PROPOSALS FOR UNION FROM 1791 to 1838 the Constitutional Act remained in force, but both in Upper and in Lower Canada grievances soon arose. The Governor, the Executive Council, the Legislative Council, and the Legislative Assembly quarrelled among themselves, each proving strong enough to thwart the others, but not to assert its own supremacy. In Lower Canada this struggle was complicated by racial and religious antagonism, the French Canadians forming the majority of the Assembly, while the Governor chose his Councils mainly from the English inhabitants of Quebec and Montreal. A bitter dispute also arose between the two provinces, Lower Canada refusing to give to the Upper Province an adequate share in the Customs dues levied at the port of Montreal, an increasing proportion of which was collected on goods destined for use in Upper Canada. To remedy these evils, the Imperial Government in 1822 proposed a union of the two Canadas.1 This proposal was withdrawn, owing to the fierce opposition of the French Canadians and the lukewarm attitude of the English, but that part of the Act dealing with the apportionment of the revenue passed into law as the Canada Trade Act. 1 It is interesting to note the large share played by financial questions in this proposed constitutional change. Similarly, in the negotiations leading up to the federation of 1867 the financial relations between the provinces proved a rock which more than once threatened to wreck the scheme. PROPOSED GENERAL UNION 123 The chief arguments for and against the proposed measure are given in a private letter of Sir John Sherbrooke, Governor from 1816 to 1818, to Lord Bathurst, the Colonial Secretary, and in the following petitions submitted to the King and to the Imperial Parliament, the text of which is quoted from the Report of the Canadian Archivist for 1897. The Legislative Councils of both provinces were at this time controlled by an English-speaking oligarchy, the core of which was composed of the prominent Loyalists and their descendants. In the answers of the chief of these to the questions of the Imperial Government, while the suggested union was but coldly received, a proposal for the federation of all the British North American provinces was put forward.1 In 1824 several of these replies were published in London, including those of J. B. Robinson, Attorney-General of Upper Canada; John Strachan, Bishop of the same province; and William Sewell, Chief Justice of Lower Canada. The two main arguments advanced in favour of the proposition were the gradual extinction of French influence, or, at any rate, of French preponderance, and the strengthening of British North America against the rising power of the United States. SIR JOHN COAPE SHERBROOKE TO LORD BATHURST. MY LORD, I have been honoured with your Lordship's private and confidential letter of the 11th inst., the contents of which shall not transpire, and in reply to your 1 The first such proposal subsequent to the loss of the American colonies is found in a report on Nova Scotia made in 1784 by LieutenantColonel Morse, and given in full in the Report of the Canadian Archivist for 1884. Oddly enough, he proposed that the capital of the united question" Whether the Union of Upper and Lower Canada would have a beneficial effect," I answer, that if these Provinces continue in the same state they were in at the time I relinquished the Government, an Union would be very desirable, provided it could be established on proper principles, so that the undue influence of the Assembly should be somewhat controlled and the power of the Crown increased. But if such a measure were to be attempted, considerable difficulties must be expected before it could be reconciled with the jarring interests of the inhabitants and the variety of wild opinions so generally entertained. Your Lordship's description of the persons usually returned to the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada is perfectly correct. And the mischiefs arising from this cause are incalculable. I also agree that the Assembly of Upper Canada appears more tractable at present. But when I consider the vicinity of the latter Province to the United States, the population continually flowing in from thence, the constant communication and intermarriages between the families on both sides of the line, the number of Americans who purchase the best of the lands as soon as they are cleared and every other description of property in Upper Canada worth having; and when I look to the loose demoralising principles introduced by those people, I very much doubt whether reliance can be placed on a continuance of this tractable disposition. I am fully aware my Lord of the evils arising from that ascendancy which the Catholics of Lower Canada exercise to the prejudice of whatever relates to the Protestant interest, but I suspect a very erroneous idea prevails in this country of the state of religion in Upper Canada. It might be supposed that the generality of the inhabitants being called Protestants were either of the communion of the established Church or of the Kirk of Scotland. Whereas the greater part are Methodists and Sectaries of every description. And I am sorry to add there provinces should be placed in the island of Cape Breton. The next proposition of the sort was that of Chief Justice Smith, quoted on pp. 104-110. In 1809 a federal union was advocated in the Legislature of Nova Scotia by R. J. Uniacke. In 1814 a similar proposal was made to the Duke of Kent by Chief Justice Sewell of Lower Canada, who had married a daughter of Smith, and been much influenced by him. Subsequent propositions will be noted later. ARGUMENTS AGAINST UNION 125 are many who appear to have no sense of religion whatever. Circumstances have materially changed since the separation of the two Provinces, and I could not avoid remarking when I was in Upper Canada, that in many instances a stronger bias prevailed in favour of the American than of the British form of Government. Whereas the Catholics in Lower Canada have a rooted antipathy to the Government of the United States, and have no dread equal to that of one day falling under its Dominion. This trait of character I venture to press on your Lordship's attention, as whatever may be the fate of the Upper Province, the Americans will never be able to establish themselves in Lower Canada, whilst this feeling is cherished. In giving my candid opinion of the state of the two provinces, I shall be happy if I have in any degree answered the expectations your Lordship has done me the honour to express. And I have only to assure you of my willingness at all times to attend to your Lordship's commands. In repeating that I shall not fail to hold your Lordship's communication confidential, I must request that my answer may be looked upon in the same light, and have the honour to be, my Lord, Your Lordship's very obedient and Faithful humble servant, J. C. SHERBROOKE. TO THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY : The Petition of the Undersigned Seigniors, Magistrates, Members of the Clergy, Officers of Militia, Merchants, Landholders, and others, Inhabitants of the City and District of Quebec, Province of Lower Canada: HUMBLY SHEWETH: That your Petitioners have learnt with the greatest satisfaction, that Your Majesty has taken into your Gracious Consideration the State of the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, with a view to adjust certain differences relating to matters of Revenue complained of by the Province of Upper Canada; and as it appears that Your Majesty's Government in the course of its inquiry into the sources of these differences, has become satisfied of the necessity of some change being made in the Constitution of these Provinces, but has postponed the adoption of final measures in order to give time to the people thereof to express their sentiments, Your Petitioners beg leave humbly to approach Your Majesty with a statement of various Evils under which they have laboured for some years and from which they have no hope of relief except by the interposition of Your Majesty and the Imperial Parliament. The experience of thirty years has now demonstrated the impolicy of the Act of the British Parliament, 31 Geo. III., Cap. 31, by which the late Province of Quebec was divided into the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada. To this Division Your Petitioners ascribe the present ineffective state of the Legislature and the want of those necessary measures for diffusing throughout the whole population of the country feelings becoming their character as British subjects, and introducing that general spirit of improvement which encouraged by the commercial system, universally pervades and invigorates other British Colonies. This division has created a difference of interest between the Provinces in matters connected with Revenue highly injurious to both, inevitably producing a spirit of dissension and animosity, and infusing into the Legislatures principles of a narrow and selfish policy adverse to the general development of their resources, and in an especial manner to the improvement of the channels of intercourse between them, and it is essential here to notice that nearly the whole of the Revenue of the two Provinces arises from the duties levied on Merchandize imported at the port of Quebec under Laws enacted by the Legislature of the Lower Provin. It has also, from the control which the geographical situation of the Lower Province enables it to exercise over the trade of the Canadas placed the export Trade of the Upper Province at its mercy, being subject to such regulations and restrictions at the Shipping Port as its Legislature may choose to impose. From this circumstance, and from the feeble attempts made to improve the grand natural channel of the Canadas, strikingly contrasted with the enterprise and energy evinced by the neighbouring State of New York in the rapid formation of Canals, together with the indifference manifested on this subject |