice was more acutely felt and resented
because of racial differences. The truth is that the
English-speaking people of Quebec were no less
aroused than the French population, and that
Doctor Nelson, who was the leader on the English
side, was as much a party to unconstitutional
methods of reform as Papineau or Cartier. It was
not, as Lord Durham said, a war of two races
within a nation but a war of two races against a
nation, that is, against the stern hand of Great
Britain, who looked for many years with appar
ent indifference upon wrongs which she only could
redress. For the troubles which Lord Durham discov
ered he proposed two remedies: first, the conces
sion of Eesponsible Government as it was in Great
Britain, the other the union of Upper and Lower
Canada. The concession of Responsible Govern-
293

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
ment and the union of the two Canadas were both
statesmanlike propositions, and worthy of their
author, but the reason given for this union, namely,
the Anglicizing of the French race and the oblitera
tion of every trace of the French language, French
institutions and political traditions, displays unex
pected want of political foresight. More, it was a
menace at the very outset to the pacification of the
two races, which it was intended to serve. All
history shows that racial absorption is retarded
rather than hastened by arbitrary measures, and
I know of no instance in colonial history in
which Great Britain adopted such a policy in
the government of her colonies. The principality
of Wales still maintains many of the tradi
tions of the ancient Druids, and the Welsh lan
guage of those olden days is still the language of
her people. Why has Wales not been Anglicized?
The same may be said of the Highlands of Scot
land and of the greater part of Ireland. Even
Russia has not been able to assimilate the Poles,
although exercising absolute control over their
institutions. In order that Lord Durham's recommendation
may not be misunderstood, I submit the following
extracts from his Report, annotated by Sir C. P.
Lucas and issued by the Clarendon Press, 1912 :
" It must henceforth be the first and steady pur
pose of the British Government to establish an
English population with EngUsh laws and lan
guage in this Province, and to trust this govern
ment to none but a decidedly English Legislature."
—Page 228. 294

THE FRENCH^CANADIAN IN POLITICS
" It is but a question of time and mode, it is but
to determine whether the small number of French
who now inhabit Lower Canada shall be made Eng
lish under a Government which can protect them,
or whether the process shall be delayed until a
much larger number shall have to undergo at the
rude hands of its uncontrolled rivals the extinction
of a nationality strengthened and embittered by
continuance." — Page 292.
" There can hardly be conceived a nationality
more destitute of all that can invigorate and ele
vate a people than that which is exhibited by the
descendants of the French in Lower Canada, owing
to their retaining their peculiar language and man
ners. They are a people with no history and no
literature." — ^Page 294.
" In any plan which may be adopted for the
future management of Lower Canada, the first
object ought to be that of making it an English
Province, and that with this end in view, the
ascendancy should never again be placed in any
hands but those of an English population. . . .
Lower Canada must be governed now as it must be
hereafter, by an English population." — Page 296.
" The only power that can be effectual at once
in coercing the present disaffection, and hereafter
obliterating the nationality of the French-Cana
dians, is that of a numerical majority of a loyal
and English population." — Page 299.
When the contents of Lord Durham's report
became known in Lower Canada, there was, as
might have been expected, the greatest alarm felt.
Under the Act of 1791 the French-Canadian felt
395

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
that the English-speaking population, although
comparatively few in number, treated him with
scant deference. To bring him into a union with
another Province where this condition would be
aggravated was not a very promising outlook. But
he had no alternative. The British Parliament was
supreme and he was powerless to resist, and so the
Union Act was accepted, and in obedience to the
mandate of the Governor-General representatives
were elected to the Union Parliament. No wonder
that he entered with many misgivings upon a
second period of his career as a French-Canadian
into the uncertain field of Canadian poUtics.
Great, however, as were his fears, he was glad
to find that the Union Act relieved him from nearly
every political disability from which he suffered
under the Act of 1791. It gave him Eesponsible
Government, the control of the revenues, and
opened up for him a career in a much wider arena
than he previously occupied. His democratic
aspirations were fully satisfied, and there was no
menace contained in the Act against his race or
religion that imperilled the one or the other. Only
one section, (41), which discriminated against the
French language in the publication of Parlia
mentary documents, could be objected to, and even
that was capable, he believed, of friendly adjust
ment. In spite of this refiection on his language he
realized that his freedom had been greatly enlarged.
He was no longer bound down by restrictions that
harassed him at every turn. His political emanci
pation was assured, and so between hope and fear
he accepted the responsibilities and duties imposed
396

THE FEENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS .
upon him by the Union Act and prepared to show
that he was not deserving of the stigma cast upon
his race and language by Lord Durham. Happily,
too, he was not received by the representatives of
Upper Canada as a political outcast. The discrim
ination contained in the Union Act against his
language was repealed by the Imperial Govern
ment, but pending that repeal the French language
was given the same status in the ParUament as the
English language. It was used in debate at the
option of the speaker, motions from the chair
were by rule of the House read in both languages
before being submitted to Parliament, and the
French-Canadian could read a report of the pro
ceedings and other Parliamentary documents from
day to day in his own language, as he was accus
tomed to do before the union.
The question of racial discrimination having been
disposed of, let me now enquire how the French-
Canadian conducted himself in the larger sphere
of politics in which he had now entered. To trace
his hand in all the legislation that was passed
during the existence of the Union Act would be a
task too arduous, and even were it accomplished
would have no real political significance. To agree
or disagree with his new associates on ordinary
matters of business, whether right or wrong, is
inseparable from business relationship of every
description. The important thing to consider is
his attitude in the settlement of questions of policy
involving principles of good government. True to
his demands for constitutional government before
the Union, we find him, under the leadership of
Lafontaine, uniting with Baldwin to make the
297

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
principle of Eesponsible Govemment effective, and
from this attitude he never varied. He next
appears as the coadjutor of the advocates of equal
ity of religious privilege. By an Act of the Imperial
Parliament, passed in 1793, one-seventh of the
uncleared lands of Canada were set apart for the
support of the Protestant Church. This at first
was assumed to mean the Anglican Church, but it
was afterwards held to include the Church of
Scotland. The dissenting churches, Eoman Cath
oUc as well as Protestant, complained that to
deprive them of the benefits of this endowment
was an invidious discrimination and a reflection
upon the teachings of their church. The Anglican
Church and the Church of Scotland were so closely
allied with the ruling powers in Upper Can
ada that although numerically much inferior,
they were able to control the Assembly. The
Family Compact was their nestling, and that Com
pact was all-powerful within the walls of Parlia
ment. The dissenting churches found, however,
faithful allies in the French-Canadian representa
tives, and after obtaining authority from the
Imperial Government to dispose of the lands
known as the Clergy Eeserves, a Bill was passed
by which the proceeds of these Eeserves were
devoted to education and other secular purposes,
while at the same time conserving existing vested
rights. On the decisive vote on the Bill a majority
of the French-Canadians voted in its favour.
In the case of Separate Schools the French-Cana
dian pursued a similar course, namely, that of
equality of privilege. In Lower Canada, prior to
the Union, Separate Schools had been conceded to
298

THE FEENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
the Protestant population. Aud although educa
tional conditions in the two Provinces were not
identical, he claimed that the privilege of Separate
Schools conceded to the Protestant minority of
Lower Canada should be also extended to the
-Catholic minority of Upper Canada. The prece
dent, though not without some force, was by no
means conclusive, as in the case of Lower Canada
the schools of the majority were religious and so
barred against Protestants; in Upper Canada the
schools were undenominational, and open to every
race and creed without distinction. The people of
Upper Canada were strongly in favour of their
own system of education. They saw that if
Separate Schools were estabUshed they would
create a distinctive cleavage between Protestants
and Catholics which might be detrimental to the
future political harmony of the Province. As time
went on, however, public opinion in Ontario veered
in the direction of Separate Schools, and on the
final motion for passing the Bill the vote stood
seventy- four to thirty. An analysis of the vote
shows that a majority of the representatives of
Upper Canada who recorded their votes were
against the Bill. Its final passage was, therefore,
due to the votes of the -FrenchJCanadians, whose
action in this regard furnished the occasion for a
very copious vocabulary for the denunciation of
French domination. The Bill, though considered
as of doubtful merit at the time, has proved to be
educationally efficient, notwithstanding the doubts
and criticism of its opponents.
Another instance in which the principle of
equality of privilege was involved was the demand
299

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTER
made by a considerable number of the representa
tives from Ontario for representation by popula
tion, commonly known as " Rep. by Pop." Against
this demand Lower Canada steadily set its face.
At the date of the Union Act the two Provinces
entered the Union with an equal number of repre
sentatives, although the population of Lower Can
ada was greater than that of Upper Canada by
two hundred thousand. With the settlement of
Upper Canada their relative positions were in time
reversed, hence the demand. The answer of Lower
Canada was that the fact of superiority in num
bers was not considered when it entered the Union,
therefore why should it be considered now? At
the date of the Union, Lower Canada on the basis
of population should have been allowed sixty seats
in the Assembly instead of forty-two — the number
fixed by the Act for each Province. As might be
expected the demand of Upper Canada was vigor
ously opposed by Lower Canada, and so further
accentuated the cry of French domination, and as
I was more a student of the press than of political
principles, I readily decided in my callow days that
the French-Canadian was narrow-minded, and that
his obliteration, as Lord Durham recommended,
would be a substantial advantage to Canada.
The third period of Canadian history at which
we arrive, namely, the Confederation of the British
Provinces of North America, is of surpassing inter
est. Up to this point the French-Canadian was
on an equality in the Legislature of Canada with
the English-speaking representatives. To embark
under a new constitution which effectually
destroyed that equality would appear somewhat
300

THE FRENCH^ANADIAN IN POLITICS
hazardous where class interests were concerned,
and in my reading of the conflict between the two
races I am more than surprised that the French
of Quebec ever agreed to Confederation.
It was no doubt under the influence of this dread
that the Hon. A. A. Dorion, the leader of the French
Liberals in Quebec, denounced Confederation as a
conspiracy to Anglicize the French-Canadians and
place them at the mercy of a majority hostile to
their religious and national interests. He argued
that the provisions in the new Constitution whereby
the representation of the English Provinces would
be increased according to population, while Lower
Canada was condemned to a stationary representa
tion, would subject the French-Canadians to the
rule of the majority that would forever increase,
and sooner or later invite conflict which would
destroy the political influence of the French ele
ment in Lower Canada. Mr. Joly, another French
Liberal, said, " As a French-'Canadian I appeal to
my fellow countrymen against the Union." He
reminded them of the precious inheritance conflded
to their keeping — an inheritance, he said, sanctified
by the blood of their fathers and which it was their
duty to hand down to their children as faultless as
they received it.
Notwithstanding these pessimistic though not
unnatural fears as to the future of the French-
Canadian, Sir George E. Cartier, leader of the
dominant political party of his Province, took
strong grounds in favour of the Union. He argued
that under the proposed federation Quebec had
nothing to fear, as her Legislature was to be
invested with control of all matters that affected
301

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
her racial or religious privileges. In the larger
matters of transportation and finance and tariffs,
her interests were common with all other Provinces,
and legislation that advanced their interests would
necessarily advance the interests of Quebec. To
take a racial or a religious view of such a large
question, he claimed, was unworthy of the French
race. So far the French-Canadian had borne his
full share in the development of Canada, in the
maintenance of British institutions, and in the
defence of the country. Whj, then, should not the
French-Canadian share in the prospective glory of
a great federation which would give Canada a place
among the nations of the world? This appeal to
his compatriots had a powerful effect, and so we
find in every vote that was taken in the old Par
liament of Canada with regard to Confederation,
that a majority of the French- Canadians were in
favour of the Union. The final vote was ninety-
one for Confederation and thirty-three against.
Had the French- Canadians responded to the appeal
made to their race and their religion, and had
they been more anxious for the preservation of
the special privileges conceded by the Quebec Act
of 1774 than for the consolidation of British North
America, Confederation would have been a dream
instead of the tremendous reality it is to-day.
The next step towards the expansion of the
Dominion was taken at the first session of the
Parliament of Canada, held in 1867-8, and con
sisted of a proposal for the acquisition of the
North-West Territories. Here again, if the racial
idea dominated the French-Canadian, one would
expect not only the most resolute opposition to
303

THE FRENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
such a measure but a solid vote against it. What
had the French- Canadian to gain from the acquisi
tion of such a territory? He could not expect it
to be peopled by immigrants of his own race, nor by
any large number of the people of his own Pro
vince. If acquired and settled, it would still more
reduce the relative influence of his Province in the
councils of the Dominion, and add to the cost of
administration, for which he would be bound to
pay his share. The measure was, however, adopted
after two divisions. In the flrst the vote stood 104
to 41, only 13 of the 41 being French-Canadians;
and in the second division the vote was 121 to 15.
The majority of the French-Canadians in both
cases voted for adding practically an empire to the
Dominion. In 1871 it was proposed to extend the Dominion
of Canada to the Pacific Ocean by the admission
of British Columbia. Looking at the matter from
a French-Canadian standpoint, one would expect
the same objection to be raised in this case as
might have been raised against the acquisition of
the North-West Territories. The division, how
ever, on the admission of British Columbia showed
that the French- Canadian had no quarrel with the
idea of expansion westward, as out of sixty-seven
members who voted against the admission of Brit
ish Columbia only fifteen were French-Canadians.
What more could they have done in these three
instances had they been of the same blood as the
majority? Happily questions of race and creed when they
do arise are chiefly conflned to the Provincial Leg
islatures. One striking instance, however, that
303

GETTING INTO PARLIAMENT AND AFTER
stirred up racial feeling occurred in the House
of Commons in 1874, on a motion by Mr. Bowell
that Riel, who was the leader of the rebellion in
Manitoba in 1869-70, should be expelled from Par
liament. On that occasion every representative
from Quebec, English as well as French, with two
exceptions, voted against Mr. Bowell's motion.
Though many reasons were urged, some of them
with considerable effect, why Riel should not be
expelled from the House, I always felt that racial
sympathy had a good deal to do with the action of
the French-Canadian on that vote.
But with this exception the severest critic can
not show that on any question on which Parlia
ment has given a decision since Confederation, he
has acted under less generous motives or with a
narrower view of the interests of Canada than have
his English-speaking fellow subjects. Even where
religious questions were involved, as in the Jesuit
Estates BiU, the Remedial Bill of 1896 and the
granting of a Constitution to Alberta in 1905, his
vote was divided, as was the vote of the English-
speaking representatives.
If it be charged that he votes as a Eoman Cath
olic because his church is interested, so it may be
said of the Eoman Catholics of other races, and so
it could have been said more than once of Protest
ants in the history of Canada. In the Province of
Ontario for the greater part of my lifetime reli
gious questions have entered very largely into poli
tical contests, and with varying results. From
1845 to 1855 we fought over the secularization of
the Clergy Eeserves ; from 1842 to 1863 we had the
question of Separate Schools; from 1872 to 1896
304

THE FEENCH-CANADIAN IN POLITICS
we had the Eiel Eebellion, the Manitoba School
question and the Eemedial Bill, all of which
affected more or less party alignments. Since 1908
we have been agitated over the Ne Temere decree.
None of these to any extent disturbed the serenity
of the French-Canadians.
It may be said that the French- Canadian is more
impulsive than the Saxon, that he is more under
the influence of the demagogue, and so affected by
his emotions that he is easily swayed from one
side of politics to the other. What is his record on
this point? Eef erring to the Parliamentary Guide
of 1912, page 272, I flnd a summary of the Domin
ion general elections since Confederation which
gives the standing of both political parties in the
different Provinces on each occasion. The tabula
tion shows the number of seats carried by Conser
vatives in Ontario and Quebec. To give the Lib
eral seats held is unnecessary, for the gain or loss
in one case shows the gain or loss in the other.
Ont. Que. Ont. Que.
1867  46 45 1891  48 30
1872  38 38 1896  43 16
1874  24 32 1900  55 7
1878  59 45 1904  48 11
1882  54 48 1908  48 11
1887  52 33 1911  72 27
From the above table it will be seen that the
Conservative vote in the Province of Quebec was
almost as steady as in the Province of Ontario. It
was only in 1896, under the leadership of Sir Wil
frid Laurier, that any decided change took place —
21 305

GETTING INTO PAELIAMENT AND AFTEE
a change that often takes place under constitu
tional government where no racial differences
enter into the contest.
Has the French-Canadian proved his capacity
for flUing responsible positions under the Crown?
Eead the life of Lafontaine, of Morin, of Cartier, of
Dorion, of Joly, of Laurier, as to the Dominion,
and Chauveau, De Boucherville, Marchand and Sir
Lomer Gouin in the Quebec Legislature, and the
answer will not be disappointing. In the House
of Commons, tn the Senate, in the Speaker's chair
of both Houses, in Spencerwood, in the Supreme
Court, he has taken a place side by side with
men of the Saxon race without any evidence of
mental inequality or inferiority. In all these
spheres I have seen him or have studied his
record, and simply flnd that he is made of the
same clay as other men, and with the ordinary in-
flrmities of our common humanity. He may be sub
ject to the temptations of office, and to an ambition
not always glorifled by achievement. He may even
give preference at times to ecclesiastical interests
over political obligations, but one thing is certain,
that he is not opposed to the highest ideals of
Canadian nationality, nor to the maintenance of
responsible govemment and all that it involves as
a fundamental principle of legislation. He may not
represent all the virtues on the calendar, but his
record for over 150 years, so far as I can discover,
proves that he was not the menace to civil and
religious liberty which he was declared to be by
the Press of forty years ago.

306

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX I.

WORK ACCOMPLISHED BY THE EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT.

The following statements show what was accomplished by the
Education Department during my term as Minister of Education
from 1883 to 1899:
PuBUc Schools — ^New Featuees Introduced.
1. Revised and consolidated the Acts and regulations re
specting Public Schools.
2. Established Kindergartens as part of the Public and
Separate School system.
3. Provided for instruction in Household Science and
manual training.
4. Required Public Schools to be opened and closed with
the reading of Scriptures and devotional exercises, and
authorized the use of Scripture readings for thia purpose.
5. Placed the study of Canadian history, drawing, tem
perance and hygiene on the list of obligatory subjects of
PubUc School course.
6. Prepared and authorized a new series of textbooks in
every subject on the Public School course.
7. Reduced the number of authorized textbooks used in
Public Schools from sixty-five (the number authorized in
1883) to eleven in 1898, or one textbook on each subjeei.
8. Provided for the manufacture of all textbooks used in
Public, Separate and High Schools in Canada. In 1883, out
of a total of 184 textbooks in use in Ontario schools, 87
were imported from Great Britain or the United States. In
1904 only the printed sheets of one textbook were Imported.
9. Secured the preparation of all textbooks by Canadian
authors with only one exception. In 1883, out of a total of
184 textbooks, 135 were the product of American or British
authors. 10. Enlarged the course of study for teachers' certificates.
309

APPENDIX I.

11. Raised the qualification of examiners for teachers' cer
tificates and restricted apiwlntments to the teaching pro
fession. 12. Established Arbor Day and Empire Day.
13. Extended summer holidays to six weeks in rural schools
and to two months in urban schools, and added Easter
holidays. 14. Extended term of Model Schools from six weeks to
three month®.
15. Established CoTinty Model School Libraries.
16. Established District Model Schools.
17. Provided for libraries in Public Schools for the use
of pupils.
18. Established libraries in teachers' institutes.
19. Changed Mechanic Institute Libraries to Public Lib
raries. 20. Establtehed Art Schools.
21. Appointed historiographer to compile history of the
school system of the Province.
22. Established continuation classes In Public Schools.
23. Appointed inspectors for schools of New Ontario.
24. Provided a flxed grant of flOO for each school in the
unorganized districts.
25. Arranged for the removal of Upper Canada College to
a new site and for the transfer of the old site on King
Street to the University.
26. Established a Technical School in Toronto, Brantford,
Stratford, Hamilton, Berlin, etc. 1883. 1904.
Number of Public Schools  5,252 6,758
Number of teachers  6,911 8,610
Number of kindergarten teachers  . . 255
Number of kindergarten pupils  . . 12,021
Number of first-class certificates  211 633
Number of second-class certificates  2,169 4,192
Number of teachers trained at Normal School 1,853 4,564
Number of teachers holding University
degree  86
Sepabatb Schools — ^New Featuees Intboduced.
1. Amended and consolidated the Separate Schools Act.
2. Appointed an additional inspector for Separate Schools.
3. Directed the preparation of a series of Readers for
Separate Schools.
4. Established a Model School for training teachers of
Bilingual Schools.
5. Directed the preparation of a series of Bilingual Readers.
6. Appointed an inspector for Bilingual Schools.
310

APPENDIX I.
1883. 1904.
Number of Separate Schools  194 419
Number of teachers  397 944
Average attendance of pupils  13,705 29,920
Total expenditure  $153,611 $506,311
High Schools— New Features Intboduced.
1. Changed the Government grants to High Schools from a
fixed sum to a grant based on equipment, salaries of teachers,
conditions of premises, etc.
2. Established science courses in Physics, Botany and
Biology. 3. Required Collegiate Institutes to provide specialists in
certain departments of High School work.
4. Abolished Second Class Certificates as a qualification
for High School masters.
5. Established reference libraries in High Schools and Col
legiate Institutes.
6. Established gymnasiums and corps of military cadets
in High Schools and Collegiate Institutes.
7. Authorized a new series of textbooks for High Schools.
8. Arranged a definite qualiflcation for specialists on the
basis of equivalents in all the universities of Canada.
9. Established a Normal College at Hamilton for the train
ing of High School teachers.
High Schools and Collegiate Institutes. 1883. 1904.
Number of High Schools  88 96
Number of Collegiate Institutes  16 42
Number of teachers  347 661
Number of pupils  11,483 27,759
Continuation Classes  . . 482
Number of pupils enrolled  . . 5,349
Pupils passed Matriculation examination . 277 851
Pupils passed Entrance examination (1882) 4,371 14,632
Normal Schools — New Featubes Intboduced.
1. Erected and opened an additional Normal School at
London, making the number three instead of two, as in
1883. Cost, $100,798.
2. Enlarged the Normal School in Toronto by the addi
tion of a third storey to the main building, rebuilt the Model
School and extended the Normal School proper for the better
accommodation of the Department of Household Science and
Manual Training, and other Improvements. Cost, $213,000.
311

APPENDIX I.
3. Enlarged Normal School at Ottawa by providing a new
public hall and departments for Household Science and the
Normal Kindergarten. Cost, $110,000.
4. Extended the terms of the Normal School from four
months to six. Subsequently extended under Mr. Harcourt
to one year.
5. Established a department for the training of Kinder
garten teachers in the three Normal Schools.
6. Established courses of instruction in Household Science
and Manual Training in the Normal Schools. Subsequently
enlarged under Mr. Harcourt.
7. Opened a gallery for the exhibition of the work of
Canadian artists in the Departmental Buildings, Toronto.
8. Established the Department of Canadian Archaeology and
appointed Curator. The collection of Indian relics made by
the Curator ranks among the best on the continent.
9. Founded the Ontario Historical Society, with headquar
ters at the Education Department.
10. Collected for the use of the Normal School students
and others specimens of the flowers of Ontario.
11. A similar collection of the birds of Ontario scienti
fically classified and arranged.
12. Enlarged the Art Gallery of the Department, and added
the busts of all the Governors^General of Canada, the Lieu
tenant-Governors of Ontario, the Chancellors of the Univer
sities and the Chief Justices of the High Court.
School of Peactioal Science — 1883-1904.
1. Enlarged the buildings of the School of Science, To
ronto, at different times and added to the equipment. Total
cost for these purposes, $650,000.
2. Enlarged the staff and extended the courses of study.
3. Established summer classes at different points in New
Ontario for short courses in Mining.
4. Established a reference library in School of Science for
the use of students and staff.
5. Established, a Mining School at Kingston, secured the
erection of new buildings and made provision towards main
tenance. Aid towards buildings over $100,000 and for main
tenance annually about $20,000. 1883. 1904.
Value of buildings and equipment ...  $40,000 $650,000
Number of professors, lecturers, etc  2 27
Number of students  21 483
312

APPENDIX I.

Univeesitt or Toeonto.
1. Secured legislation for the federation of all the univer
sities of Ontario.
2. Made provision for the establishment of a Medical Fac
ulty in the University of Toronto and the federation of ex
isting Medical Colleges. Toronto Medical School was fed
erated in 1886 and Trinity Medical School In 1903-4.
3. Established the Department of Political Science and
Psychology In the Provincial University.
4. Enlarged the staff of the Provincial University in all its
Departments. 5. Secured the aflailation with Toronto University of the
following colleges: Royal College of Dental Surgeons, School
of Pharmacy, Agricultural College, Veterinary College, two
Schools of Music, and several others.
6. Secured from the Legislature for the endowment of the
University at different times the appropriation of Crown
lands lin New Ontario amounting to ten townships of 240,000
acres of Crown land.
7. Secured appropriation from the Legislature to meet the
annual needs of the University in excess of Its own annual in
come. 8. Co-operated with the trustees of the University in the
erection of new buildings for (1) Biology, (2) Chemistry,
(3) Students' Union and Gymnasium, (4) Convocation Hall,
(5) Women's Residence, (6) University Library, (7) Physics
Building, (8) Medical Buildings.
9. Recommended the grant of $160,000 for the restoration
of the University after the fire of 1890.
10. Gave assurance of a grant of $100,000 for the new
Medical Hospital in the Interests of medical education.
1882-3. 1903-4.
Number of students in Arts  320 1,209
Number of professors and instructors in
Arts  21 120
Number of students in Medicine  . . 652
Number of professors and Instructors in
Medicine  . . 96
Number of federated or afBlIated colleges 3 15
Number of students in colleges federated
or affiliated with University*  650 3,157
Number of degrees granted in Arts  65 141
Other degrees  21 321
Cost of University staff and maintenance. $66,285 $213,720
• The affiliated colleges in 1882-3 were Trinity Medical School,
Toronto Medical College, St. Michael's College and Knox College.
The number of students in attendance would probably aggregate
650. Exact flgures cannot be obtained. 313

APPENDIX II.

SHALL CANADA ALWAYS BE A DEPENDENCY
OF THE EMPIRE ?
Extension of the Addeess Deuyeeed by the Hon. Geoege
W. Ross, at the Banquet tendered to Viscount
MiLNEE BY the NATIONAL ClUB, OCTOBEE 28tH, 1908.

The address which follows is an extension of the notes of
the address which the Hon. Geo. W. Ross delivered in reply
to the toast " The Empire," proposed by the Hon. Geo. E.
Foster at the banquet tendered by the National Club to Vis
count Milner, on the occasion of his visit to Toronto, October
28th, 1908. Col. Geo. T. Denison in the Chair. Mr. Ross
referred In complimentary terms to Viscount Milner's speech
and to the services he rendered the Empire In South Africa,
and also to the lucid and statesmanlike manner In which he
discussed the relations of the colonies to the Imperial Gov
ernment. The greatest example In the history of the world of a
stable, progressive and efflcient government, purely democratic
in conception and operation. Is furnished by the United States
of America. And the greatest example in the history of the
world of colonial government, federal In form and democratic
to the verge of independence, is furnished by the Dominion
of Canada. In the manner of their development, Canada and
the United States are in many respects analogous. Both gov
ernments are based upon the federal principle. Both had
well-defined constitutions and extensive powers of legislation
before becoming a federal union. Both were a combination of
widely-diversified interests and resources. Both felt the neces
sity of enlarging their boundaries by acquiring the title to
adjoining territory — the United States by the purchase of
Louisiana from France in 1803, and Canada by the purchase
of the rights of the Hudson's Bay Company to Prince Rupert's
Land in 1868. Both projected their great transportation sys
tems from east to west. Both depended largely fbr the
increase of population upon the overflow of European coun-
314

APPENDIX II.
tries, and both, under various forms and with traditional modi
fications, have admitted the masses of the people to a large
share in government. The United States has demonstrated,
contrary to the expectations, and it may be the wishes, of the
monarchs of Europe, that democratic government is compatible
with the security of life and property — with law and order
In the community. Canada has shown that all the privileges
of democracy are compatible with colonial self-government.
No nation, no matter how broad-based its constitution, could,
in practice, enjoy greater liberty than Canada enjoys in the
internal and local administration of its affairs. It is only
when we approach the zone of Imperial Interests that we
realize our limitations, and that, notwithstanding the liberality
of our constitution, we are In fact not a nation, but a depend
ency, in the full sense of the term. Within that Imperial
zone Imperial authority Is supreme, and Interests of the great
est moment to us may be disposed of without our will or
consent. The Ashburton Treaty, the Oregon Treaty, the Wash
ington Treaty and the Alaska boundary award amply establish
this proposition. And although we have no quarrel with the
Imperial Govemment, although, on the contrary, at no time
In our history has the feeling of love, loyalty and devotion to
the Empire been more sincere and substantial than now, yet
without doing violence to those feelings In the slightest, or
without arousing even a suspicion as to their sincerity, we
may very properly ask ourselves, " Is it not possible to so
adjust our relations to the mother country as to strengthen
what Gladstone called ' the noble fabric of the British Empire,'
and at the same time obtain a status of greater dignity and
influence for ourselves than Is possible under colonial condi
tions?" We are no longer infantile in years or in experience.
We have shown our ability to grapple with all the political
problems which have arisen in the last hundred years, and of
settling them successfully and honourably. We have measured
up to every call that commerce or democracy or public morality
has made upon us. Why should we not, then, cast our horo
scope anew? Surely the statesmanship of the twentieth cen
tury has not lost that vigour and prescience which, in a glor
ious past, raised the British Empire to the sovereignty of the
world. And If the cultivation of the arts of peace and enter
prise and loyalty is a qualiflcation for a higher than a meredy
colonial status, Canada's promotion should not be long delayed.
Said the Hon. Joseph Howe, In the Legislative Assembly of
Nova Scotia, in 1854, when discussing the relations of the
Provinces to the Empire, "The day is not far distant when
our sons, standing in our places, trained In the enjoyment of
public lilDerty by those who have gone before them, and com
pelled to be statesmen by the throbbing of their British blood
and by the necessities of their position, will be heard across
the Atlantic." 315

APPENDIX II.
Now, what are our claims for the reconsideration of our
Imperial relations? First, we have established our political
ascendancy over the whole of British North America, that is,
over one-fourth of the British Empire, containing a population
of 7,000,000 souls. No monarch In Europe, save one, can claim
jurisdiction over so vast a domain. In advancing this propo
sition I do not wish to forget what we owe to the example,
the guidance and protection in the past, and even now, of the
motherland. Nevertheless, I think It will be admitted that the
enterprise and statesmanship which evolved Confederation,
and which gave to Canada her ascendancy in British North
America, was to the manner born — ^was Canadian, not Imperial.
True there were times in our history when the withdrawal of
the protecting arm of the mother country would have wrecked
all our hopes, and perhaps have completely changed our des
tiny, and yet it Is equally true that at other times the minds
of British statesmen were moved, all too reluctantly, to grant
privileges of citizenship, which, if finally denied, would have
been equally fatal to our aspirations. And although occasion
ally there was a momentary hesitation In Canada as to
whether her colonial connection was In her best interest, this
hesitation was no more a pause In her career than the hesita
tion and doubt of British statesmen as to colonial connection
from the standpoint of Imperial interest.
Many illustrations of this hesitation might be cited. In the
debate In the British House of Commons on Canada, December
22nd, 1837, Disraeli said, " That our dominion In America
should now be brought to a conclusion I sincerely desire, but
I desire It should terminate in peace and friendship. Great
would be the amicable separation of the two countries, and
great would be the honour this country would reap in consent
ing to such a state."
Again, in writing to Earl Malmesbury In 1852, he said,
" These wretched colonies will be all independent in a few
years, and are a millstone around our necks.'
John Bright, speaking at Birmingham in 1862 (after refer
ring to the predicted dissolution of the American republic
by the Civil War), said, "1 have another and a far brighter
vision before me. It may be but a vision, but 1 will cherish
it. I see one vast confederation, stretching from the frozen
north in unbroken lines to the glowing south, and from the
wild billows of the Atlantic westward to the calmer waters of
the Pacific main, and I see one people, and one language, and
one law, and one faith, and over all that wide continent the
home of freedom and the refuge of the oppressed of every race
and every clime."
Mr. Gladstone, speaking at Manchester, 1864, said, " The
colonies should pay their own way, and if the old dream of
making their interests subservient to the mother country had
passed away, it was just as little reason that the mother
316

APPENDIX II.
country should bear charges that rightly belonged to them,
and all the more if the colonies set up against England the
mischiefs of an exploded protection policy."
Mr. Richard Cobden, In 1865, said, " Nor must we forget
that the only serious danger of a quarrel between these two
countries (the United States and Canada) arises from the con
nection of Canada with this country. In my opinion it is for
the interest of both that we should as speedily as possible
sever the political thread by which we are as communities
connected, and leave the individuals on both sides to cultivate
the relations of commerce and friendly intercourse as with
other nations. We have recognized the right of Canadians to
control their own affairs, even to the point of asserting their
independence whenever they think flt, and which we know to
be only a question of time."
In the " Life of Lord Dufferin " there is the following, " It
is quite true that after 1 had been appointed to Canada (1872)
Bob Lowe (Lord Sherbrooke) came up to me in a club and
said, ' Now you ought to make it your business to get rid of
the Dominion.' To which 1 replied that I certainly did not
intend to be handed down to history as the Governor-General
who had lost Canada."
The political aspirations of Canada from her earliest days
were towards those measures of civil and religious liberty
which mark the progress of the last century. As far back as
1774 Canadians insisted that the disqualification of Roman
Catholics from holding '< office on account of their religion
should be removed, and removed it was by the Quebec Act of
that year. The demand for this change originated not in the
Colonial Office, but In Canada, and the fact that no harm
came to the Government of Canada by the change was an
incentive to the passing of the Catholic "Simancipation Act of
1829. Again, in 1791, Canadians appealed to the Imperial
Parliament for a Legislative Assembly In which representa
tives elected by the people should legislate for the people,
instead of a Council appointed by the Crown under the Quebec
Act. Here again the change was the product of Canadian
aspiration. Again, In 1841, when it was clear from Lord
Durham's report that Canadians would be content with noth
ing less than the full measure of responsible government
enjoyed by the mother country, the Imperial Government sur
rendered its control of the customs and postoffice and terri
torial revenues and civil appointments to a Canadian Parlia
ment. Responsible government, as we have it in Canada, is
a plant of our own growing. It was deeply rooted in the
soil long before Lord Durham's visit to Canada, and has been
recognized as worthy of preservation and protection by every
Governor^General from Lord Elgin's time to the present day.
It is said that Britain discovered herself on the battlefields
of South Africa. Canada discovered herself at the conference
3ir

APPENDIX II.
held in Quebec in 1864 to form a union with her sister col
onies. She then discovered that by the adoption of the federal
principle of Government she could possibly attain the ascend
ancy of British North America. Starting out with four Pro
vinces, with an area of 500,000 square miles, and a population
of 8,000,000, she began her onward march, eiach year giving
fresh proof of her optimism and her vitality. Now it is the
purchase of the rights of the Hudson's Bay Company, adding
an empire to her dominion. Then it is the incorporation of
British Columbia into the federation, giving her a frontier on
the Pacific Ocean. Next it is the widening of her Atlantic
frontier by the addition of Prince Edward Island. Scattered
peoples are given territorial rights — then equality with the
original members of the compact. Courts of justice are
erected, officers to preserve law and order appointed, the fran
chise broadened, representation In Parliament conceded, till
in the short period of forty years the original compact of four
Provinces has become nine, the original area of 500,000 square
miles has become 3,700,000 square miles, and the original popu
lation of 3,000,000 has become 7,000,000. Over all this vast
area, and to its remotest corners, from Halifax to Vancouver,
from the forty-ninth parallel to beyond the Arctic Circle, the
authonlty of the Canadian Parliament is supreme, and the
mandate of a Canadian Minister of Justice obeyed. With the
exception only of such laws as a common sovereign deems
necessary for the protection of Imperial interests, the ascend
ancy of Canada over British North America is as complete and
undisputed as the ascendancy of Great Britain over the United
Kingdom. In the ownership of this vast territory feudalism
has no traditional monopoly. Upon forms of religious wor
ship there is ho restriction by the State. In the division of
legislative power there is no hereditary privilege. In citizen
ship there is no ancestral distinction. The whole course of
political ascendancy, from the military rule of General Murray
fco the present day, is the product of Canadian statesmanship,
embodied in the statutes of a Canadian Parliament — the expres
sion of the sovereign voice of Canadian public opinion.
Secondly, Canada has practically accomplished the physical
ascendancy of British North America. When ancient Rome
established a colony In any part of the world, she immediately
connected it with the capiltal by means of highways built as
only Rome knew how to build highways. This gave her
physical access to her subjects in the colony and facilities for
trade, as well as facilities for continued control.
On the application of steam to transportation, all the pro
gressive nations of the world availed themselves of its advan
tages, and the measure of a nation's resources and enterprise
was the extent to which it Increased the efficiency of transpor
tation by this means. In 1840 the United States had only
3,000 miles of railroad for a population of 17,000,000. In 1908
318

APPENDIX II.
the railroad mileage is 125,000 miles. In 1867 Canada had
3,000 miles of railroad for a population of 3,000,000. In 1908
the railroad mileage is 25,000 miles, or 3,500 miles for every
million of its population, against 2,500 miles in the United
States to a million. In 1886 the Canadian Pacific Railway
spanned the continent, and before three years have passed an
other transcontinental railway will be completed, and a third
will tie well under way. The United States have six railways
across the continent. Canada will soon have three. The outlets
by railway along routes already projected, and ultimately by
Hudson Bay, will be ample for the transportation of the west.
What other country can furnish a more striking triumph over
the physical difficulties of transportation?
By our canal system we have similarly shown our mastery
of difficulties. From the mouth of the Gulf of St. Lawrence to
the western limit of Lake Superior, a distance of 2,240 miles,
there is now unbroken water communication. As far as Mont
real, ocean liners can find their way with safety — a distance
of over eight hundred miles. Thence westward for 1,500
miles farther navigation is continuous for vessels of smaller,
though considerable, capacsity. Harbors have been deepened
and dredged, elevators, the largest in the world, erected, and
telephonic and postal communication established between the
east and the west and north and south, so that the remotest
part of the Dominion, vaster than the empire of the Caesars,
can make Its wants known at the capital every hour of the
day. And, if this were not enough, the cables which touch
our shores bring to us hourly tidings from every corner of the
globe. Thirdly, we have achieved the commercial ascendancy of
British North America. We no longer export the great bulk
of our natural products to be manufactured abroad. We are
very largely our own manufacturers, and in some instances
we supply foreign markets. Every year we are becoming less
dependent upon the skilled labour of alien workshops; every
year we consume more of the products of our own looms and
factories. Canadian rolling mills furnish equipment for Can
adian railways, send their surplus to India and South Africa,
and Canadian shipyards stock our inland lakes. And even
were the Canadian ports entirely closed against foreign manu
facture, there is little that we need for the necessities and
luxuries of life that we could not ourselves produce. The
competition of the foreign artisan excites little or no alarm,
and the recurring cycles of financial depression are every year
becoming less disturbing. Our monetary institutions supply
abundant capital for the wants of trade, and our credit is
sufficient to meet all demands of the greatest national under
takings, on terms as favorable as can be obtained by any other
nation in the world. To have attained to this position in our
319

APPENDIX II.
colonial tutelage is signiflcant of the business capacity, enter
prise and integrity of the merchants and traders of Canada.
Fourthly, we have accomplished the moral and intellectual
ascendancy of Canada. There Is no hamlet so remote and no
citizen so isolated as to be beyond the reach of the missionary
and the schoolmaster. And there is no Canadian, no matter
what his social position, that is debarred from the beneflts of
elementary education. To those who aspire for a higher edu
cation, there are colleges and universities which have already
proved themselves equal to all the requirements of the best
natural talents. Illiteracy, like pauperism, hides its dimin
ished and degraded countenance in the light of our Cana
dian educational facilities.
Assuming, then, what I have said to be true as to the
achievements of Canada, is it not reasonable to expect that
Canadians should look forward to a larger life and a broader
outlook than they now enjoy? Would we be doing justice to
ourselves — ^to our present status or to a certain future of
great wealth and population, if we failed to aspire to a more
independent and influential position in the councils of the
Empire and the world?
And so the question arises. In what direction shall we look
for that larger life and that greater influence to which our
present status and future development appear to supply a
reasonable claim? To this question there are but three con
jectures — annexation to the United States, an independent
Canadian commonwealth, or Imperial federation. The flrst of
these, annexation to the United States, is unthinkable. It
would mean the negation of one hundred and flfty years of
Caadlan loyalty to Great Britain. It would be on our part a
confession of failure as the administrators of the great heri
tage committed to our keeping at the surrender of Quebec. It
would be a rupture of those filial bands which in a thousand
ways bind us to the " altars and the fires " of the motherland.
It would simply be the last refuge of despair.
The second conjecture — an Independent Canadian common
wealth — could be more easily entertained. The very term —
" Canadian commonwealth " Is euphonious and dignifled, and
tingles the lips in uttering it. A Canadian commonwealth — the
companion of the Northern Star, as the Australian common
wealth on the other side of the globe is the companion of the
Southern Cross, with half a continent as a heritage — free to
"sail wherever ship could sail" under its own flag; with its
ambassadors in all the courts of the world — with all the
insignia and all the prerogatives of a nation — with a Parlia
ment subject to no limitations and its acts subject to no veto.
The very conjecture stirs the blood and fllls the mind with
visions of the future which words cannot express, and we
involuntarily say with Tennyson: —
" Pray Heaven our greatness may not fall
Through craven fear of being great."
sao

APPENDIX IL
The third conjecture — Imperial Federation — remains to be
considered. What are its claims for favour?
(1) It would continue Imperial conneotion and all that it
implies— connection with an Empire which, in the words of
the Hon. Mr. Asquith, " is the greatest and the moat fruitful
experiment that the world has ever seen in the corporate
union of free and self-governing communities," or, as described
by Lord Rosebery, "the noblest example yet known of free,
just and adaptable government."
To continue our relations with the British Empire is to
preserve the continuity of our institutions, our models in
statesmanship and in government; is to preserve all that has
entered our thoughts and lives of the achievements of her
statesmen, her soldiers and sailors, her leaders In religious
thought, her great scholars and thinkers, her enterprise, her
courage and her confldence in her own right arm In days of
trial and amid the storm of dissolving nations, as when Pitt
said of her at the close of the war with Napoleon, " she saved
herself by her exertions and could be trusted to save Europe
by her example." To continue our relations with an empire
so renowned is a stimulus to all that is best in human nature
which we cannot afford to forego.
(2) It would place Canada in a filial relation with the
other colonies of the empire. The problem of colonial govern
ment is one of the most interesting in the history of modern
civilization. Here and there upon lands discovered in dif
ferent parts of the globe settlements were made amid the most
unpromising surroundings by a few quiet and obscure emi
grants from the British Isles or from France or Spain or
Germany. How these settlers Increased their numbers and
established themselves amid hostile natives, and advanced
stage by stage until they assumed in numbers and influence
the status of a nation, is among one of the marvels of modern
history. As active and successful colonizers the Anglo-Saxon
race has had no superiors. And now that great colonies of
that race exist on every continent, all sprung from the loins
of the same world power, and all with kindred blood in their
veins, it would appear to be a seemly thing. If for no other
reason than one of fllial duty, that they should unite as a
common sisterhood in token of their common origin. Why
ahould not Australia and South Africa and "his Majesty's
dominions beyond the seas " be linked together and .to the
motherland by a union as between equals, each to reflect its
greatness and the spirit of its institutions upon the other.
" The strength of the wolf is the pack." The power of the
American Republic does not consist in the autonomy of the
different States of the Union, but in the Union itself. Forty-
six republics, with their different motives for action and
divergent views, would never coalesce as the American States
now do where any great national purpose is to be served,
22 321

APPENDIX II.
nor would they ever have the same feeling towards each
other they have now, if they were not correlated parts of one
government. A common purpose united them in their early
history, and how the world has gained by this union! And if
the British Empire was similarly bound by one common
impulse and the ties of a common federation, would not the
civilization and freedom of the world gain even still more?
True, the colonies are separated by many leagues of sea. The
brave men and women by whom they were founded travelled
far from the seat of empire and from the hearths of their
childhood for a home, and only in their dreams " do they
behold the Hebrides " ; but filial affection is not necessarily
chilled by distance, nor nature's ties sundered by parallels of
latitude. How much greater would their affection be, and
how much stronger the tie, if the strands which bound them
to the empire also bound them to each other in one common
bond of family affection and mutual good-will!
To lead a regiment into battle requires some knowledge of
the art of war, but to command an army successfully is a
much larger undertaking. Colonial govemments have proved
their ability in their respective spheres to command a regi
ment, and have won many decisive battles for local govern
ment and colonial advancement. In the larger sphere of a
federated empire they would be partners in the conflicts of
an empire, and its rivals for the laurels of world-competing
Marathons. They would be called to bend the bow of Ulysses,
as well as to carry his quiver. Where provincial boundaries
now restrict their vision, they would be able from the greater
altitude of the Imperial outlook to see the players in the
world game of statecraft as it is played by the experts of
every nation, and would learn to avoid the errors and to
emulate the skill of those who carry off the prizes, whatever
they may be. The victories of the empire would be their
victories, and the glamour of its achievements would be
reflected in every colonial fleld of action.
( 3 ) It would be a source of strength to the empire. No patri
otic colonist would desire federation at a loss to the empire, or
at the expense of the empire. Even in her "splendid isolation,"
Britain can depend upon the assistance of her colonies, as was
the case In the war in South Africa. How much more secure,
however, would she be in all her conflicts if her colonies were
indissolubly united with her? Moreover, the moral effect of
such a union would have a deterrent effect upon her enemies,
and if the gage ot battle had to be taken up tiheir assistance
would render " assurance doubly sure." Britain, with a popu
lation of only forty millions, stands to-day " four square "
against a militant Europe. Add to her population the twenty
millions of self-governing colonies, and who would dare molest
her? In every quarter of the globe she would have an ally
of her own kith and kin, to whom her honour was dearer than
322

APPENDIX II.
life and to whom no sacrifice would be too great on her behalf.
On the other hand, if by any obsession on her part, her colonies
should drift away, then iher Isolation would be terrible indeed.
The Duke of Wellington, referring to the troubles in Canada
dn 1837, urged the Colonial Office to bestir Itself, saying, " If
you lose Upper Canada, you will lose all your colonies, and if
you lose them you may as well lose London." The very
thought of the empire with all its colonies estranged is appal
ling. How her enemies across the Channel would rejoice at
such an event! What a gathering there would be of the vul
tures of war, with whetted beaks, to swoop upon her the first
moment she was off her guard! Old animosities would be
revived as an occasion for attack. The courts of Europe would
treat her wishes with indifference, if not disdain, and it would
take another Trafalgar and Waterloo to re-establish her before
the world.
And what of the colonies so estranged? Might it mean the
reconquest of Canada by some foreign power? Would China
or Japan find Australia an easy prey? Would South Africa
sit at the feet of some conquering power? Would India and
the islands of the sea continue to pay tribute to their royal
master? But to such a federation it may be objected that it would
embroil the colonies in the intrigues of European courts and
ultimately in European wars. In answer we may ask. Are
the colonies now Immune from foreign intrigue and from the
consequences of Imperial wars? In 1812 Canada was in a
state of siege because of Britain's quarrel with the United
States, although she was in no sense a party to the quarrel,
and history may repeat itself. Interference with British
authority in any part of the globe might embroil the colonies,
even if they performed the cowardly part of simple spectators,
while in a federated union the colonies would have a voice in
the councils of the empire, and that voice might be the means
of reconciling differences and thus prevent the cruel arbitra
ment of war. European wars are in a certain sense heredi
tary. France has not forgotten Sedan. Austria has not for
gotten Solferino. Russia has not forgotten Moscow. England
has not forgotten the Spanish Armada. To place In the coun
cils of the empire men who have no hereditary antipathies —
men who were removed by generations from the jealousies and
feuds of continental courts and cabinets, would in itself be a
measurable guarantee for peace, just as to federate the empire
would be a measurable restraint upon the belligerent disposi
tion of unfriendly nations. We cannot. If we would, avoid all
the consequences of British wars, whether in Europe or else
where. Why, then, should we shrink from a possiible oppor
tunity of preventing such wars by taking part in the coun
cils of the empire or In fighting them to a finish if there was
no other alternative? 323

APPENDIX II.
(4) It would greatly expedite the business of the British
Parliament. On this point I may be permitted to quote Mr.
Sydney Low, in his admirable work bn " The Governance of
England " : " The House of Commons is not so much over
worked as overwhelmed by merely the multiplicity of its
duties. No other legislative body in the world — none of which
history has given us an account — had to attend to so many
things at once so weighty and so trivial. We are endeavoring
to get our one Legislature to perform that which in Germany,
in the United States, and even in Canada, is performed by
many legislatures. There is no distinction between the great
and the small, between subjects merely local and transient
and those of Imperial and enduring importance. The same
steam hammer is raised and lowered to break an egg or to
pound an armour plate. An act to alter the succession to the
throne or to legalize slavery would be performed by the same
machinery, and it would go througli the same steps as one
empowering a district council to examine milk pails. The
members of the House of Commons in their casual hours of
comparative leisure are expected to discuss the policy of an
empire greater than that of Alexander, Charlemagne and
Napoleon Bonaparte taken together. From a famine in Asia
to a campaign in Africa, to tum to a row with the police in
Ireland or a squabble with the postoffice in London. The men
who on Monday afternoon are holding in their hands the issues
of peace and war and pondering a decision that may change
the course of history may on Tuesday be discussing either
tramways in Camberwell or the gas works In Gravesend."
The remedy he suggests is devolution, that is, "devolving
internal business upon national or provincial councils. The
Imperial Parliament should devote itself to those things which
are really imperial, such as the army and navy, international
trade, and the mutual relations of the various constituent
States of the Empire. Purely local affairs should be delegated
to purely local assemblies." This states admirably the out
lines of a scheme for Imperial federation, whioh we now pur
pose to consider somewhat in detail.
But I may be asked for a working plan of Imperial federa
tion. Its advantages may be conceded, but how is it to be
carried out? A working plan for a scheme so vast would
require more initiative than I would think of claiming, and
yet I may be permitted fo offer a few practical suggestions.
Imperial federation is a proposal to bind together under one
central government the United Kingdom and the self-gov
erning colonies. And as, in any federation, the parties to such
a compact must stand upon equality. It would follow that
under Imperial federation the powers and privileges of the
Parliaments of the federating bodies would be on a parity.
So far as the colonies are concerned, they could enter the
federation without surrendering any of the rights of self-
3-24

APPENDIX II.
government which they now possess, or changing one line of
their constitutions, but once federated they would have the
same status in the central government as the United Kingdom.
If then, the powers of the British Parliament as now consti
tuted were reduced to those possessed by colonial govern
ments, the status of all the federating bodies would be equal.
The excess of the power now possessed by the British Parlia
ment would then constitute the powers of the central govern
ment. Now, what is that excess? It consists mainly of four
things: The maintenance and control of the defensive forces
of the empire; the right to declare war; the right to make
treaties, and the government of India and the Crown colonies
and dependencies. All matters outside of these, as Mr. Low
says, are purely local, and may be relegated to the Parliaments
of the federated bodies. That is to say, the postal systems,
the militia, education. State hospitals, banking, labour, the
poor laws, liquor licenses, railways, tramways, municipal legis
lation, might be regarded as local, and left, as In Canada and
Australia, with the Parliaments of the federated bodies.
Nor would it be necessary to withdraw from the federating
bodies the power of taxation which they now possess. The
United Kingdom would remain under free trade until its Par
liament declared otherwise. And so the colonies ^ould retain
a protective tariff so long as their Parliaments authorized
them so to do. Indeed, it may be assumed that the policy of
protection, even if incidental to a revenue tariff, has become
so fixed in the colonies that no self-governing colony would
abandon it. And if not abandoned, a moment's refiection
would show that it involves so many local considerations and
details, and Is so exceptional in its application and bearing,
that no government, except one in touch with local conditions,
could successfully deal with it. The tariff that suits Canada
would not suit Australia, as the business interests of the two
countries are entirely different. The proof of this is fully
established by reference to the customs and excise duties of
the two colonies. And if " tariff reform " should prevail in the
United Kingdom, any departure from free trade will require
to be adapted to the industries of the kingdom, possibly in a
very different manner from the tariff that prevails in Canada
or Australia. The principle of federation is local freedom, and
this principle should apply to the tariff as It affects local in
dustries and the interests of local labour. Even "preferential
tariff " within the empire, desirable as it is, must be left to the
federated bodies. While they would doubtless gladly accept a
"preference," each in the markets of the other, it would be
inconsistent with the principle of local self-government to
allow the central government to fix the terms on which such
preference should be conceded.
But it may be sajld that in the United States, in Canada,
Australia, and all federated States and Provinces, the subject
3^5

APPENDIX II.
of tariffs belongs to the federal or central government. That
is true, but we are not dealing with a federation of States con
tiguous to each other, between whom there must be the
greatest freedom of intercourse, or else federation would be
Impossible. We are dealing with groups of States already fed
erated and so far removed from each other geographically as
to be distinct and separate commuruities. The relative position
of Canada and Australia is very different from any two of the
United States — say Maine and California, and still greater
than between two contiguous States. And although by virtue
of their right of taxation one group of colonies or States might
engage in a war of tariffs upon another group of colonies or
States (which they now can, but do not), the closer relation in
which the colonies would be placed, if federated, would surely
not be an exciting cause to be less friendly towards each other
than they have shown themselves in their state of colonial
separation. What then would be the functions of the central govern
ment ?
(1) It would be charged with the defence of the empire
and the maintenance and control of the army and navy. The
Secretary' of State for War and the Lords of the Admiralty
would be transferred, with all their duties and responsibilities,
to the central government. Each member of the federation
could, as now, but under the direction of the central govern
ment, deal locally with the traiinlng of Its militia. The expense
of the troops on regular service, as also the maintenance of
the navy, would be borne by the central government.
(2) The central government would have the power to de
clare war. The right possessed by the British Cabinet to de
clare war without reference to Parliament is an undesirable
centralization of power. In the United States the right to de
clare war is vested in Congress — a right which must exercise
a wholesome restraint against hasty action by ,the President
and executive government. For Ministers to declare war and
then ask Parliament to furnish the money with which to carry
it on is to commit the nation to a course from whioh Parlia
ment might not be able with honour to withdraw. Let the
power to declare war be decentralized, and let Miniaters feel
that they must exhaust all the resources of diplomacy before
they take the last irretrievalble step, and possibly wars would
be less frequent than they have been.
(3) The central govemment should have the treaty-making
power. Ministers might be allowed, as at present, to negotiate
treaties, but theiir ratification should be subjeot to the central
government. The colonies or outlying commonwealths would
then be able to guard their interests as they have not been
heretofore, from the want of representation.
(4) India and the Crown colonies should be under the cen
tral government. The Secretary of State for India, and the
326

APPENDIX II.
Colonial Sccretaa-y, would be transferred to the central govern
ment, retaining generally theiir respective powers.
In the report of the Imperial Council for 1907, certain mat
ters are referred to as requiring the attention of the Imperial
Government, such as " the encouragement of emigration from
the United Kingdom to the colonies," " greater freedom and
fuller commercial intercourse between the colonies," " prefer
ential trade," " navigation and coasting laws," " uniformity
in trade marks and patents," " statistics and company laws,"
" the development of communication within the empire by
cable and the shortest routes by sea and land," " naturaliza
tion," and "the simplification and cheapening of appeals to
the Privy Council." Wit'h the exception of the last two, all
might await the natural course of friendly solution by the
Legislatures of the federated commonwealths. The subjeot of
naturalization, however, affects the status of a British subject,
and the anomaly of requiring a naturalized British subject to
become renaturallzed every time he changes his domicile from
one federated commonwealth to another should be immediately
removed either by law or by courtesy.
The establishment of a Supreme Court of Appeal for a fed
erated empire is a matter of detail. The colonies should settle
all legal questions arising within their own jurisdiction,
including the interpretation of their constitution, in their own
courts. Should disputes arise between the federated colonies,
a central court with powers somewhat similar to the Supreme
Court of the United States might be necessary.
So also with questions of trade and commerce. A Board of
Trade for the empire would no doubt serve a useful purpose.
But trade and commerce have their local aspects, and might
be entrusted to the direction of the Parliaments of the fed
erated bodies. At the most an Imperial Board of Trade could
have only advisory powers.
And now 1 may be asked,. Into whose hands shall the powers
to be withdrawn from the United Kingdom be placed, and
who shall assume the responsibility of defending the empire
and managing its dependencies. My answer is, A federal Par
liament composed of representatives from the United Kingdom
and the colonies, on the basis of population. By way of Ulus
tration, let a unit of representation of 200,000 be taken as a
basis. This would give a Parliament of about 260 members,
200 for the United Kingdom, 35 for Canada, 20 for Australia, 4
for New Zealand, 1 for Newfoundland, and 10 for South Africa.
Such a Parliament might be elected on the same franchise
and through the same machinery as now exists in the bodies
to be federated. The federating colonies might elect their
representatives by States or Provinces, each State, as in elec
tions to the Senate in Australia, being taken as one electoral
district, with the proviso that any State or Province having
a smaller population than the unit adopted should be allowed
327

APPENDIX II.
one representative. Only men who had a provincial standing
in such case would be likely to secure their election. The
United Kingdom could be divided into electoral districts on
the same unit basis — each district to elect one member. A
member of the House of Commons or Lords should be eligible
for election to the central government, but should retire from
the House he represented on being elected to the central
government. There should be no dual representation. An
Upper Chamber or House of Lords could be constituted from
the peerage of England, Scotland and Ireland, by authorizing
the peers to elect a fixed number of their own class to such a
Chamber, as the peers of Scotland and Ireland now elect of
their number to sit in the House of Lords. The other feder-
ated bodies could appoint their quota to the Upper House as
State Legislatures appoint members of the United States
Senate. The Ministry or Cabinet to be constituted would be
responsible to the federated Parliament, and might consist
of: (1) The First Minister and President of the Council.
(2) The Chancellor of the Exchequer.
(3) The Seoretary of State for the Empire.
(4) The Secretary of State for War.
(5) The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
(6) The Secretary of State for India.
(7) The Secretary of State for the Crown Colonies.
(8) The Lords of the Admiralty.
The duration of the Parliament of the federation, the
indemnity to be paid to its mem'bers (if any), where Parlia
ment should meet, and how often, are matters of detail, and
require no consideration at the present stage. When consti
tuted, the duties of such a Parliament would be purely
Imperial in character — leaving to the Parliament of the
United Kingdom sufficient of a local character to engross all
its energies and in a position to give Its undivided attention
to matters of internal policy which, as at present constituted,
have been too much neglected.
Next we come to consider a financial basis for the proposed
federation. We have already said that existing systems of
taxation are not to^ be disturbed, and that no power of taxa
tion at present exercised by the Parliament of the United
Kingdom is to be withdrawn or transferred to the central
government. The proposed system of federation is based
upon the " irreducible minimum " of change in existing con
ditions. How, then. Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
meet the financial requirements of the federation? There is
but one source of supply — the resources of the federated
bodies; and these could be reached by an annual apportion
ment of the sum necessary for federal purposes among all the
328

APPENDIX II.
parties to the federation, either on the basis of population
or on the aggregate of their respective commerce or on the
tonnage of the shipping entering or leaving their ports. The
cost of maintaining the empire should be divided among the
federated bodies, according to the interests to be protected.
If it be assumed that the interests are purely personal, then
the basis should be population, as a British subject in every
part of the empire has equal rights for protection by the whole
force of the empire. If t'he basis is to be the protection of
the commerce of the empire, then the imports and exports, or
the tonnage of the shipping by which such commerce is
carried on, would supply a reasonable one. Wbatever basis
is taken, the federated bodies would be required to furnish
their quota of the annual budget, as required by the Chan
cellor of the Exchequer. It might be said that the central
government, having to depend upon the federated bodies for
its revenue, would not be sufficiently secure against financial
contingencies. This is a danger so remote that it may be
entirely dismissed. No federated body would repudiate a
solemn obligation entered into for the honour and safety of the
empire. Canada, under the British North America Act, pays
annually to the Provinces a fixed charge based upon popula
tion. All the colonies have so far with commendable punc
tuality promptly met their loans on the money market of the
world. Is it to be supposed that they would be less prompt in
meeting financial obligations when their existence as well as
their honour was concerned?
Now, what would be the apparent advantage and disadvan
tage of the proposed federation? To the colonies it would, as
Sir John Macdonald said In a letter to Lord Knutsford in 1889,
constitute each federating colony "an auxiliary kingdom" of
the British Empire; It would relieve the colonies of all re
straint ujwn their legislation from the Colonial Office; it would
give them a voice in maintaining the peace of the world; it
.would give them the right to be heard in the negotiation of
treaties within the empire; it would be a stimulus to the high
est form of statesmanship; it would remove the "bar sinister"
of colonial tutelage and dependence; it would give them a
quasi-national rank among the nations of the world; it would
unite them permanently with the empire; it would strengthen
them against hostile invasion; It would increase inter-
Jmperial trade; it would foster attachment to the empire; it
would attract the overflow of population from the United
Kingdom. To the United Kingdom it would be a source of security
in the numerical InCl-ease of the population from which its
defences could be drawn; It would lighten the burden of main
taining the defence of the empire; it would make the United
Kingdom a greater force in the councils of the world; it
would vitalize her present conservative forces by the energy
329

APPENDIX II.
and optimism of the colonies; it would retain her surplus
population to the empire; it would place the empire as a whole
under one representative govemment; it would unify the
defensive forces of the empire.
The only disadvantage of an Imperial federal Parliament
would be the distance of the seat of government from the
colonies. To the representatives of the United Kingdom there
would be no geographical difficulty, as no doubt Westminster
would continue to be the capital of tlie empire. To Canada
the distance would be no obstacle. As a matter of fact, some
of the representatives who attend the federal Parliament are
now nearly as far from the capital as the majority of them
would be from London. In the case of Australia and South
Africa, the distance would be greater, and for a special meet
ing of the Imperial Parliament on short notice the attendance
of their representatives might be impossible, but with a com
plete cable service between all parts of the empire it may be
fairly assumed that no serious obstacle to the business of
Parliament would Intervene.
And now, at the close of my argument, 1 am confronted
with three propositions: Firstly, Is the necessity for a reor
ganization of the empire so great as to command the attention
of those concerned in its administration in the United King
dom, and are the colonies sufficiently impressed with their
obligations to the empire, and with the advantages of closer
relations, to share the burden of Its maintenance? So far
Imperial federation has been regarded academically by the
majority of Imperial statesmen. From a few there has been
a more distinct pronouncement as to its Importance, notably
our guest. Viscount Milner, and Mr. Joseph Chamberlain. A
certain portion of the British press has also declared in its
favour. But still I fear it has hardly yet entered into the
" practical politics " of the United Kingdom. John Bright has
said that " foresight is one of the characteristics of the highest
form of statesmanship." May we hope that miany who have
not yet expressed their views are not wanting in prevision
on this great question. As to the colonies. Imperial federa
tion is so far but a loyal aspiration — all the more expressive
because it would add to colonial prestige. Secondly, the more
serious question of assuming their share of the burdens of
empire has yet to be considered. So long as the colonies are
content with the ungenerous feeling that the empire is bound
to protect them for its own sake, and without any charge to
them, the growth of public opinion in favour of federation will
be slow. 'Not that the colonies would not make sacrifices for
the empire, or tbat they are wanting in genuine loyalty.
Indeed, In emergencies, as I have already pointed out, they
could be relied upon to fight Its battles. But doles for emer
gencies are a form of out-door relief wbich may evince a kindly
spirit, but are a poor substitute for permanent and efficient
330

APPENDIX II.
security against the incidents of attack upon the integrity of
the empire. And the third proposition is. Will the Parliament
of the United Kingdom agree to transfer its control of the
defences of the empire and the administration of its vast
concerns to any other corporate body, no matter what its
claims to recognition may be? For nearly a thousand years
the nations of the world have been obliged to consult the Par
liament of the British Isles in regard to national boundaries
and the fate of Emperors and Kings. Will that Parliament ^
that fought for the honour of Great Britain, that directed the
expansion of the empire in every clime, and that bore the
burdens of a world sovereignty, hand over the sceptre of
empire to another Parliament less Intimately acquainted with
the traditions of the past than it may very rightly claim to
be? To effect the changes in opinion necessary to make
Imperial federation an accomplished fact may take time.
Nations are not born in a day. Great movements make their
way painfully often, but always slowly, to a climax. " There
is first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear."
May we trust that the blade has appeared, and that the har
vest, when it comes, as come I trust it will, will be of the full-
ripened corn of a loyal and well-informed public opinion, which
will garner for the historian the story of a federation so com
plete and so comprehensive as to leave the story of Caesar and
Alexander but a paltry page in the archives of the universe

331

APPENDIX III.

THE DAY AfiJD A' WHA HONOR 'T.
Speech on St. Andeew's Day, Novembee 30th, 1909.

" She taks or plays nae second pairt;
And Scotland has the best"
The toast was proposed by Sir William Mortimer Clark,
and was weU received.
Hon. Senator Ross, in responding, said: —
Mr. President and Gentlemen, — ^It is not quite twelve, but
it is getting very near it. I have spoken so often at banquets
of the St. Andrew's Society and the Caledonian Society that
unless I believed that St. Andrew had more sympathy with
speakers in their affliction than any other saint I would
scarcely trespass on your time at Uils late hour. As Sir
Mortimer Clark bas said, it has been an exceedingly pleasant
night, and you know that where 1 spend a good deal of my
time — in the sacred precincts of the Parliament Buildings at
Ottawa — things are usually very quiet. We have not quite
the same routine that you bave here. (Laughter.) The
atmosphere Is more calm, and we can reflect with greater
safety upon our shortcomings, and we oan look into the future
with greater certainty, when we see our way clearly, than
we can in a gathering like tbis. Nevertheless 1 am delighted
with the change. It is somewhat refresihlng. We have had
an excellent dinner and an abundant appetite, and splendid
music, and we bave bad speeches — that one of Colonel Denison
with tbe clang of steel in it — (laughter) — and that of Sir
Mortimer Clark, with a sort of wringing of the neck of the
" Cock of tbe North." In fact, it bas been what the Scotch
would call "a gran' nidht." Sitting here, 1 thought of Tam-
o'-Shan ter's experience with Souter Johnnie, when he said: —
— " but Tam was glorious.
O'er a' the Ills of life victorious."
Now, of course, the object of these meetings is not to eat
and drink and bave a good time — not altogether; that would
332

APPENDIX III.
not be practical enough for Scotchmen. Is there any way by
which, as Scotch ministers sometimes say, we could " improve
the time"? What is there in the history and life and cbar
acter of Scotchmen and Scottlsib men that we as Canadians
might transfer to Canada? We are an eclectic people in this
country. We get our wit and wisdom from every quarter, and
we get Ideas in business and trade wherever they can be
found, and we adapt our forms of govermnent to our own
needs, but taking as much from the forms of other countries
as we think will suit our case. To-night it is our business
to consider whether there is anything In the history and life
and character of Scotchmen that we might fairly transfer to
Canada. Let me say, firstly — for I think tbat is the orthodox way
to proceed with a discourse — that we might very well imitate
the love Scotchmen bave to preserve tbeir identity and Indi
viduality. (Hear, (bear.) That is to say. In the great swirl
of nations Canadians should not lose sight of themselves. You
know you caimot obllteriate the Scotch In a man once It is
thoroughly ground Into him. Dr. Johnson said you could
do anything witb a Scotchman if you caught him young. He
has got to be caught very young before you can rub out of
him all his Scotch peculiarities — that is, assuming that those
are proper peculiarities. There is a law of chemistry that
certain elements are insoluble — tbey are called primary ele
ments. You know there are some things soluble in water,
and some in spirits, and some otherwise. A Scotchman Is
not soluble In water; everybody knows that. (Laughter.)
Spirits only help to' preserve him — (lauglbter) — ^and as for
heat, he has already in bis career passed through the fiery
furnace of Whig and Radical, and like tbe three Hebrew cap
tives he came out without the smell of fire upon his garments.
You cannot, then, destroy the characteristics of a Scotchman.
In no position where be is placed are bis Scotch feeling and
(Scotch spirit and Scottish instincts entirely obliterated. We
see here 'bow he preserves his identity in St. Andrew's Society,
Caledonian Society, in Highland regiments with Highland kilt
and feather, in Scottish song, in tbe ibagplpes, in the orchestral
suggestions of the Highlands, in the honor we paid to the
haggis, and so forth. All these things may be Indigenous to
¦Scotland, but they may ibe found everywhere, as indicating
that In some peculiar way, by a process I cannot understand
and therefore cannot explain, tbe Scotchiman never loses his
identity. You may find him in the pulpit or you may flnd
bim In business, or you may flnd him where you please, and
when you look him all over, some way or other you conclude
ihe is not just exactly like otber men. (Hear, bear, and
laughter.) Nor is that love of bJis, either, a matter of recent
origin. It dates historically as far back as tbe battle of
Bannockburn, wben he preserved his identity against tbe
333

APPENDIX III.
iSaxon, and the last gasp of his attempt to preserve that dis
tinctive identity In matters of loyalty was in tbe fatal field
of Culloden. Another remarkable circumstance is the his
tory of Scotland in its relation to England. One would sup
pose — and it was really one abjection held by tbe Scotch
people to tbeir union with England — that In doing so tbey
might lose their Identity; tout with their natural foresight,
witb their cbaracteristic foresight, they took good oare to see
that tbeir indentity would not be lost. That is to say, tbey
provided toy Apt of Parliament that the Presbyterian Churcih,
that was very dear to them, would be the legal and constitu
tional churoh of Scotland. (Hear, hear). They preserved to
themselves their law courts, and the procedure of their lajw
courts in civil and criminal matters. Tbey preserved to them
selves their system of land tenure. Tbey preserved to them
selves their njarriage law. In tbat respect we bave an Illus
tration Olf a similar desire to preserve identity in the case of
the FrencbJCanadlans. We In Ontario sometimes say tbe
French-Canadian is narrow, tbat be should allow hmself to
be absorbed, assimilated with the rest of the people of Canada.
He, by his treaty with Great Britain wben Canada was sur
rendered, preserved bis religion; he preserved bis language;
be preserved tihe French system ¦oif laws — it was not the Code
Napoleon then, but it was tbe custom of Paris — and he pre
served his system of land tenure. Now, we must be liberal.
When we blame the French-Canadian for his rigidity and
tenacity In regard to bis own laws, we have a precedent in
the people of Scotland, who preserved their individualty by
Act of Parliament to a precisely similar way. This historical
faot Is wortby of consideration.
Now, what sbould Canadians do, having regard to what
Scotland has done? Scotchmen have preserved their indi
viduality the world over — (hear, bear) — and they have pre
served their Institutions; and they have treasured up In their
hearts all the sentiment and heroism of their own people.
Should not Canadians have a similar desire to create a Cana
dian individuality? To make it worth preserving? And to
be, while associating, as we must, witb each other, and While
engaging in business and enterprises -with otber nations, let it
be known that there is a standard of bonor, and tbat there is a
standard of manliness to be called Canadian which will be re
cognized as such the wide world over. (Hear, hear, and ap
plause). We have precedent along tbat line to a great extent.
Col. Denison referred to the battles we fought fbr the independ
ence of Canada. What does tbat mean? It meant that Canada
sbould preserve its Identity in spite of opposition from the
United States, as In 1776, and as in 1812, and as in 1866.
Our battles for our independence may not have been as famous
as that of Bannockburn, but tbey were to us the Bannockburn
of Canada, wbich estaibilsbed tbat independence in spite of
334

APPENDIX III.
opposition. (Applause). Then in our legislation there bas
been a movement going on, extending over a hundred years,
that Canada might assert her own individuality. We were
under the rule of Downing Street until 60 years ago. Our
legislation was affeioted by the will of the Colonial Secretary.
What was our struggle for responsible government but a
struggle for Canadian independence? Why did we bail Lord
Elgin, that noted Scotchiman, and speak so Mgbly of him?
For his independence in asserting — as it was done really for
the first time in Canada — ^the true responsibility of the Cana
dian Parliament. We did so, because at that time we were
allowed, as it were, to stand upon our own feet. For a certain
time our customs duties were collected toy offlcers appointed
by the British Govemment. Our postoffice system was regu
lated by an Imperial officer. Our judges were appointed by
the Government, acting for the Crown, without any responsi
bility to Parliament. In all respects we were in leading-strings
practically until 1841, and as a result of that condition of
humiliation we had an Incipient rebellion — led, most naturally,
by a resolute Scotchiman of tbe name of William Lyon Mac
kenzie. (Hear, hear, and applause.) But later, again, in
1867, there was a reassertion of the Individuality of Canadians,
just as Australia bas had it more recently, just as the South
African States have had It, and just as England struggled
for It In the days of the Stuarts, and that has been followed
up toy some further assurance in regard to that individuality.
We are now consulted in regard to every treaty that is formed
by Great Britain affecting Canada — a wonderful position for
us to be in. (Applause.) In every treaty, in every matter
of State in which Canada bas been affected, a Canadian bas
been on tbat commission — sometimes two or three, and even
four — In order that Canadian interests might be protected.
The climax of that individuality was sbown last summer.
When England felt the stress of danger from Germany and
from her enemies abroad, there was a conference in tbe city of
London, and at that table, surrounded by the Premier of
Great Britain and the great officers of State and his Majesty's
Privy Councillors, sat two Caniadians to discuss In solemn
conclave, as officers, pracJtlcally, of the Empire, how the Empire
could be best defended from her foes. Tbe individuality of
Canada, with ber seven million people, in am Empire of three
hundred millions, is now recognized as fully as was ever the
individuality af Scotland In tbe Commonwealth of Great
Britain. (Hear, hear, and applause.)
Now, gentlemen, we have reached that position. Let us
be worthy of it. We ought to feel tbat we have attained,
as it were, to our majority, that we are no longer aliens in
the ESmpire; that we are an Integral part of tbe Empire, with
standing in her councils, anid so we ought to quit ourselves
335

APPENDIX III.

like men wherever tbe interests of the Empire are involved.
(Hear, bear, and applause.)
The second thing that I would ask to-night tbat we might
remember, as something that we might learn from Scotchmen,
is their adaptability. Sir Mortimer Clark used that word in
the course of his remarks — their adaptability in every position
into wbich tbey are put. Put a Scotchman into any position
you please, and be seems to fit In — we cannot tell exactly bow,
at flrst. If he is a pioneer, he builds his shack or bis house,
and immediately tbe forest melts before bim, and by-and-ibye
he has a better habitation, and be always seems to act on the
Scriptural injunction that if be Is faithful In sma,ll things
he may become the lord of many. Put him in a line of busi
ness, in a bank, and 'be bas his eye on the Presidency of that
bank. (Laughter.) Make him a captain of soldiers, and by-
and-bye, like Napoleon's soldiers, he Is thinking of tbe baton
tbat he is carrying in his knapsack, and hopes to be Marshal
some day. Put bim In any business, and he seems to adapt
himself to tbat business so as to achieve success, perhaps not
from any genius in other respects that he may possess, but he
suits himself to Circumstances, and, as old Napoleon says, then
he makes circumstances suit him. (Laughter.) Now, there
is that adaptability which Is necessary to our success In any
career of life. I think we have acquitted ourselves reasonaJbly
well in that respect. (Hear, bear.)
And there are greater problems before us. Canada was
never confronted by such great problems as she is to-day, by
sucb large questions that require the highest statesmanship
and tbe greatest possible sagacity to solve wisely and well.
(Hear, bear.) Take one or two of them.
About 1878 we were confronted with the difficulties which
we had In matters of trade, and there grew up in Canada a
party which was called tbe Protectionist party. We had then
been practically the apostles of free trade. Free trade was
good lor 'Canada at one time — naw don't say I am turned
Protectionist — and free trade was good for Great Britain at
one time, for she bad the trade of the world wben Cobden
and Bright declared themselves tbe apostles of free trade,
and what did sihe care for protected nations? For tbey could
not compete with ber in any way. Conditions bave changed
In England, and there are many who are in favor of tariff
reform, as tbey call it. Conditions changed in Canada, and
we oould not afford to bave our industries crushed by coimpeti-
tlon from abroad, and so we adopted some form of tariff —
call it what you please — 1 must not call It by Its proper name
— (laughter) — ^by which we adapted ourselves to our con
ditions, to the great benefit of our Industrial development.
(Applause.) Tbat was adapted witb Scotch sagacity; it was
adaptaibiility, and no one could tall what happened. Now we
bave problems in regard to tranportatlon. We have at our
336

APPENDIX III.
feet to-day the trade of the great Northwest. Montreal has
beaten Buffalo and New York as to the monopoly of the
carrying trade of our western prairies. (Hear, hear.) But
that is not the trade we want. Our conditions are such, our
highways are sucb, tbat with certain necessary and proper
improvements we not only sbould have the trade ot our
Northwest, but of that tier of states lying under the forty-
ninth parallel from Lake Michigan to tbe Pacific coast. (Hear,
hear, and applause.) Are we going to adapt ourselves to
these conditions? If we have the foresight necessary, we
will see to it tbat tIhe deepening of tbe Erie Canal from
Buffalo to Albany will not deflect the tremendous trade for
whicb the St. Lawrence was dug by Providence and placed
under the control of Canadians. (Applause.)
Then we must adapt ourselves to other problems the
Government bas forice3 upon us. How are we going best to
settle that great northwest territory? If the Scottish people
are sucb a noble race, bow are we going to get more of them
into it? Or if England has a population to spare, can we
get those? Or should there be in the great central nations
of Europe, nations 'of people equal to our requirements, how
are we golnig to bring them here? These prairies under
prairie flowers are pleasant to behold, but a fleld of wheat
is much more profltaJble and more adapted to the tastes of
the Scottish cbaracter. (Laughter.) That problem must be
solved. We got tbis possession practically through Prince
Rupert, who was himself a Scotchman, and who founded the
Hudson's Bay Company. There has come to us the problem
of settling this territory witb people, and giving them such
facilities of transportation as tbey require. It is an expensive
undertaking, and we must all Inform ourselves. We built the
CanaJdlan Pacific Railway under trying circumstances. We
are building now the Grand Trunk Pacific, and the Canadian
Northern is building its own railway. How are we going to
reach out and get greater facilities of trans'ptortation?
The same problems face us in regard to agriculture, and
I need not go around tbe whole circle of problems to whicb
we must apply ourselves.
Then there is the great problem ra.i86d to-night about tbe
naval and military defence of Canada. We must not deal with
that problem as the old Scotch minister used to do when he
came to a difficult text in tbe Bible, when he would proceed to
say:— "My brethren, tbis text has been differently translated
by some translators, and some commentators think it means
this thing, and others think it means that thing, and it pre
sents great difficulties to us. I think the best thing we can
do to-day, my brethren, is to look the difficulties straight in
the face 'and pass on." (Laughter.) It won't do simply to
look this difficulty straight in the face, for we cannot pass on
Now, how are we going to meet th'at difficulty? I am not here
23 337

APPENDIX III.
to solve it. I bave no commission, but 1 do hope it will be
solved In consistency with tbe dignity of Canada. (Hear,
hear.) A trifling recompense for tbe protection of tbe British
flag from 1759 to the present day would be unworthy of
Canada. We must meet tbe emergency at any cost, and witb
tbat degree of liberality and generosity which will fit tbe
situation. (Hear, bear.) The foes of England are our foes,
whether on the North Sea or on the plains of Russia, or to
the south of forty-nine. (Hear, hear.) Tbey are our foes,
and what is England's interest to defend is our Interest,
for the Empire Is one, and we are part of tbat unit and should
do our duty. (Hear, hear, and appl'ause.) The adaptability
of Canadians to tbis case is what is required.
We have solved great problems. I have no fear. 1 may
be an optimist. Otber great problems we have solved. We
have solved Confederation — the first of tbe colonies of the
Britisih Empire that applied tbe principle of federal govern
ment to tbe principle of constitutional government. It was
said It could not be done; we were four Provinces — that is
all we would ever be. But behold tbe nine! We that were
a little community east of Lake Superior in 1867, with only
about 700,000 or 800,000 square miles, we bad not been one
year in Confederation until there were 350,000 added from
British Columbia. Then we bought that great Northwest
territory for $1,500,000, out of which we carved tbe Province
of Manitoba. Now we are nine Provinces. A few years ago
we had 3,000,000 people; to-day we bave 7,000,000. We have
solved a problem in govemment that statesmen said we
could not solve. Australia bas taken it as an example, and
South Africa, so recently torn by war, bas confederated four
of those opposition States into the TJnlted States of South
Africa. (Hear, hear.) That was a great problem. The con
struction of the Canadian Pacific Railway was another great
problem which we have solved. And so, from time to time we
have gone on dealing with problems that some thought far too
gigantic for our strength and for our numbers. Tbat sbould
give us courage. Having settled so much under specially
difficult circumstances, let us not fear tbe lion in the path
now. Let us rather rejoice because we are more closely allied
to the Empire than we ever were, that jointly — I do not say
with the assistance of the Empire, but jointly with the Empire,
and as part of it— we will assist tbe Old Motherland in main
taining still flying at the mast-head that flag whicb is the
emblem of liberty and Christian civilization throughout the
world. (Loud applause.)
There is just one other point in wbich I think Canadians
may well consider the history of Scotland, and tbat is, that
we sbould proflt by tbe sentimental characteristics of the
Scottish race. Now, 1 am very fond of what Is called tbe
sentimental characteristics of the Scottish race. (Hear, hear.)
338

APPENDIX III.
You know what Carlyle said atoout tbe "piece of bunting."
"The piece of bunting is but a rag. Mark it with the red
cross flag of England, and no man dare insult it." (Hear,
bear.) Sentimentality is a characteristic of the iScottisb race.
They are said to be hard-headed. Someone said tbeir char
acteristic is not at all sentimentality. I think it is in a very
large degree. Combined with canniness, or what we may call
the pawklness, or what may be called the frugality of Scotch
men, lies somewhere atoout his personality that love of the
beautiful, tb'at love of poetry and song, that mysticism, that
fondness for the supernatural, in a greater degree than per
haps with any other race whose history I have studied. All
races have their characteristics. You know the Greeks were
famous for sculpture, the Ramans for their architectural
genius, the French for their reflnement and taste in matters
of beauty, the English for their great colonizing power, the
Americans, you would say, for their illustration of the sane-
ness of an unbridled but well-governed democracy.
What Is Canada going to be famous for? Scotland is
famous for her sentimentality, for her love for poetry and
song, for her love of poetry in Its highest phases. We speak
of Shakespeare as the greatest dramatist of the world. So
I believe he was. We speak of Robert Burns as tbe greatest
song-writer of the world, and of Scottish poets allied with
him as almost equal in their powers of song and In the
sweetness and beauty of tbat poetry. Just look at some
departments In which Scottish song has embalmed Itself —
say, for instance, in the heroic. We have heard to-night "Scots
Wha Hae," with kilts complete. It Is said of Sir Robert Peel
that whenever he bad a great speech to make In tbe House
of Commons which would call forth the highest sentiments
which he possessed, be would retire into his private room and
recite to himself, once or twice over:
" Scots wha hae wl' Wallace bled!"
and his blood, a little phlegmatic, was fired, and the House
of Commons caught the refiex of that supernal fire which
blazes in every line of that song. (Hear, hear, and applause.)
In the same way, when Edmund Burke had a great speech
to write, being an Irishman, and not familiar with Robert
Burns, he read a chapter from the prophecy of Isaiah, full
of eloquence and the greatest fire. But we bave another
song which will never be forgotten. We have " The Gathering
ot Macgregor" —
" While there are leaves in the forest or foam on the river,
Macgregor, despite them, shall flourish forever."
— (Hear, hear.) Then we have "Tbe March of the Cameron
Men " : 339

APPENDIX III.
"We h€ar the pibroch sounding, sounding,
Loud through the forest and glen.
While light-springing footsteps are trampling the heath.
'Tis the march of the Cameron men."
— (Applause.) And to tbat tune and to the melody and to
the force of those words who would not fight for Scottish
right and Scottish might and Scottish hills forever? And
then we have " A Man's a Man For a' That " — not so warlike,
but equally heroic. Then wben you come to the domestic, is
there anything so sweet in poetry as sucb songs as " John
Anderson, My Jo " ?
" John Anderson, my Jo, John,
When we were first acquaint,
Your looks were like the raven.
Tour bonnie brow was brent;
But now your brow is bald, John —
— we all feel it — (laughter) —
" Tour lockis are like the snaw,
— I see them here. (Laughter.)
" But blessings on your frosty pow,
John Anderson, my jo."
Could any wife say anything sweeter than that? And then
there Is something quite as nice: —
" There's nae luck aboot the house
When oor guid- man's awa'."
How many ladies could sing tbat justly? (Laughter.)
Some people think there is no luck about the bouse unless
the good man is away, but not so with the Scottish, and, as
Sir Mortimer Clark said, there is a strain of pathos and
tenderness in tbe Scotch songs — " Tbe Land o' the Leal."
" Bonnie Doon." How sweet and pathetic is " Annie Laurie "
sung in the trenches before Sdbastopol! Then " The Soldier's
Return " and " Bonnie Loch Lomond," A curious thing about
Scottish songs is the frequent use of tbis word ' bonnie."
Do you know tbe full significance of it? I never can quite
comprehend it. We have tbe English word " darling " but
" bonnie " gets much nearer one's heart than " darling." (Hear,
hear, and applause.) To a layman It embodies tbe spiritual
meaning of darling. Then we have "Tbe Banks and Braes
0' Bonnie Doon," and then in " Annie Laurie " we have
"bonnie Annie Laurie." No woman can be described with
any other word tbat would give her sucb a spiritual love as
"bonnie." Then you have it even in " Tam-o'-iSbanter " : —
" I wad gie the breeks f rae aft my hurdles
For ane blink o' the bonnie hurdles!"
340

APPENDIX III.
Then we have love songs, and no man that has experienced
that emotion can read some of those love songs without having
revived in bim his youthful memories — " Jock o' Hazeldean,"
"Highland Mary," "Green Grow the Rushes, 0," "Tbe Lass
o' Ballochmyle," " The Laird of Cockpen," and " Come under
My Plaidie," " Duncan Gray Cam' Here to Woo."
" Come under my plaidie and sit down beside me.
Believe me, dear lassie, there's room for us twa."
Many of you have tried the experiment. (Laughter.)
" Duncan Gray cam' here to woo.
Ha, ha, the wooing o't!"
We have these lovely verses — I don't know anything in
the English language like them — Burns to his Jean:
" I see her In the dewy flowers,
I see her sweet and fair;
I see her in the tunefu' birds,
I hear her charm the air:
There's not a bonnie flower that springs
By fountain, shaw or green;
There's not a bonnie bird that sings
But minds me o' my Jean."
You cannot beat that. Even the Psalms of David, forceful
though they be, have scarcely touched a higher pitch in beauty
and poetry and in spiritual meaning.
That is Scottish song. Who would not rejoice in Scottish
fblood, witb such a legacy from the days of Ossian down to
tbe present time of Scottish poetry and Scottish song, poured
out on every musical Instrument that human genius has
devised to gladden the hearts and to make one feel that —
" — a man, though e'er so poor.
Is king of men for a' that." (Applause.)
We should cultivate in Canada some of that refinement
which lifts us up albove sordid engagements, whicb lifts us
up ajbove even the pleasures of life, and which stirs a man
with thoughts that will follow him in clouds or sunshine.
And lastly, tbat love of Scotland to which Sir Mortimer
Clark has also referred — that love of country to which Sir
Walter Scott refers in those well-known lines:
" Breathes there a man with soul so dead,"
quoted by everybody when he speaks of bis own lands. You
have it in "The Emigrant's Lament":
" Oh, why left I my hame?
Why did I cross the deep?
Oh, why left I the land
Where my forefathers sleep?
I sigh for Scotia's shore —
341

APPENDIX III.
— so many of you have done tbat —
•• And gaze across the sea,
But I cannot get a blink
Of my ain countree."
Then you have it in that wonderful verse whicb one cannot
repeat without being thrilled: —
" Prom the lone shieling of the misty Island
Mountains divide us, and a waste of seas,
Tet still the blood Is strong, the heart is Highland,
And we in dreams behold the Hebrides."
Why, we fancy the Scotchman at some lone post in the
Hudson's Bay, as Lord Strathcona was at one time, or farther
north still, near the brim of the Arctic Circle, having mail
from the Old Country but once a year, or perhaps in the back
forests of Canada, In some of our northern counties, or In
New Ontario, separated from home friends. In bis dreams
be beholds the Hebrides, and tbat is satisfaction enough to
bim for tbe time being.
That is the patriotic spirit whicb we should cultivate in
Canada. Put Scotland side by side with Canada, and it is,
as was once said of the Emperor of Russia when he called
upon his secretary to bring him down the map of Europe and
show him where England was. He held one side of the map
while his secretary was holding tbe otber, and he was looking
for England, and could not find It. " Why," says the Secretary,
"your Majesty, your thumb is on it!" It was so small a
space that it was covered by his thumb. Scotland. is so small
a place — 58,000 square miles — while Ontario Is four times
as large, and Canada more than seventy times as large. If
Scotland in her few heather bills can produce the race that
she has produced, if Scotland has given laws to the world
in many respects, and directed tbe commerce and tbe legis
lation of tbe world In some respects, surely we with our larger
territory and our more favorable circumstances will be beard
of yet in the councils of the world and in tbe progressive
elements which constitute the higher civilization. (Hear, hear,
and applause.)
Whatever strength we may get to-night from gatherings
like these ought to go to contribute to make this great
Dominion what Scotland is in its identity, in its individuality,
in Its adaptaJbllity and its love for the beautiful, the true, the
holy, the pure and tbe reflned.
To-night the world is girdled with tbe songs of "Auld
Lang Syne." The Scotchman in Hong Kong clasps bands
with the Scotchman in Peru, with tbe Scotchman in Aus
tralia, with tbe Scotchman in Ceylon, in India — the whole
world clasps hands to-night, singing, "Should auld acquaint
ance be forgot?" No other nation can boast of that univer-
342

APPENDIX III.
sality of loyalty and devotion to their native land. Let us
transfer that loyalty to Canada. For, great as Scotland was
and is to me 'and to you —
" There Is no Land like our Land,
Where, mistress of our own.
We lead the breed of Erapire
To guard the ancient throne.
And the old land keeps a welcome
For her kin beyond the sea;
But this Land Is our Land,
And Canada for me!
" There is no Land like our Land;
Our day is at the dawn;
Our waking stirs the nations;
"We are no feeble spawn.
And the old Land keenly listens;
And the alien frowns to see;
But this Land is our Land;
And Canada is fre«!
" There is no Land like our Land;
God keep it ever so;
And heart-throbs shall be drum-beats.
When we flnd our country's foe.
Oh, this may love the Southland,
And that may cross the sea;
But this Land is our Land,
And Canada for me!"
(Loud and continued applause.)

343

¦¦KbS

II. lliil] I"'
«fii !'',>"
jillii'li?;

V'" 1" Il if 1; . ,i',

., .l,'l

ill |l li:;:;f-**^
lili&&>'

¦iiilfll