the complete ruin of the colony, no matter by what means, which is much to be desired if it can be effected. So I am working for it with all my heart.'

settlement.

About three-fourths of the colonists were artfully per- Destrucsuaded to leave the country, while force was employed against tion of the remainder. Driven from their homes, they were on the road to Hudson's Bay, when they met an agent of Lord Selkirk, who induced them to return. A considerable influx of settlers in the following autumn did not avail to make the colonists a match for their enemies, and in June, 1816, they were again fugitives from Fort Douglas. Governor Semple and twentyone others were killed in the attack made by the North-West Company's men.

action.

Meanwhile Lord Selkirk, who landed in New York on Selkirk's November 15, when he heard of the first destruction of his colony, hastened to Montreal, and applied for assistance from the Government. The influence, however, of the North-West Company was great, and his request was refused. Selkirk proceeded to engage one hundred discharged soldiers as settlers, with whom he proceeded to the Red River. At Sault Ste. Marie he heard of the disaster of June 19. He wrote at once to the Governor, Sir John Coape Sherbrooke, that he should exert his powers as a magistrate in dealing with the offence. Hastening to Fort William, he at once issued warrants of arrest against several members of the NorthWest Company. The fort was seized and the members of the North-West Company made prisoners and sent to Upper Canada. In January, 1817, Selkirk for the first time visited. the site of his colony. A remnant of the settlers was restored to their homes, and a treaty was made with the Indians, who by no means shared the animosity of the North-West Company.

Law

The battle was now transferred to the law courts, where the Case in influence of the North-West Company was very great. Courts. Several of its partners were members of the Executive Council, and were related by marriage or otherwise to occupants

West

Influence of the judicial bench. Lord Selkirk was, in fact, tilting against of North- the powerful interests which formed the family compact'. Company. The Church militant was to the fore in the shape of Dr. Strachan, a vigorous Churchman and politician, who left deep marks upon the history of Upper Canada.

commis

A warrant was obtained for Selkirk's arrest, but he ignored it on the ground that the process was irregular and surreptitious.. This act of contumacy provoked both Sir John Sherbrooke and the Secretary of State, Lord Bathurst. The latter threatened to invoke the aid of Parliament. It was admitted by the Governors of both the Canadas that it was impossible to obtain two impartial commissioners from either province to inquire into the whole matter. Nevertheless Report of the report of one of the commissioners appointed by no means acquitted the North-West Company. The foundation of the whole evil, it was said, was to be traced to that violent spirit which was nurtured by the species of monopoly that the North-West Company had established and continued to maintain in the Indian territories by physical power rather than by fair advantage derived from capital or connexion. The various illegal measures taken to crush adventurers who attempted to oppose this monopoly were notorious, whilst the bad effect of such monopoly on the character of individuals had been glaringly exhibited by the late events.

sioner.

Profits of The profits which the North-West Company was deterCompany. mined to keep to itself were in truth no small ones. Exclusive of the large sums made by agents, an annual profit of forty thousand pounds was made on the share capital. The North-West Company was the most powerful of Canadian institutions, whereas the Hudson's Bay Company was regarded askance, as representing English and alien interests; so that, when the struggle came within the purlieus of the Canadian Courts, it was not difficult to predict the issue. Apart from this, the appointment of Miles MacDonell as Governor had never been approved by the King, as was required by

contest.

statute, nor had he ever taken the due oaths of office. Selkirk Outcome of was convicted at York of resistance to lawful arrest; while one of the partners of the North-West Company obtained a verdict against him for false imprisonment. Of the forty or fifty persons, against whom true bills were found in the assault upon Fort Douglas, not more than nine could be brought to trial, and these were the least guilty. Selkirk was contending not only against a powerful association, but against the Government itself. The unequal contest may have hastened his death, but some of his colonists still remained in the country, and if, in other causes besides religion, the sacrifice of martyrs is not made in vain, the rich harvests of Manitoba will always recall the memory of its first pioneers.

AUTHORITIES

Voyages from Montreal through the Continent of North America, 1789 and 1793, by A. Mackenzie. London, 1801.

Les Bourgeois de la Compagnie du Nord-Ouest, par L. F. R. Masson. Quebec, 1889-90.

The Canadian West, translated from the French of Abbé G. Dugas. Montreal, 1905.

Narrative of Occurrences

since the Connexion of the Earl of

Selkirk with the Hudson's Bay Company. London, 1817.

Manitoba, by G. Bryce. London, 1882.

Parliamentary Papers, 1819, 'Red River Settlement.'

Brymner, op. cit. 1897, Note D.

See also

Lord Selkirk's Work in Canada, by Chester Martin. Oxford, 1916.

CHAPTER VII

THE WAR OF 1812

THE war of 1812 marks a turning-point in Canadian history. Hitherto the life of these provinces had been a somewhat inglorious one. Governor after Governor had confessed that they existed through the sufferance of their southern neighbour. Lord Dorchester, who had tried to fan into a flame a spirit of imperial patriotism amongst the French Canadians, had found his efforts unavailing in the damping atmosphere of English prejudice and jobbery. In Upper Canada, indeed, the United Empire loyalists were strong in their devotion to Great Britain, but they were few in number and surrounded by American newcomers. Craig had arrived at the conclusion that Quebec was the only place in Canada which could be defended. Even if reliance could be placed on the militia, military stores were wofully deficient. Brock, who was in command in Upper Canada, wrote to Prevost, in February, 1812, that there was not a single position in Upper Canada which could be considered a safe dépôt; and the general impression had been that in case of war no opposition to an invasion by the Americans was intended. The appointment to the post of Administrator and Acting-Governor of Upper Canada of a strong man like Isaac Brock, and the active preparations which followed, put a new spirit into the population. Brock was very anxious with regard to American influence in the Assembly and elsewhere, but recognized that the best policy was to act as if no mistrust existed. Unless the inhabitants gave an active and efficient aid, it would be impossible for the regular troops to preserve the province.

war.

The actual issue of events was very different from that Issue of which had been expected. At sea the power of the British navy was never adequately brought to bear, except by sweeping the rising commerce of the United States from the seas, and isolated actions of single ships appeared to leave the honours of war rather with the Americans. On land, on the other hand, the splendid services of the British troops, largely consisting of militia, in both provinces, were such as to make the war of 1812 a glorious memory to patriotic Canadians, the blood-pledge of the birth of a nation. At the same time, the political circumstances of its origin and its inglorious conclusion, so far as British leadership was concerned, have made it for Englishmen a somewhat painful episode to be explained away.

The two ostensible causes of the war of 1812 were the Orders in Council directed against neutral commerce and the impressment of British subjects on board American vessels. The Orders in Council of 1807 were the British counterblast to Napoleon's Berlin decree of 1806. Under the latter, the British Isles were declared to be in a state of blockade, and all correspondence and commerce with them was prohibited. By the Order in Council of January, 1807, neutrals were forbidden to make use of any port which did not allow British trade thereat. A further Order in Council of the same year declared all such ports to be subject to blockade. Confronted with this state of things, Thomas Jefferson, the President of the United States, forced through Congress an embargo bill, under which American ships were detained at home. The embargo, however, was difficult to enforce, in the face of the active hostility of a large section of the people, and some other remedy had to be found. An unauthorized and premature withdrawal of the Orders in Council made (in 1809) by the British Minister at Washington, Mr. Erskine, and promptly disowned by the home authorities, did not mend matters; and his successor was on such bad terms with the Washington