CHAPTER XII LORD DURHAM AND THE AFFAIRS OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA LORD DURHAM arrived in Canada on May 29, 1838. He came with exceedingly wide powers which can be studied in detail in the various commissions, instructions, and dispatches which he received from the cabinet. They can be summed up in the words of Lord Glenelg. He was given a general superintendence over all British North America', and he was to consider any proposals which he might think conducive to the permanent establishment of an improved system of government in her majesty's North American possessions'.1 He also came with a preconceived idea of the future government. Before he left England he had drawn up the outline of a federal plan, believing that under a monarchy such a federation would gradually change into a complete legislative union of all the provinces.2 6 On his arrival he disclosed the purpose of his mission in a proclamation to the people: The honest and conscientious advocates of reform and of the amelioration of defective. institutions will receive from me, without distinction of party, race, or politics, that assistance and encouragement which their patriotism has a right to command from all who desire to strengthen and consolidate the connexion between the parent state and these important colonies; but the disturbers of the public peace, the violators of the law, the enemies of the crown and of the British empire will find in me an uncompromising opponent. ... I invite from you the most free and 1 Glenelg to Durham, January 20, April 21, 1838, Report, vol. iii, pp. 305 ff. (ed. Lucas, Oxford, 1912). * Charles Buller, Sketch of Lord Durham's Mission to Canada', ibid., pp. 336 ff. The idea may have been suggested by Glenelg; see ibid., p. 309. unreserved communications. I beg you to consider me as a friend and arbitrator, ready at all times to listen to your wishes, complaints, and grievances, and fully determined to act with the strictest impartiality. If you on your side will abjure all party and sectarian animosities and unite with me in the blessed work of peace and harmony, I feel assured that I can lay the foundations of such a system of government as will protect the rights and interests of all classes, allay all dissensions, and permanently establish under Divine Providence that wealth, greatness, and prosperity of which such inexhaustible elements are to be found in these fertile countries.'1 The proclamation proclaimed him a liberal imperialist. His goodwill was immediately evident. He dissolved the old council and appointed a new one, which, with the exception of Dominick Daly, the provincial secretary, consisted of members of his staff. His desire to be surrounded with unbiased advisers met with universal approval. With all its defects Durham's Report on the affairs of British North America remains the greatest state paper in colonial history. The minutest criticism has been applied to it since the time of its appearance. Much of this criticism is valid. The 'family compact', for example, subjected it to searching examination, and a committee of the legislative council of Upper Canada produced a report in which forceful restraint is combined with a logic which from many points of view can never be denied. The sections on Upper Canada are decidedly weak. Politically there is fairness, socially and economically there are exaggerations and distorted views. The part dealing 1 In English and French, enclosed in dispatch to Glenelg, May 31, 1838, State Papers, Q. 246–1, p. 45. 2 Kennedy, 7, op. cit., pp. 470 ff. The legislative assembly also made a report to which a reply was issued by Francis Hincks, editor of the Toronto Examiner, whose paper had made a strong plea for responsible government' during Durham's residence in Canada. His pamphlet is entitled A brief Review of the Report of the House of Assembly of Upper Canada on Lord Durham's Report (Toronto, 1839). with Lower Canada can only be described as brilliant, and the situation there is diagnosed with the greatest insight, which is made all the more remarkable by the occasional slips in fact and errors in interpretation. In his efforts to grasp the problems which called for solution Durham gave himself up to five, months of ceaseless activity. His resignation cut him off from perfecting his summary in detail, and had he remained longer it is reasonable to expect that he would have learned more of Upper Canada. He felt, however, that the most pressing issue was that of French-Canadianism, and on it he expended the greater part of his tireless energy. Of the Maritime Provinces he said little. The blow from England fell on him at the moment when he was in the middle of a conference with eastern delegates, and his Report was finished leaving the history a mere sketch, with no comprehensive grasp of the difficulties which the interview brought to light. Contact, however, with the Maritime Provinces brought him into touch with Sir John Harvey of New Brunswick, Sir Colin Campbell and William Young of Nova Scotia, Sir Charles Fitzroy of Prince Edward Island, and others, from whom he learned something of conditions and before whom he laid his plan of British North American federation. The attitude of each eastern province was different for different reasons. In the Maritime Provinces there had been much social, political, religious, and economic progress. In the course of time constitutional friction appeared similar to that in the Canadas. The issues, however, were held well in hand, and there was never any public clamour of a disloyal nature. In Nova Scotia and New Brunswick the executive council and the legislative council consisted of the same persons. In 1830, when Lord Goderich was dealing with questions raised by the parliamentary report of 1828 on the Canadas, he wrote to the lieutenant-governors of both provinces suggesting the advisability of making the councils more independent by appointing . to them a greater number of members who were not government officials and by excluding the puisne judges. Two years later he sent a dispatch to Sir Archibald Campbell, lieutenantgovernor of New Brunswick, proposing that in future the executive council and the legislative council should not consist of the same members and that the former should be small and include 'one or two influential members of each branch of the legislature'. He also recommended that the legislative council should be increased, and that membership of it should not of necessity carry with it membership of the executive council. Campbell agreed with these suggestions, pointing out that the previous state of affairs constituted an anomaly which ought never to have existed. By a royal commission dated November 20, 1832, New Brunswick was given two distinct councils, one entirely executive and one entirely legislative. In 1836 a deputation from New Brunswick visited England headed by the reform leader Lemuel Wilmot. They suggested reforms in the personnel of the councils, but they made no demands for responsible government or for an elective second chamber. Their main object was to secure from the colonial office general concessions such as had been offered in the Canadas by Gosford and Head. They asked for the control of the crown revenues in return for a civil list and for a reform in the crown lands' department. These requests were at once granted, and arrangements were agreed on for carrying them out. Unfortunately Campbell feared that the concessions were too extreme, and he carried on an undignified dispute with the house of assembly, dissolving it on a side issue. An election brought him no relief, and finally he resigned. His successor was Sir John Harvey, whom Durham met in Canada, and the reforms agreed on in England were carried out without serious trouble. New Brunswick would have been the gainer from federation. The Maine boundary was still in dispute, and in case of war with the United States New Brunswick would have been the earliest point of attack. Harvey, however, knew that the province had just passed through a political crisis in which reactionary and reform forces had been engaged in a bitter quarrel, and he was not anxious to introduce new proposals before the recent changes had passed out of an atmosphere of local political controversy. In Nova Scotia the strong English element centred round Halifax stiffened the forces of conservatism, and it was not till 1837 that the councils were separated. When the legislature opened in that year Joseph Howe proposed a series of reform resolutions, demanding among other things that the council should no longer hold their seats for life and treat with contempt or indifference the wishes of the people'. Howe made a fighting speech in which he repudiated any separatist or republican tendencies, but claimed the fullness of self-government. The council threatened to refuse the supply bill, and Howe withdrew the resolutions after he had secured a majority in their favour in the assembly. The tactics were admirable. The supply bill was saved, and Howe embodied the resolutions, which had fulfilled their purpose as a test of opinion, in an address to the king. The address asked for the control of the casual and territorial revenues, and an elective legislative council. Failing the latter the assembly desired that the executive and legislative councils should be separated, and that provision should be made in both for a just representation of all the great interests of the province. They also asked that the executive council should include some members of the popular branch', and that thus the province might secure responsibility to the commons'. Glenelg replied granting the concessions which had been made in the other provinces, but he expressed a doubt as to the possible success of separating the councils. For the moment he avoided reference to the Glenelg to Campbell, April 30, 1837, Sessional Papers, Canada (1883), No. 70, pp. 17 ff. |