THE circumstances of
the country during the years which preceded the general election of
1891 were in many ways exceedingly favourable to the agitators whose
aim was to induce Canadians to adopt the policy of "commercial
union" with the United States as a remedy for the business
depression under which the country was suffering. The settlement of
the North-West had not proceeded with the rapidity that had been
anticipated when the transcontinental railway was completed. A
succession of bad seasons had had a most discouraging influence on
the settlers who had come into the country. The price of
agricultural produce was low, and for a long time gave no sign of
improvement. The farming population was therefore, for the moment,
poor and far from contented. The inflation which had followed on the
opening up of the North-West had been succeeded by a period of
reaction and extreme depression in Winnipeg and other western
centres. The National Policy had, in the east, stimulated production
in manufacture before a sufficient market had been created in the
west for the goods produced, so that the artisan suffered with the
farmer. The renewal of the reciprocity secured by the treaty of
1854, so favourable to Canadian trade, had been, over and over
again, refused by the United States. In that country a distinct
hostility to Canadian interests had been created after the rejection
by the senate of the Chamberlain-Bayard treaty, and the consequent
assertion and protection of Canadian rights in the fisheries of the
coast. The threat of President Cleveland to abrogate the bonding
privilege by way of reprisal for the latter proceeding, accentuated
the anxiety of those who doubted Canada's ability to stand up
against the commercial dominance of her great competitor on the
American continent.
These and many other minor circumstances
conspired to strengthen the hands of those who in 1887 and the
following years advocated a policy which in practice would have
involved the surrender of the country's commercial and fiscal
independence as the price to be paid for the full enjoyment of the
markets of the continent.
Between 1887 and 1891 a vigorous and
sustained campaign was carried on in favour of this policy—at first
under the name of "commercial union," and later, as this term became
increasingly unpopular, under that of "unrestricted reciprocity."
The movement attracted the support of men actuated by widely
different motives. Mr. Goldwin Smith, the gloomy prophet of
annexation perhaps even more than its advocate, lent the service of
his skilful and incisive pen and the prestige of his name to a cause
which promised industrial alleviation at the moment, with ultimate
realization of his own conception of Canada's inevitable future as a
part of the American union. His openly avowed object for the moment
was to "bring Canada within the commercial pale of her own
continent." Mr.
Erastus Wiman, a Canadian resident in New York, and a man of
considerable ability and exceptional energy, brought the resources
of wealth, and a business organization which covered the continent,
to the promulgation of the ideas of the party which advocated this
drastic change in Canadian policy. Many business men, impatient at
the prolonged depression of trade, joined the Commercial Union
League, which was formed to influence public opinion. Among
politicians another factor in the situation should not be left out
of the account. It was that of personal discontent, due to the long
continuance of Conservative supremacy under the leadership of
Macdonald.
While the party system seems, on the whole, to furnish the best
machinery yet devised for self-government by free and democratic
communities, in operation it is not without serious drawbacks and
some dangers. Even in England, the birthplace and home of modern
constitutional government, the fierce struggle of parties striving
for power has not unfrequently obscured men's regard for the real
interest of the State. It is hard at times to reconcile party spirit
with patriotism in the acts and utterances even of such a man as
Charles James Fox, to mention but a single instance.
Conditions of public life in a new
country like Canada exaggerate this evil. Politicians have not the
wealth common among the ruling classes in older communities, and so
it means more to them to lose office, with its influence, its
emoluments, and its opportunities for the distribution of patronage.
Parties cling to power desperately, and under skilful management an
undesirable regime may maintain its ground for a very long period.
This reacts on the spirit of an
Opposition. A party long kept from power and the rewards of office
grows bitter and discontented. It is scarcely too much to say that a
small section, at least, of the Liberal party, towards the end of
Macdonald's career, was in this mood and ready for very doubtful
adventures. A few certainly laid themselves open, even among men of
their own side of politics, to the suspicion of disloyalty, as that
term is understood in Canada.
The keenest advocates of fiscal union
with the United States were, however, outside the ranks of political
party. The Commercial Union League which was formed for the special
advocacy of the scheme had Mr. Goldwin Smith as its president. The
movement secured support from the president of the Toronto Board of
Trade, and the president of the Council of Farmers'
Institutes—circumstances which indicated the possibility of a strong
movement in its favour among the trading and farming classes of
Ontario. Two
powerful organs of public opinion—the Toronto Mail and the Globe—one
professedly independent and the other strongly Liberal in its
traditions, gave active support to the new policy.
On the other side of the national
boundary line the movement was encouraged by the introduction into
congress by Mr. Butterworth, a member of the House of
Representatives, of a bill which proposed to settle all the existing
differences between the United States and Canada by the adoption of
a zollverein.
Against these various forces a group of vigorous thinkers, partly
also outside of politics and influenced mainly by other than party
considerations, set its face resolutely, and fought the Commercial
Unionists on every platform. Foremost in this group were Principal
George M. Grant, Dalton McCarthy, M.P. and Colonel George T.
Denison. Their appeal against the new policy was chiefly based on
the spirit of national honour and loyalty to British traditions,
which they believed would be violated by any system which
discriminated against the motherland and tended to make Canada
subject, in the first place commercially, and later politically, to
an alien people. An established reputation as disinterested men and
as sincere and ardent advocates of imperial unity gave the arguments
of this group great weight in an electorate long trained in
principles of British loyalty, and their speeches went far to bring
discredit upon Commercial Union as a popular cry. Meanwhile
politicians on both sides watched closely to see whereto the
agitation would grow.
In the Liberal party there was divided
opinion as to the attitude which should be taken towards the new
policy. Subsequent events proved that Mr. Blake, who had lately
resigned the Liberal leadership, though publicly silent, was
privately suspicious of the whole movement. Mr. Laurier, the
newly-elected leader, in one of his earlier speeches in that
capacity, while carefully stating the case for Commercial Union with
the United States, hesitated about committing himself to it
entirely, hinted that it might be "surrounded by insurmountable
difficulties," but held that "the time has come to abandon the
policy of retaliation followed thus far by the Canadian government,
to show the American people that we are brothers, and to hold out
our hands to them, with a due regard for the duties we owe to our
Mother Country." He, at the same time, expressed his preference for
a policy under which "all the nations recognizing the sovereignty of
Great Britain would agree to rally together by means of commercial
treaties," adding in reference to this, with prophetic vision of his
own future efforts: "I consider the idea as good and fair, and such
being the case I believe that it will eventually triumph." On the
other hand Sir Richard Cartwright, whose authority at that time was
great in the Liberal party, openly declared in 1887 for Commercial
Union. In a speech delivered at Ingersoll on October 12th of that
year, he said: "I am averse as any man can be to annexation or to
resign our political independence, but I cannot shut my eyes to the
facts. We have greatly misused our advantages. We have been most
foolish and most wasteful in our expenditures. We have no means of
satisfying the just demands of large portions of the Dominion except
through such an arrangement as Commercial Union . . . . There is a
risk, and I cannot overlook it. But it is a choice of risks. I say
deliberately that the refusal or failure to secure free trade with
the United States is much more likely to bring about just such a
political crisis as these parties affect to dread than even the
closest commercial connection that can be conceived."
An utterance such as this, coming from a
man of position in the party, gave colour to the opinion that
Commercial Union would be adopted as the Liberal trade policy. The
provincial governments of the time were mostly Liberal, and at an
interprovincial conference of their representatives held in the
autumn of 1887, a resolution in favour of "unrestricted reciprocity"
was passed, but coupled significantly with the declaration of
"fervent loyalty to Her Majesty the Queen, and warm attachment to
British connection," indicating clearly the danger which was
anticipated from pressing the question of Commercial Union pure and
simple. It is to be noted that a small Conservative minority at this
conference, representing Manitoba and New Brunswick, which both
suffered severely from restriction of trade with the United States,
assented to this resolution.
When parliament met in 1888 it became
necessary for the Liberal party to definitely state its policy. At
the caucus held for that purpose a large majority was found to be
opposed to any scheme which would make the fiscal system of Canada
so dependent on that of the United States as it would be under
complete Commercial Union, although some members were ready to make
even this sacrifice for the sake of the advantages expected to flow
from untrammelled trade relations.
The declaration of policy ultimately
fixed upon was introduced into parliament as a resolution on March
14th, 1888, by Sir Richard Cartwright. It read as follows : "That it
is highly desirable that the largest possible freedom of commercial
intercourse should obtain between the Dominion of Canada and the
United States, and that it is expedient that all articles
manufactured in, or the natural products of either of the said
countries, should be admitted free of duty into the ports of the
other, articles subject to duties of excise or of internal revenue
alone excepted ; and that it is further expedient that the
government of the Dominion should take steps at an early date to
ascertain on what terms and conditions arrangements can be effected
with the United States for the purpose of securing full and
unrestricted reciprocity of trade therewith." While the unpopular
term "Commercial Union" was rejected in this resolution the
substance of the idea was manifestly retained, since it is
impossible to conceive a common tariff the terms of which would not
be fixed by the predominant partner to the arrangement.
In parliament Macdonald met the issue
thus raised by a direct negative. An amendment, approving of the
protective policy of the government, was moved to the resolution of
Sir Richard Cartwright by the finance minister of the cabinet, the
Hon. G. E. Foster, and was carried by a vote of one hundred and
twenty-four to sixty-seven. Again in 1889 Sir Richard Cartwright
brought forward a modified resolution demanding a reduction of
tariffs, and proposing that negotiations with the United States
should be "conducted upon the basis of the most extended reciprocal
freedom of trade between Canada and the United States in
manufactured as well as natural products." This resolution also was
voted down in parliament by a large majority.
But the Liberal party was now thoroughly
committed to the general policy of unrestricted reciprocity outlined
in these resolutions, and its leading speakers and writers devoted
their energies during the next two years to the education of the
public mind in this direction. They had perhaps been carried further
than they intended by the apparent necessity for having some strong
and individual line of policy to put before the country.
No reasonable person doubts that the
majority of those who argued for closer trade relations with the
United States did so with a view to the best interests of Canada and
in perfect good faith. But it was unfortunate for the party that,
while the policy thus adopted had in it much specious promise of
material benefit, it was, as now put forward, opposed to sentiments
and prejudices deeply rooted in the Canadian mind, and enlisted
support of an exceedingly questionable character.
The extreme advocates of unrestricted
reciprocity brought forward arguments and used expressions which
offended the powerful sentiment of British nationality, and aroused
suspicion of the objects they had in view. So true was this that a
genuine belief was created in many minds that there was an organized
conspiracy to hand over the country to the United States, and facts
were to come to light which strengthened this suspicion.
The parliament of 1887 had yet a year to
run when Macdonald, early in 1891, made up his mind that the time
had come for an appeal to the electors on the momentous issue which
had thus been raised. In many ways the chances of an election would
at this time, under ordinary circumstances, have been strongly
against him. Even his wonderful political adroitness could not
altogether resist the swing of the pendulum, that tendency in free
governments to lose strength during any long continuance of power,
either by the defection of friends or the multiplication of
opponents. Ontario was sore over the government's attitude towards
the Jesuits' Estates Bill. Suspicion of corruption was hanging over
one at least of his principal colleagues. A struggle going on in the
West against the monopoly of transportation enjoyed by the Canadian
Pacific Railway reacted unfavourably on the government which had
granted the monopoly. The mere desire for change, after so many
years of Conservative supremacy, was a force in the constituencies
not to be ignored.
But he felt that it would be useless for
parliament to meet again until the political atmosphere had been
cleared by some definite expression from the constituencies. He
perhaps recognized also the desirability of having a question of
such far-reaching consequence to the Dominion settled once for all,
while his own personal influence and prestige would count in the
struggle. His political instincts, long trained to nice perception
of the state of public feeling, told him that the time was
opportune. He saw that the policy put forward by the Opposition,
while it received support from a certain class of thinkers and
business men, and for the moment seemed to serve the party purposes
of his opponents, was fundamentally opposed to the main drift of
Canadian history and Canadian purpose. He was convinced that the
Canadian people shared his own fixed belief that greater things were
in store for the Dominion than Commercial Union, or union of any
other kind with the United States, could give.
The new policy, it was clear, drew
support from some who had no sympathy with that devotion to British
connection, and that passionate loyalty to the idea of a United
Empire, which had played so large a part in Canadian history, and
had more than once exercised a decisive influence on the course of
events. The cold philosophy of Goldwin Smith, which placed the
theory of free trade before national sentiment, was, to say the
least, opposed to Canadian traditions. Macdonald on the other hand
trusted to the strength of that sentiment to overcome every obstacle
that confronted him in the coming contest.
He would not have been true, however, to his own record as a
strategist in politics had he not tried to turn his opponents'
flank. He had steadily opposed the plan of complete surrender to the
American system. But he knew that the demand for improved trade
relations with the United States was widespread and in a measure
justified. In past times he had himself made every honourable effort
to renew the reciprocal arrangement, which, between 1854 and 1866
had proved of so much advantage to both countries. Indeed, he
claimed with apparent truth that every improvement in reciprocal
trade hitherto made with the neighbouring republic had been obtained
by Conservative governments of which he was a member. He now took
steps through the medium of the home government, in connection with
certain discussions concerning Newfoundland and Canadian fisheries,
to approach the government of the United States once more *ith
proposals for considering the various questions in dispute between
that country and Canada with a view to an amicable settlement, and
especially with the object of extending commercial intercourse
between the two countries. How far he entertained hopes of success
we have no means of knowing. But he well knew that a government in
power striving to get the best terms possible from a commercial
rival was more likely to be approved by the electors than an
Opposition ready to make wholesale concessions and even risk
political integrity.
The Conservative press made the most of
this attempt to renew negotiations, and perhaps gave an exaggerated
significance to the fact that the question had been re-opened partly
at the suggestion of the American secretary of state, in connection
with the discussion of fishery questions which concerned both Canada
and Newfoundland. The Liberal party, recognizing that active
exertion on the part of the government for better trade relations
greatly weakened their own exclusive claim to this policy, denounced
the new move as a mere electoral stratagem, and the circumstances
introduced a new element of bitterness into the struggle.
Parliament was dissolved on February
3rd, and the election was fixed for March 5th. On February 7th,
Macdonald issued his last formal appeal to the electors of the
Dominion. This address, in which he reviews the work of his party in
the development of Canada, criticizes the obstructive policy of his
opponents, and finally concentrates attention upon the great issue
immediately before the country, furnishes so good an illustration of
his twofold character as party leader and national statesman, that
even to-day, when the questions which he discusses are dead and
buried, much of it may be read with interest. He says to the
electors :-
"The momentous questions now engaging public attention having, in
the opinion of the ministry, reached that stage when it is desirable
that an opportunity should be given to the people of expressing, at
the polls, their views thereon, the governor-general has been
advised to terminate the existence of the present House of Commons,
and to issue writs summoning a new parliament. This advice His
Excellency has seen fit to approve, and you, therefore, will be
called upon within a short time to elect members to represent you in
the great council of the nation. I shall be a candidate for the
representation of my old constituency, the city of Kingston.
"In soliciting at your hands a renewal
of the confidence which I have enjoyed as a minister of the Crown
for thirty years, it is, I think, convenient that I should take
advantage of the occasion to define the attitude of the government,
in which I am First Minister, towards the leading political issues
of the day. "As
in 1878, in 1882, and again in 1887, so in 1891, do questions
relating to the trade and commerce of the country occupy a foremost
place in the public mind. Our policy in respect thereto is to-day
what it has been for the past thirteen years, and is directed by a
firm determination to foster and develop the varied resources of the
Dominion, by every means in our power consistent with Canada's
position as an integral portion of the British Empire. To that end
we have laboured in the past, and we propose to continue in the work
to which we have applied ourselves, of building up on this
continent, under the flag of England, a great and powerful nation.
When, in 1878, we were called upon to
administer the affairs of the Dominion, Canada occupied a position
in the eyes of the world very different from that which she enjoys
to-day. At that time a profound depression hung like a pall over the
whole country, from the Atlantic Ocean to the western limits of the
province of Ontario, beyond which to the Rocky Mountains stretched a
vast and almost unknown wilderness. Trade was depressed,
manufactures languished, and, exposed to ruinous competition,
Canadians were fast sinking into the position of being mere I hewers
of wood and drawers of water' for the great nation dwelling to the
south of us. We determined to change this unhappy state of things.
We felt that Canada, with its agricultural resources, rich in its
fisheries, timber, and mineral wealth, was worthy of a nobler
position than that of being a slaughter market of the United States.
We said to the Americans: 'We are perfectly willing to trade with
you on equal terms. We are desirous of having a fair reciprocity
treaty, but we will not consent to open our markets to you while
yours remain closed to us.' So we inaugurated the National Policy.
You all know what followed. Almost as if by magic, the whole face of
the country underwent a change. Stagnation and apathy and gloom—ay,
and want and misery too—gave place to activity and enterprise and
prosperity. The miners of Nova Scotia took courage; the
manufacturing industries in our great centres revived and
multiplied; the farmer found the market for his produce, the artisan
and labourer employment at good wages, and all Canada rejoiced under
the quickening impulse of a new-found life. The age of deficits was
past, and an overflowing treasury gave to the government the means
of carrying forward those great works necessary to the realization
of our purpose to make this country a homogeneous whole.
"To that end we undertook that
stupendous work, the Canadian Pacific Railway. Undeterred by the
pessimistic views of our opponents—nay, in spite of their strenuous,
and even maligant, opposition—we pushed forward that great
enterprise through the wilds north of Lake Superior, across the
western prairies, over the Rocky Mountains to the shores of the
Pacific, with such inflexible resolution that, in seven years after
the assumption of office by the present administration, the dream of
our public men was an accomplished fact, and I myself experienced
the proud satisfaction of looking back from the steps of my car upon
the Rocky Mountains fringing the eastern sky. The Canadian Pacific
Railway now extends from ocean to ocean, opening up and developing
the country at a marvellous rate, and forming an imperial highway to
the East over which the trade of the Indies is destined to reach the
markets of Europe. We have subsidized steamship lines on both
oceans—to Europe, China, Japan, Australia, and the West Indies. We
have spent millions on the extension and improvement of our canal
system. We have, by liberal grants of subsidies, promoted the
building of railways, now become an absolute necessity, until the
whole country is covered as with a network; and we have done all
this with such prudence and caution, that our credit in the money
market of the world is higher to-day than it has ever been, and the
rate of interest on our debt, which is a true measure of the public
burdens, is less then it was when we took office in 1878.
"During all this time what has been the
attitude of the Reform party? Vacillating in their policy and
inconstancy itself as regards their leaders, they have at least been
consistent in this particular, that they have uniformly opposed
every measure which had for its object the development of our common
country. The National Policy was a failure before it had been tried.
Under it we could not possibly raise a revenue sufficient for the
public requirements. Time exposed that fallacy. Then we were to pay
more for the home-manufactured article than we used to when we
bought everything abroad. We were to be the prey of rings and
monopolies, and the manufacturers were to extort their own prices.
When these fears had been proved unfounded, we were assured that
over-competition would inevitably prove the ruin of the
manufacturing industries, and thus bring about a state of affairs
worse than that which the National Policy had been designed to meet.
It was the same with the Canadian Pacific Railway. The whole
project, according to our opponents, was a chimera. The engineering
difficulties were insuperable, the road, even if constructed, would
never pay. Well, gentlemen, the project was feasible, the
engineering difficulties were overcome, and the road does pay.
Disappointed by the failure of all their predictions, and convinced
that nothing is to be gained by further opposition on the old lines,
the Reform party has taken a new departure, and has announced its
policy to be Unrestricted Reciprocity—that is (as defined by its
author, Mr. Wiman, in the North American Review a few days ago)
free-trade with the United States, and a common tariff with the
United States against the rest of the world. The adoption of this
policy would involve, among other grave evils, discrimination
against the mother country. . . . . . . . It would, in my opinion,
inevitably result in the annexation of this Dominion to the United
States." After
discussing the necessity that such a system would create for direct
taxation to replace the ordinary revenue derived from import duties,
which would be done away with by a system of commercial union, he
returns to the vital issue of the election.
"For a century and a half this country
has grown and flourished under the protecting aegis of the British
Crown. The gallant race who first bore to our shores the blessings
of civilization, passed, by an easy transition, from French to
English rule, and now form one of the most law-abiding portions of
the community. These pioneers were speedily recruited by the advent
of a loyal band of British subjects, who gave up everything that men
most prize, and were content to begin life anew in the wilderness
rather than forego allegiance to their sovereign. To the descendants
of these men, and of the multitude of Englishmen, Irishmen and
Scotchmen who emigrated to Canada that they might build up new homes
without ceasing to be British subjects—to you Canadians I appeal,
and I ask you what have you to gain by surrendering that which your
fathers held most dear? Under the broad folds of the Union Jack, we
enjoy the most ample liberty to govern ourselves as we please, and
at the same time we participate in the advantages which flow from
association with the mightiest empire the world has ever seen. Not
only are we free to manage our domestic concerns, but, practically,
we possess the privilege of making our own treaties with foreign
countries, and, in our relations with the outside world, we enjoy
the prestige inspired by a consciousness of the fact that behind us
towers the majesty of England. The question which you will shortly
be called upon to determine resolves itself into this: Shall we
endanger our possession of the great heritage bequeathed to us by
our fathers, and submit ourselves to direct taxation for the
privilege of having our tariff fixed at Washington, with a prospect
of ultimately becoming a portion of the American union? I commend
these issues to your determination, and to the judgment of the whole
people of Canada, with an unclouded confidence that you will
proclaim to the world your resolve to show yourselves not unworthy
of the proud distinction that you enjoy, of being numbered among the
most dutiful and loyal subjects of our beloved queen.
"As for myself, my course is clear. A
British subject I was born—a British subject I will die. With my
utmost effort, with my latest breath, will I oppose the 'veiled
treason' which attempts by sordid means and mercenary proffers to
lure our people from their allegiance. During my long public service
of nearly half a century, I have been true to my country and its
best interests, and I appeal with equal confidence to the men who
have trusted me in the past, and to the young hope of the country
with whom rest its destinies for the future, to give me their united
and strenuous aid in this, my last effort, for the unity of the
empire and the preservation of our commercial and political
freedom."
Over-strained on some points as this address may seem to-day, it yet
has in it the ring of reality and sincerity, and it reflects with
reasonable accuracy the tension of public feeling at the time. The
leader of the Opposition, Mr. Laurier, who must have found himself
seriously embarrassed by one wing of his allies, replied with
moderation, repudiating as an "unworthy appeal to passion and
prejudice" the charge that unrestricted reciprocity was "veiled
treason" . . . . "even when it was presented with the great
authority of Sir John Macdonald's name." Sir Oliver Mowat and other
prominent Liberals did their best to strengthen their leader's hands
by re-affirming, as they had the strongest traditional right to do,
their unqualified loyalty to British connection. It was while the
judgment of that wavering body of electors which holds the balance
between parties was yet in suspense that a new factor was introduced
into the discussion.
An extremely able political journalist
of the time, Mr. Edward Farrer, who had won distinction by his
contributions, especially on economic questions, to other Canadian
journals, had lately been transferred to the staff of the leading
Liberal organ—the Toronto Globe—as its chief editorial writer, and
as such was naturally supposed to have intimate relations with the
prominent men of the party. Mr. Farrer had convinced himself that
annexation to the United States was the inevitable destiny of Canada
; he was in communication, as afterwards appeared, with public men
in the neighbouring states on the question, and he had prepared a
pamphlet in which he discussed methods by which pressure could be
exercised at Washington to force Canadians into political union.
Among these methods were an increase of taxation on the products of
Canada; the abolition of the bonding system by which British or
foreign goods were imported into the Dominion through American
ports; the imposition of a tonnage tax on Canadian fishing vessels;
the cutting of connection between Canadian and American railways at
essential points —everything, indeed, which would impress upon
Canadians the disadvantage of not being a part of the American
system. He claimed that steps such as these, by paralysing the
commerce and industry of the Dominion, would compel the electorate
to look to political union as the only way of escape from financial
ruin. He paid Macdonald the compliment of saying that a time when he
was about to leave the stage of public affairs would be a favourable
moment for carrying out this coercive policy. "Whatever course,"
this writer said, "the United States may see fit to adopt, it is
plain that Sir John's disappearance from the stage is to be the
signal for a movement towards annexation. The enormous debt of the
Dominion (fifty dollars per head), the virtual bankruptcy of all the
provinces except Ontario, the pressure of the American tariff upon
trade and industry, the incurable issue of race, and the action of
natural forces making for the consolidation of the lesser country
with the greater, have already prepared the minds of most
intelligent Canadians for the destiny that awaits them; and a leader
will be forthcoming when the hour arrives."
The proof sheets of this pamphlet were,
it is said, stolen from the office of the printer, and they found
their 'way into Macdonald's hands. They doubtless furnished the
grounds of the reference in his address to "veiled treason." At a
great party gathering in Toronto he disclosed, amid much excitement,
what he pronounced to be a conspiracy to hand over Canada to the
United States. The leaders of the Liberal party vehemently protested
against having themselves associated with the opinions expressed in
the pamphlet, and the writer himself promptly asserted his sole
responsibility for everything that he had written, which was, he
declared, merely an expression of his own private views.
Nevertheless, the Farrer pamphlet strongly influenced public
opinion, and was taken as an indication that the policy of
unrestricted reciprocity furnished shelter to elements of
disloyalty.
"The old flag, the old man, and the old policy," was the
epigrammatic phrase, coined by a journalist of the time, into which
the issues of the campaign were concentrated, and this became the
Conservative rallying cry. The season at which the election came on
was the depth of the Canadian winter. Macdonald was now seventy-five
years old, and his friends looked forward with natural anxiety to
the strain that the contest would put upon him. He threw himself
into the campaign with all the energy of youth, travelling from
point to point throughout Ontario, and speaking at times twice or
thrice a day to huge audiences at places widely apart. The
enthusiasm of his supporters knew no bounds, and far too great
demands were made on his powers of endurance. The excitement of the
contest was greatly augmented by the disclosures to which reference
has been made. Sir Charles Tupper, summoned from his post as high
commissioner in England, seconded the efforts of his old chief with
great vigour.
The election took place on March 5th and at its close, for the
fourth time in succession, Macdonald found himself confirmed in
power, with a majority of rather more than thirty. It was not an
overwhelming victory—a fact sufficient in itself to show that a
large proportion of the electors did not take seriously the charge
of treasonable conspiracy made against the Opposition. But that
Macdonald's attitude on the question was not simply a party trick,
nor yet a mere figment of his imagination, was soon shown in the
most unexpected way. Edward Blake, long a member of the Liberal
party and for some time its leader, had refused to stand at the
election, and rumours had circulated which pointed to profound
objection on his part to the policy of his friends. Throughout the
campaign he maintained complete silence, but as soon as the election
was over he addressed a letter to his old constituents of West
Durham, in which he reviewed the situation and explained his own
position. While strongly denouncing the protective policy of the
government as well as its administration of public affairs, he went
on to show that unrestricted reciprocity was practically
indistinguishable from commercial union. But he had no illusions as
to the result of adopting such a policy. The tendency would be
towards political union. Hence his refusal to cooperate with his
party. "Whatever you or I may think on that head, whether we like or
dislike, believe or disbelieve in political union, must we not agree
that the object is one of great moment, towards the practical
settlement of which we should take no serious step without
reflection, or in ignorance of what we are doing? Assuming that
absolute free trade with the States, best described as commercial
union, may and ought to come, I believe that it can and should come
only as an incident, or at any rate as a well understood precursor
of political union, for which indeed we should be able to make
better terms before than after the surrender of our commercial
independence. Then, so believing—believing that the decision of the
trade question involves that of the constitutional issue—for which
you are unprepared and with which you do not even conceive
yourselves to be dealing—how can I properly recommend you now to
decide on commercial union?"
How far the pamphlet of Mr. Farrer and
the explanation of Mr. Blake to his constituents, to say nothing of
the other speeches and journalistic utterances of the time, justify
the attitude of Macdonald during the campaign of 1891, the impartial
student of the period may perhaps best be left to decide for
himself. Certain it is that in the bye-elections which occurred
during the ensuing year, when people had been given time to coolly
review all the circumstances, the Conservative majority steadily
increased. Macdonald's still more triumphant vindication rests in
the fact that, throughout the many years of Liberal sway which have
since elapsed, his policy has been perpetuated, and it is Sir
Wilfrid Laurier himself who has finally disposed of unrestricted
reciprocity by declaring that Canadians will make no more
"pilgrimages to Washington" in search of commercial advantages.
Political strategist Macdonald may have been, but the searching test
of time has proved conclusively that the consummate strategist was
also the wise and prescient statesman. |