IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

4iJ

%.
%

1.0

1^ 1^ ill 2.2
Z 1^ 11112.0

I I.I

11.25 i 1.4 ill 1.6

^^?

L<s>

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

1980

Technical Notes / Notes techniques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Physical
features of this copy which may alter any of the
images in the reproduction are checked below.

L'Institut a microfilmd le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Certains
d6fauts susceptibles de nuire d la quality de la
reproduction sont notds ci-dessous.

Coloured covers/
Couvertures de couleur

□

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

Coloured maps/

Cartes gdographiques en couleur

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqudes

Tight binding (may cause shadows or
distortion along interior margin)/
Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou
de la distortion le long Je la marge
int^rieure)

I I Coloured plates/

Planches en couleur

Show through/
Transparence

Pages damaged/
Pages endommagdes

Additional comments/
Commentaires suppldmentaires

Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Bound with other material/
Relid avec d'autres documents

Pagination incorrect/
Erreurs de pagination

Pages missing/
Des pages manquent

□

Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

Plates missing/

Des planches manquent

Maps missing/

Des cartes gdographiques manquent

Additional comments/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires

)

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibilit;
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall
contain the symbol —►(meaning CONTINUED"),
or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever
applies.

The original copy was borrowed from, and
filmed with, the kind consent of the following
institution:

National Library of Canada

Les images suivantns ont 6t6 reprodiuites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu da la condition et
de lo lettetd de I'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la der-
nidre image de cheque microfiche, selo.i le cas:
le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole
V signifie "FIN".

L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduiv' grdce d la
g6n6rosit6 de I'^tablissement prdteur
suivant :

Bibliothdque nationale du Canada

Maps or plates too large to be entirely included
in one exposure are filmed beginning in the
upper Iftft hand corner, left to right c id top to
bottom, as many frames as required. The
following diagrams illustrate the method:

Les rartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre
reproduites en un seul clich6 sont film^es d
partfr de Tangle sup6rieure gauche, de gauche d
droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images ndcessaire. Le diagramme suivant
illustre la mdthode :

yggg^

I» •

'C^i^ ' I f<y^\^y^

(^1

W Closer gnion.

F. Blake Crofton.

(

f Pebkateb bfi ^lermrsmon to the ^^onoratole gmUfrib iJauncr.
^rimc Jtiniater at Cannba.

;(T<.^«,v,.;'^-y.,,;p':

FOR Gl^OgEjR UNION;

SOME SLIGHT OFFERINGS TO A GREAT CAUSE.

KRANCIS BLAKE CROKTON,

Provincial Librarian of Nova Scotia, author of " The Major's Big Talk

Stories," etc.

HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA:

A. & W. MAC KIN LAY,

1897.

Price 35 cents.

"If there ake any Communities of Britt»?h origin anywhere who

DESIRE TO EXJOY ALL THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE QuEEN'S
SUBJECTS, WITHOUT PAYING FOR AND DEFENDING THEM, LET US ASCERTAIN
WHO AND WHERE THWY ARE— LET US MEASURE THE PROPORTIONS OP
POLITICAL REPUDIATION NOW, IN A TIME OF TRANQUILITY, WHEN WE HAVE
LEISURE TO GAUGE THE EXTENT OF THE EVIL AND TO APPLY CORRECTIVES,
RATHER THAN WAIT TILL WAR FINDS US UNPREPARED AND LEANING UPON
PRESUMPTIONS IN WHICH THERE IS NO REALITY."

HON. JOSEPH HOWE.

INTROnUCTORY.

TWE collection of these articles (some of which were unsigned) is
(kie lar{,fely to their author's vanity, a vanity shared by
not a few who have served, however humbly, in memorable cam-
paij,Mis. At the same time it is hoped that these reprints may feebly
aid the efforts of more important writers and speakers who are
striving for the same beneficent end, namely the strengthening and
staying of our Britannic Empire, " the greatest secular agency for
good now known to mankind "

riu;rc have lately been many hopeful symptoms that we are
ncaring the goal. One is the feeling of brotherhood for the starving
Hindoos, shown all over the Empire, and nowhere more than in
Canada. .Another is the preferential treatment offered to the mother-
country in the new Canadian tariff. Another was the unbroken and
imposing front presented by all the nations owning allegiance to the
Queen, when Britain seemed on the verge of wars arising from her
championship of .South American and South African colonies. In
his 'i|)ee(h at the Royal Colonial Institute's banquet on the 31st of
last March, .Mr. Chamberlain, the Colonial Secretary, declared : —
" 1 believe in the practical possibility ( . federation of the British
race (loud cheers), but I know that it will come if it does come — not
by pressure, not by anything in the way of dictation by this country?
but it 'vill come as the realization of a universal desire, as t^e expres-
sion of the dearest wish of our colonial fellow-snbjects themselves."
.And what is still mori; significant, if not so seemingly important, the
chief organ of the dominant party in Nova Scotia, the Halifax
Morning Chro?iicU\ which not long ago pooh-poohed imperial
'federation as a dre.m and a fad, observed editorially in its issue of
.\pril 5th, 1896: "The whole trend of sentiment, conviction and
events is in the direction of the unification of the empire, and the

INTRODUCTORY.

short-sighted jingo politicians of the United States, apparently with-
out knowing it, by their narrow, unfriendly attitude towards Canada,
are actually strengthening the ties which bind ns to the mothe"
country, and promoting that unification of the empire which is
emerging from the region of dream-land and assuming a form and
direction which point to its realization at no distant day." And
while 1 believe this excellent editorial to be entirely sincere, it was
published a fortnight before a general election, when its publication
would certainly have been postponed, if its sentiments were beli?vef
to be at all unpopular.

Mr. Chamberlain is perhaps right in thinking that no " pressure"
from the imperial parliament or government would aid or expedite
federation, though a friendly invitation to a partnership could hardly
be resented and might possibly hasten a decision. Rut it would pre-
vent some risk of misapprehension if the initiative should come from a
self-governing colony. In Canada public sentiment is perhaps
already ripe for a proposal ; and an over-ripe fruit will decay. And,
besides, while we are delaying to propose a scheme of closer union
for fear of its being premature, the lack of closer union may destroy
the empire. The hour is surely at hand, if it has not already come ;
but where is the man ?

From The Week (Toronto), Oct. 23, 1884.

CONFEDERATION OR DISMEMBERMENT (?)

The conference recently lield in London to promote imperiiil
contederation affirmed the desirability of a closer political union of
the Empire, prudently leaving the means of attaining that ohject
for future consideration. The great journals of England seem
unanimously to have endorsed the views and action of the confer,
ence, which have since been advocated on the platform by Lovd
Rosebery and oth(U" prominent speakers. A i)r>)])osed clause, to
the' effect that a closer union is essential to prevent total dismem-
berment, Avas struck out of the resolutions at the desire, it is said,
of a prominent Canadian. If this erased clause conveyed a truth,
as I believe it did, it is a truth which should not have been
suppressed. An early and constant recognition of it would surely
lielp to bring the present agitation to some practical conclusion.
Separation is too serious a crisis to drift upon blindly and phleg-
matically.

It is likely that England herself would shake off, sooner or

later, colonies which accept the protection of her army,- navy, and

diplomatic service without contributing one dollar to their support,

and which refuse to grant her commercial reciprocity. Some of

the North American colonies cut adrift from the Mother Country

because she taxed them ; possibly the Mother Country may cut

adrift from the others because they, indirectly, tax her. But

for the larger colonies, whether it involve their independence

or honourable union with neighbouring colonies or states, the

dismemberment of the Empire seems preferable to their hiv.

ibordinate dependencies lor ever. If grown up sons cannot

•-operate serviceably in business with each other and their

"ents, giving and taking a fair quid pro quo, better for them to

up for themselves than keep the family together by continuing in

ifantile dependence on their father. Such important regions as

"■stralia and Canada should be full members in any imperial or

■

FOB CLOSER UNION.

republican union. They should politely decline back seats with-
out the privilege of sp»niking.

At present the issues Canadian statesmen have to deal with
are too restricted. They have no school for diplomacy, no foreign
poli(!y to franu?, no navy, and only a liilliputian army to manage.
The (pialities needed to conduct these departments languish in this
country and may eventually die out from disuse. In his memor-
able book, " Natural Law in the 8i)iritual World," Professor
Drummond gives striking instances of the degeneracy attending the
i.on-exercise of certain faculties in various animals. The iu'rmit-
crah, for example, having long ago adopted the chnap expedient of
occupying vacant shells, " has ceased to exercise itself upon ques-
tions of safety and dwells in its little shell as proudly and securely
as if its second-hand house were a fortress erected for its private
use.

" Wherein, then, has tlie hermit suffered for this cheap but
real .solution of a practical dilHculLy 1 Whether its laziness costs
it any moral qualms, or whether its cleverness becomes to it a
source of congratulation, we do not know ; but judged from the
appearance the animal makes under the searching eye of the
zoologist, its expedient is certaiidy not one to be commended. To
the eye of science its sin is written in the plainest characters on its
very organization. It has suffered in its own anatomical structure
just liy as much as it has borrowed from an external souice.
Insti'ad of being a ])erfect crustacean it has allowed certain
important parts of its body to deteriorate, and several vital organs
are wholly atro}thied.

* * # # # #

" As an important item in the day's work, namely, the securing
of shelter juid safety, was now guaranteed to il, one of the chief
inducements to a life of high and vigilant effort wns at the same
time ■withdrawn. A number of functions in fact struck work.
******

" Every normal crustacean has the abdominal region of the body
covered by a thick chitinou<^ shell. In the hermit this is repre-
sented only by a thin and delicate membrane — of which the sorry

FOR CLOSER UNION.

figure the cninLure cuts wlioii drawn fioin its foreign hiding-place
is sutficiont evidence. Any one who now examines further this
liulf-naked ami woe begone object will perceive, also that the
fourth and fifth jmirs of limbs are either so small and wasted aa
to be quite useless or altogether rudimentary ; and, although
certainly the additional development of the extremity of the tail
into an organ for holding on to its extemporized retreat may be
regarded as a slight compensation, it is clear from the whole
structure of the animal that it has allowed itself to undergo severe
degeneration."

This analogy was intended by Professor Drummond to explain
the decay of the spiritual faculties due to sheltering oneself inertly
in dogmas without practising virtues or combating doubts. Jiut
we may use it to foreshadow the decline of healthy political activity
and the consequent impairment of mental virility, in a country that
elects to remain in loading strings. And are not the beginnings of
such a decline visible to-day 1 How petty are our interests, how
small most of our jmblic (pjestions, how narrow our sympathies !
How much more do Canadians generally speculate upon the pros
pects of a local election than on the i)rosiiect3 of a great war in
which the Empire may be involved, but in the cost of which they
have no immediate interest ! Can we in this country be expected
to feel the same pride as Scotchmen or loyal Tilsinnen in the
exploits of an army or navy which they help to pay for, but we do
not. An Englishman feels a --ense of ownership, as well as of
security, when he see? a British ironclad at anchor in a foreign
port ; but a Canadian can e-.perience tlie latter feeling only. A
Yermonter can " enthuse " over a diplomatic success achieved by a
Marylander, or fume over some foreign outrage to a Californian,
with an excitement that no public event outside Provincial or
Dominion politics can arouse in the semi-enfranchised Canadian,
who has nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with the cost or
conduct of the Imperial army, navy, legislature, or diplomatic
service. Yet some Canadian statesmen say, Sir Francis Hincks is
quoted as saying, that we dont want any voice in the distant
councils of the Empire. H so, in the nanie of our self K^spect, let
lis form or let us join some sovereign body politic in which we

FOB CLOSER UN [ON.

sliall want and shall claim a hearing. For the degeneracy that
arises from letting qualities lie fallow is less excusable in a nation
than in a hermit-crab. The life of an individual pagurus ends
with the individual ; the life of a nation continues from one
generation to another. Could each particular pagurus reason, it
might reason plausibly that, in its " life of nothings nothing
worth," it pays to secure its private comfort at the expense of
racial degeneration ; but law-makers, who profess to legislate for a
nation and not for themselves, cannot dare to formulate distinctly
any such argument. The probability of increased taxation is the
most potent argument against Imperial Confederation, Annexation,
and Independence. Eut it is not a conclusive argument,, at all
events against the first two of these schemes. A certain increase
in taxation might be a cheap price for the increased self-reliance
and enterprise and the larger patriotism to be exfiected from
enlarging our public needs and interests, even if the growth of these
qualities should not somewhat reduce the cost of administering
existing departments of our Government. Canadian patriotism af
present displays itself mainly in the merit-barring cry of "Canada
for the Canadians," " Manitoba for the Manitobans," *' Quebec for
the Quebeckers," each county for its own people, each town for
its own townsmen. A take-all and give-nought disposition is being
fostered by our semi-parasitic status. Such a disposition deters
immigrants, and in the long run impoverishes a state. Had not
the " Know nothing" party been decisively defeated in the Presi-
dential election of 18.t6, the subsequent immigration would, no
doubt, have been smaller and the growth of the country seriously
retarded.

To escape political degeneration, (involving to some extent
mental, moral, and material degeneration also), we must have
co-ordinate, not subordinate, membership in a British Imperial
Confederation, or in the United States, or we must have Independ-
ence. The fact that the first of these alternatives is at once
pronounce<l impracticable by most of our so-called politicians only
shovs the cramping and niimbing effect of our hermit-crab condi-
tion on our mental energies, and our growing inability or reluctance
to grapple with large issues. If the greater colonies accept the

FOR CLOSER UNION.

principle of a co-ordinate union, in which Canada, Australia, Ire-
land, Scotland, England, shall be politically the peers of one smother,
legislating and taxed for imperial objects proportionally to their
resources, then the method will be arranged afterwards. The
yearning of the dependencies of the Eoman Empire was for full ,
civifas, the right of voting and holding imjieria) offices. And the
pride of full citizenship in a confederated British Empire would be
better grounded than even the pride of full citizenship in the
Empire of Rome. Such a confederation could dare any European
combination. With the alliance of its sister Anglo-Saxon power,
the United States, it could smile at the jealousy of other great
nations and their somewhat tardy longings for colonial empire.
"Why," we might then complacently ask, with the self-right ious-
ness of our race, " do the heathen so furiously rage togethei, and
why do the people imagine a vain thing ! Why do the kings of
the earth stand up and the rulers take counsel together to break
our bonds asunder 1 Know they not that we are given the
heathen for our inheritance and the utmost parts of the earth for
our possession ? "

From the Halifax Herald, June 22nd, 1887, (Queen's Jubilee Day).
THOUGHTS ON THE FUTURE OF CANADA.

pe ■

li-

To men better fitted for such calculations I leave the forecast
of our commercial and industrial future under the flag of the
United Empire or the United States. And material prosperity
must be the first and strongest consideration with the majority
of the people. A nation will not knowingly follow a path which
it feciS will lead to want and ruin. We want healthy life first,
then that which comforts, adorns, and enobles it. If a decided
majority of Canadians are persuaded that their incomes will be
doubled by living under a foreign flag, under that flag they will
eventually live. Even British jingoism will not seriously attempt
to hold this Dominion against the decided wishes of its people.

But if a fair living be secured in either case, a nation, like an
individual, may determine its course largely, or even mainly, by

FOR CLOSER UNION.

sentimental considerations. Stron'j; ties of love, kinship, grati-
tude, the call of pride or honor, the certainty of a grander histori-
cal record, the prospect of a higher national life, or of a purer or
better government, should and would outweigh sliqht mercenary
advantages with any enliglitenod c >untry, doubting with wliich of
two or more great nations she should choose to cast her destiny.
What parent, not utterly base, in advising a daughter who has
two or more suitors for her hand, would tell her to ignore all con-
siderations except dollars and cents ? A prudent father would
naturally prefer, other things being equal, the swain who could
otier the most comforts and provide most surely for her offspring ;
but if there were two or more respectable suitors each doing a
fair bii-;iness and having fair prospects, he would not ignore other
considerations. He would counsel his daughter to weigh well
whom she loved and honoured most, from whom she had received
most kindness, who had the most reputable connections, the most
honourable record, the finest education, the soundest constitution.
Why shonld one give more sordid counsel to a nation than to an
individual 1 Cm a people lay aside moral considerations in shap-
ing its policy and not deteriorate morally 1 /. nd will not a
people's moral deterioration sooner or later react upon its national
prosperity 1

It may be silly sentimentality to ]irefer a direct to a collateral
heirship in the historic record of Grt^at Britain, or for a liberal to
regret losing a single link of connection with an empire that has
been the champion and "xemplar of freedom in the modern woild.
Yet a good many fairly decent people are guilty of just such silly
sentimentality. And a good many people will also persist in tiiiid<-
ing, sneers notwithstanding, that the ])atriotism which extends lo
a whole empire has quite as much claim to be reckoned a virtue
as the patriotism which is contineal to a province or a parish. But
some of the advantiges we shouhl have in the confederated
em])ire would not be sentimental ones at all. The St:irs and
Stripes could not command for our traders abroad so much
security and respect as the Union Jack. Even if the American
navy should at some time equd the British navy, the United
States can never have the offensive ami deiensive power which is

FOR CLOSER UNION.

Avieldetl by the British Empire, with its Gibraltars and Adens, it-
docks and coaling stations all over the world. 80 nifiny of the
most important marts in Euro])e, Africa and Asia are controlled
by Britain that, by a retaliatory tariff over the entire empire, she
probably aouhl (and possibly would, in the interest of the colonies
Confederating with her), force the United States or any other
power to modify its duties. Imperial federation may thus be the
dawn of the era of universal free trade, a vision which, if dim and
remote, mv.st yet be attractive to every one who thinks the wel-
fare of mankind at large worthy of some regard. Under imperial
confederatirn, too, home rule would come to Ireland (as it would
to Scotland and England) as a part of the general scheme — a con-
sideration which must be of great moment to all the legislatures of
Canada whioh have taken such a remarkable interest in the
matter.* "Were the empire consolidated, Canadian rights would
not be lightly encroached upon by our neighbours. They would
then feel that the chance of war ensuing, and that with a .still
mightier power than England, was not so very slight as at present.
It seems likely that if the idea of imperial federation do^s not
evoke soTiC general enthusiasm in this country soon, it may never
do so. Federation leagues have lately been formed, and others
are soon to be formed. The celebration of the Jubilee tends to
awaken our imperial patriotism and pride. Speakers and writers
are everywhere telling the wonderful story of the empire's expan-
sion and progress in the i)ast half century, and poets are hymning
its glory and its power. The late ill-judged attempt of agitators to
incite demonstrations against the Queen's representative in Canada
has further fanned our loyalty to the crown. At the same time
the dispute about the fisheries has signally illustrated one of the
chief disadvantages of our present status. Canada has been •
taught that she cannot rely, as surely as Scotland or Wales can,
upon the imperial government issuing an ultimatum, if necessary,
in defence of her local interests against foreii,'n aggression. As
*be Toronto Mail has pointed out, some British statesmen have

* During the precedinff year most or the colonial legislatures had been
kindly, if intrusively, volunteering their ^^dvice to the British Parliament upon
the subject of Home Rule for Ireland.

FOR CLOSER UNION.

long ago arguod, and sotn,. English journals have lately argued
anew, that tue onus of protecting a colony should not devolve
upon Britain unless she obtains some reciprocal favors from it,
and that, her commercial interests no longer receiving any con-
si l.'^iration from Canadian tariff-makers, this colony gives her no
due e(piivalent. But a fair contribution to her imperial establish-
ments (according to the essential principle of imperial federation)
would preclude all grumbling and grudging on the part of British
statesmen or British tax-payers, and Canada would be fu)ly and
freely backed, in all her just quarrels, by the entire resources of
the consolidated empire. Then blustering Yankee demagogues
would hesitate to bid for Fenians' or fishermen's votes by insulting
Canada or proposing to boycott her commerce. They would be
frowned down by the common sense of their sober countrymen.
AnotluT encouragement to those who hope to multiply the ties
between the colonies and Britain is the recent action of the
London Conference, at which nil the important Colonial govern-
ments were represented, and which has adopted the ])rinciple that
the colonies should co-operate with the imperial military authori-
ties in ])roviding for their defence, and should sh;;re its cost.
And some sincere loyalists hold that the admission of this
principle, carried effectively into practice, will suffice to secure the
lasting cohesion of the empire, and is all that England can expect
her great colonies to do. Perhaps it might be, if their population
and resources were stationary, and not rapidly expanding.

The fa :t that Canada has contributed something to the strength
of the empire in the Canada Pacific Railway is no obstacle to
her admitting the justice of bearing her fair share of the imperial
expenses. That contribution would surely be placed to her credit
at a fair valuation, and so would her maintenance of the Dominion
milii-ia.

Commercial union with the States, with a common tarifi
against outsiders, is proposed as an alternative to imperial federa-
tion, and its financial advantages are argued by many as being
likely to exceed any that can fairly be expected from the latter
scheme of policy. Some American journals have pronounced
against commercial union without annexntion, while others favor

FOK CLOSER UNION.

It as " the courtshi]) which must precede the marriage." Its i)ro8
and cons have been lately discussed by the Toronto board of
trade, as well as by newspapers all over the continer ' they

will be more widely discussed in the near iuturo. It i ot. how-
ever, with its material advantages or disadvantage. ^,s feasibility
or non-feasibi'ity, that this article has to deal, out with its
Ignoble and nnomalo^as nature. To do our large shipping business
abroad unuer the British flag and under protection of the British
consular and naval services, to invoke the aid ot the British crovern-
ment, with the British army behind it, when our rights or our
citizens are interfered with, and yet to discriminate against British
products in favor of a foreign nation, and one which has lately been
bullying and sneering at us ! To accept free shares in establishments
maintained by the taxpayers of one nation and to go to that
nation in all our difficulties, and to give all the a.lvantages of
our trade to another nation ! To belong to one nation fiscally to
another nominally ; and to pay nothing to the national est^ulish-
nients of either ! What an honorable position we are asked to
assume ! But this, I have been told, is " a merely sentimental
consideration."

The scheme might indeed be purged of much if not all of its
meanness, if its advocates would propose to give, out of the over-
flowing wealth they anticipate from it, a fair contribution to the
imperial establishments. But I have not observed that any one of
them has made such a proposal. ' Some of the n even argue that
If England does not object to our occupying such a parasitic
status, neither need we. It is our own self resp ,ct, and not the
disapproval of another, that should deter us from meanness.
VVhen one has entered a partnership tending to spoil the business
of a friend, one should be decent enough to cease accepting favors
from him, without waiting for him to grudge or withdraw them.

It IS true that commercial union would remove the most pro-
bable causes of friction between Britain and the United States,
for surely no one could expect the British- government to inter-
vene and risk a quarrel if Canada's more powerful partner should
Ignore her interests in the arrangement of the tariff, or her riohts
m the division of the customs revenue. And it is probably this

FOR CLOSER UNION.

prospect of nnbroken frieinlsliip between the two great branches
of our race (added to tlie hope of greater commercial prosperity)
tliat has induced Mr. (roldwin Smi^h and other loyal-hearted men
to s>u[)port the scheme. But coiit'iiued peace between the great
English-speaking powers would be still more secure were Canadt
annexed to the States. AVhy then will not those commercial
unionists who are really annexatio!iistg openly but peacefully
agitate for the destiny they prefer 1 Those Canadians who would
gag or imprison them are not in a majority. Those tiery English-
men who still believe in holding reluctant colonies by force of
arms are not numerous. The battle that will determine our
destiny will be one of reason, not of battalions, it will be fought,
not with cannon, but with pens and tongues ; it will be decided
by calculations and sentiments and principles. And it would be
exceedingly desirable to come to a decision while there are no
bitter disputes between the mother country and her gieat colonies ;
while we are able to deliberate calmly t.nd to part in peace, if we
must part at all.

But some men favor commercial union who fancy it may avert
political union with the States, by atlbrding ecjual advantages.
Do not these theorists foresee that, surely as eti'ects follow causes,
the empire will sooner or later object to assuming even diminished
risks for a parasitic dependency when it discriminates against
British in favor of foreign traders 1 Then will come grumblings
and recriminations, and the worst of misfortunes to be feared
for our race and nation will eusue — the Dominion and the Empire
will part in anger. Canada will then increase, instead of decreas-
ing, the percentage of Americans unfriendly to (iroat Britain.
The grand vision of allied speakers of English dominating the
world and dictating peace to the too heavily armed nations will
have melted from dimness to invisibility.

Principal Grant has dei)recated Canadian independence as " a
costly prelude to annexation." Commercial union (without a fair
contribution to the imperial services whose protection we enjoy)
seems to me a cheap prelude to the same political destiny.

Mark Twain has recorded, to the immortal honor of a western
saloon-keeper, that " he never shook his mother," though he would

FOB CLOSER UNION.

(loubtk'ss liiive found it very economical to have iloiie so. .should
a nation only consider the economic aspects, and shut its eyes to
the mora] aspects, of this policy of "shaking its mother T' And
when a nation does shake its mother, is it not an extra meanness
to gf on accepting assistance from her ?

Xova Scotia nurtured two great sons who contributed largely
to her welfare at home and her honor abroad, Joseph Howe and
Thomas Chandler Haliburton. They were not i-arochial patriots,
but each of them lo-.ked on matters of state from a height and
commanded an extensive view. Before the idea had dawne.. on
common minds, both of them appear to have seen that the future
of the em[)ire would be either closer confederation or dismeml er-
ment. And botii of them pronounced emphatically tor the former.
Howe's eiocjuent utterances on the subject have been recently
quoted more than once.

***** -.(1

Another eminent Nova Scotian federationist, Rev. Principal
Grant, has lately sketched in vivid language the importance of
the birth-right which every British emigrant has brougit with
him to Canada. " Not one jot or tittle of his inheritance was left
behind," adds Dr. Grant. " And we have not parted with our
birth-right. It belongs to us by a right as absolute, and a oiini
as unbroken and flawless, as that by which it is held in Wales
and England, in Scotland and Ireland."

I trust that Canada may never become famous, like Esau, for
for selling her birth-right for a me&s of pottage.

From the Montreal Herald, July 8th, 1887.
To the Editor of the Herald :

You honored my '« Thoughts on the Future of Canada " beyond
their deserts by devoting to them your leading article of June 28th.
You were, however, under a misapprehension in assuming me to
be an apologist of the administration, or a defender of the status
quo. My article was written in the interests of Imperial Federa-
tion only. I hold that the bonds which bind the Empire

FOR CLOSER UNION.

together mast be strengthened, or else burst rnler the Ftniin of
conflicting interests. I consider tliat if Canada cannot norv rely
ou the fall and ungrudging support of the Empire, this is mainly
ill consequence of the. " National Policy." Our present state
seems to me parasitical and dangerous to the permanence of the
British connection, though I tried to show that conimerf .al union
(as it is generally advocated) is still more so. To commercial
union with a fair contribution to the imperial services, I see no
objection on the score of loyalty or honor.

Your obedient servant,

F. JJlakb Crofton.

From The Wetk, Juno 2l8t. 1888.
THE COST OF IMPERIAL FEDERATION.

i I

An opponent of imperial federation assures me that he has
merely to point out that the scht .le would involve a few dollars
extra taxation per family, to turn the average voter de "sively
against it. This seems tantamount to saying that, from long
dejjendence, parnsitism is so ingrained in the character of most
Canadians, that Canada will hang on to her leading-strings until
they break. In this case, she will also shrink from her two
alternative destinies as long as she can, for it would likewise cost
money to start national establishments of her own, or to subscribe
to those of the United States. She will choose only on compulsion
from outside, and then she will choose whichever of the three
courses that are open to her may appear the cheapest.

Of course, imperial federation will co.st something. It is
essentially a project to buy certain things which we now lack for a
fair price. Taxation without representation is no more one-sided
an arrangement than representation without taxation. We cannot
get joint proprietary rights and joint control over the imperial
establishments without paying for these privileges. If any silly
Canadians favour the scheme because they fancy it will bring them
part ownership in the army and navy and consular service by gift
or grace, and without any contribution on their part, they had

FOR CLOSER UNION.

bettor " stop <lown ami out " of tlio luoveinent. To secure a oo-
ordinate stiitus instead of a subordinate one, a full instead of a
partial citi.,enship, we must assume otiual burdens and reciprocal
obligations with the other fedoratin*^ partnor^J,

A starving, a miserly, or an unroflocting man might prefer tha+^i
his country should accei>t gratuitous protection for ever, and shirk
for ever the resi)onsil)ility devolving on adult nations, as on adult
individuals, of providing for their own security and defence, rather
than contribute a single dollar. But to any high-minded Canadian
who is not starving, two or three dollars a year should be a small
price to pay to enhance his own self-rosjtect and the reputation cf
his country, and to secure for himself a part ownership in every
imperial service and in every imperial official.

" But this is oidy a sentiment.' Not so, it is a principle. Is it
a sentiment only that woidd make any well-to-do person shririk
from adopting the excellent policy, in a mercenary point of view,
of accepting a lodging in a home for orphans or decayed gentlemen,
and spending on his pleasures the money so economised 1 Is it
only a sentiment that would prevent your suing in forma ^mtiperis
— even if you could do so — while you had sufficient means to fee
a counsel? No, you are acting uw principle : you recognize that
that to accept services or favours without reciprocating them is to
write yourself down as a dependent, or as an inferior, or as a
sponge. And this your self-respect forbids,

# * * # * *

Inasmuch as in the opinion of most thinkers, our present state
of tutelage cannot last much longer, Canada would have to pay
much move towards national defensive and diplomatic services
under either of her only alternative destinies. If she joins the
United States, that compact power, having no military need of the
Canadian Pacific Railway, will make her no allowance for it. If
she prefers independence, she will have to support military, naval,
consular, and diplomatic services of her own ; and it is to be
observed that she would have not only to contribute to the running
expenses of a navy — as under imperial federation — but also to
stand the enormous first cost of its construction.
2

FOR CLOSER UNION.

As an aiMitional return for our coin|iariitiv('ly trifliii<( contribu-
tion, wo would <;aiii a v(M'y important alvantii^'o which we. do not
now possess ; wo would substitute; for tho protc(!tion of Knj^daiid
tho still moro powerful protection of thc! federated empire;, and wo
could rely upon the latter much more surely than wo can now rely
upon the former. We could demand the help of the federation
as a rii^ht, instead oi askinj; it as a favour, in aid of our ju«t con-
tentions ; and our brethren would un<,'rudj;jin<,dy grant in our tiuie
of need, a supjiort whi(;h we had pledged ourselves to reciprocate
in fhi'irs. Knowing this full well, the most blatant dcMuagogues of
tlie ITnited States would no longer dare to make footballs of our
rights and interests. But at present, if Canadian interests aro
neglected or sacriUceil by Downing Street, to u.-e the memorable
words of Hon. Ivlward Blake, in his Aurora peei.i, "that is a
state of thing." of which you may have no right to complain as
long as you choose to say, ' AVe |)refer to avoid the cares, the
expenses and charges ' ; but while you say thi.-*, you may not yet
assume the lofty air, or speak in the high-pitched tones which
belong to a people wholly free."

From The Week, July 12th, 1889.

PAYING THE INSURANCE.

r I

In an editorial note npon imperial federation in The Weel; of
June 28, the following sentence occurs: "The only condition
which would commend the scheme, on grounds of self-interest, to
the British people — viz , that of the colonies undertaking to bear
their share of the tremendous cost of imperial armaments and
possible wars — is the very condition whicli the colonies, happily
free from the turmoil and danger of European complications, would
be most loath to accept." I do not imagine for a moment that so
high-minded a journal as The Week can favour the idea of Canada's
remaining a dependency for ever, shirking in perpetuity the

FOR CLOSER UNION.

ol)lipitioii wliich devolves on adult nations, as on adult individuids,
of bearing' th(! burden of their own defence. 1 infer, therefore,
that you object to the Doniiuiou assuming' that obligation by tho
particular nietliod of becuniiug a full payinj^ partner in the empire,
because she is now " hap|tily free from the turmoil and dangcir of
Eurojiean complications," in which, you fear, she would then
become involved. Hut this favourite buj^bear of anti-federation-
hlA seems to me to be quite imaginary. In the first place, su|)pose
England should be drawn into a " European complication," our
coasts and our commerce are as much in dangtM- an<l are less
powerfully protected now than they would be under imperial
federation. In the second jdace, as we federalionists believe, the
chances of our being involved in a "European complication"
Would l)e vfihirvd io a i/u'niiinoit Vty the fodeiation of the empire.
The Hritannic empire would then be an oceanic world-|)ower.
Reinforct-d 1 y the contril)utions of her new and growing partners,
Britain could att'onl to withdraw wholly from the European system,
caring little whether Sultan or Czar reigned at Constantinople, and
less whether the balance of power were preserved or disturbed on
the Continent. AVe should simply have to go on strengthening
the vidnerable part of the Induin frontier by railroads and fortili-
cations ; and we nug.it soon ask the Rus.sians whether they would
prefer to have India now or wait till they get it.

But the strongest argument for inii)erial federation, for
Canadians at least, is the present danger of a war with the United
States over some of the bones of contention which now exist
between us, and which American political leaders persistently
decline to have removed. Those who say there is no d.'jiger of
our quarreling over our disputes seem simply to think that causes
cannot produce effects. Another American flag hauled do*vn by
the captain of a C.uiadian cruiser, a man or two killed by a
cruiser's gun in a runaway Hshing schooner, or the resistance of a
sealer to capture in Behring Sea, may lead to a war in which we
may lose more cash than would pay our inqjerial contributions for
fifty years, not to speak of the deaths of friends and relatives and
possible national huntiliation, which are mainly matters of senti-
ment. If the killing of a bread winner is a material loss to those

FOR CLOHER UNU)N.

(lepcndtiiit on liiiii, it must not be for^'i»tt('n tliiit tli(!s«* arc only
women and childrcM), wlio, huvin^' no votes, are unwoitliy tlic con-
sideration of practical politicians.

Tliore are other expedients than federation by which we might
avert war with the Tnitetl States. One — annexation — would bo
a certain success, but it does not seem practicable. Two others —
the policy of persistent caving '"n and " commercial union " —
while they are about equally in)i ' able, would not be so surely
etficacious. Early independence vc ; - increase our danger and
our burdens manifold ; ami neither Canada nor the empire can
prud(Mitly wait in its present j)recaiious condition until the former
is rich and strong enough for independence. There are at lea.st a
few aspirants for ultimate independence who hold that the only
practicable way to it is through an intermediate period of imperial
federation. lUit is imperial federation itself practicable ? I have
no more right to .say it /« than some self-confident gentlemen of
the press and some jtrovincial politicians have to say it is 7iot^
simply because no faultless scheme has occurred spontaneously to
their creative brains. ]^)Ut I do believe that if the will becomes
general, the way will be found.

And will imperial federation make our American neiglibours
more disposed to settle the questions in dispute between us 1 I
should certainly fancy so, for it would give them an assurance^
which they do not generally feel now, that Britain wilt fight for
Canadian rights, and not Britain alone, but Britain plus Australia,
plus New Zealand, plus South Africa, etc. Politicians will probably
find it impossible to make political capital by bullying Canada and
worrying Britain, when their constituents clearly see war staring
them in the face. For this increased security from war it would
be worth paying something. A marine insurance policy does not
insure the merchant against all possible loss of his merchandise,
yet the prudent shipper insures his goods year after year, nor does
he think shipwrecks obsolete because he has never experienqed
one. The policy of imperial federation, I might say if I were a
punster, is an insurance policy.

In The Week of June 3rd, Mr. Longley, in an otherwise
thoughtful aiticle, actually sets up the established church and

FOK CLOHpni UNION*.

lu'it'ilitiiry aiistucracy of Kii^liiiul as additional scuiuuirows for
Canadians who are inclined to favour fi'dcration ! Canada of
course would be no more bound to adopt the municipal laws and
institutions of England than she would be bound to adopt those
of New Zealand or South Africa, or any other of the federatinj^
partn(M"s. Besides, the non-existence of hereditary lej,'i8lator3 in
the hnpt'i'ial legislature would very likely form a precedent fatal
to the retention of hereditary legislators in the municipal legisla-
ture of Kiigland. And the presence in England of representatives
from Canada, Australia, etc., and the growing intluence of these
young 'ommunities on English thought, would probably also
hasten the impending dipcstablishmont of the Church of England.
Th federation movement is not intended to place us in leading-
istrings, but to emancipate us from them. If England could out-
vote all her new partners in the imperial legi^-lature at the outset,
in a few years they could outvote her. And here let me say that
it is the conviction of many federationists — a conviction empha-
tically expressed the other day by the Halifax Morning Ilemhl, a
journal advocating federation — that should England, from a fear
of being outvoted, and of losing her present predominance in the
Britannic Empire, decline to make her great colonies co-ordinate
partners, the scheme of federation will not be consummated. N
inferior status can evoke the necessary enthusiasm in the colonies
or satisfy their rising desire for a full national life. If we are to
make our sacrifices, our friends in England musu be prepared to
make theirs. If we nro to rise to the grandeur of the occasion, so
must tlipy. If it is to be " P^mpire First" with us, it must be
" Empire First " with them also.

The foregoing article, and three editorial commeni;: of The
Weeli u]ion it, were reprinted in " Im]ierial Federation," in its
next October's issue. One of these editorial comments elicited the
following letter : —

IMPERIAL FEDERATJON AND THE UNITED STATES.

To the Editor of The Week :

Sir,— There is one passage in my letter on " Paying the Insurance " which
you seem to have misconstrued, owing doubtless to the fact that my idea was
only partially defined. As your misconception attributes to me a sentiment

FOB CLOSER UNION.

; 1

which, T iiKrce with you, wotild argue an ignorance of the character of our
neiKhbours to tlie south, and whi(^li might possibly have an iriitating and mis-
chievous effect. I hasten to cxjjlain my meaning more clearly. Our neighbours,
I said, would be more likely to settle the disputes unfortunately existing
between us under imperial federation than they are at present, because " it
would gi\e them an assurance which they do iwt generally feel now, that
Britain id// fight for ("a nadian rights, and not Hritain alone, but Hritain plus
Australia, i)lus New Zealand, plus South Africa," etc. Politicians, I added,
" will probably find it impossible to make political capital by bullying Canada
and worrying Hritain, when their constituents clearly see war staring them in
the face" This you fancy is presenting imperial federation as "as a menace
to the United States," and you question, like myself, " whether the people of
the United States, any more than ihose of Canfvda or England, are of a kind to
be easily frightened into a more friendly attitude. "

If "the people of the L^nited States "were generally averse to settling the
matters in dispute between us, then any assurance that the Empire would fight
for OUT contentions, whether this assurance was created by the federation of
the Empire or otherwise, would probably precipitate the war, which, in the
state of feeling assumed, would be bound to come sooner or later. Jiut the fact
is, I believe, that the sensible majority of our republican neighbours would bo
glad to have our disputes arranged, by arbitration or otherwise, and moi-e
neighbourly relations established between us. '^' :ir desire is, however,
balked by the caction of certain politicians who feel they can profitably truckle
to a minority, composed of Yankee jingoes and of Brittain-haters. The respect-
able constituents of these gentry at present view their violent anti-Bricish and
anti-Canadian speeches as grotesque, but not as dangerous. "There is no
earthly chance of war ;" " England will never fight for a few codfish ;" " Britain
will never risk her vast commenie for a troublesome colony," too many Ameri-
cans believe. And so ti:iy may forbear to extinguish their political firebrands
till a stray spark may have I-'^'Hled a conflagration. But if all parts of our
Empire were banded together to defend the just rights of each part, and if all
the provinces were ready to give iingrudgingly to any province in her need a
aid which she had bound herself to reciprocate in their need, then " the people
of the United States," see'ng that the antics of their tail-twisters might actually
lead to war, would probably suppress these mischievous mountebanks. This, I
think, they would do, not from fear, but from natural disinclination for a war
with a kindred and friendly empire ; a fratricidal war which would prevent
English from becoming the world-language and the English-speaking peoples
from controlling the earth in the interests of humanity and peace. It is largely
to avert so piteous a strife that I desire to see our E' '^ire federated ; and
should federation prove impracticable, I am willing to consider without prcju"
dice any other means to effect the same beneficent end.

E. Blake Crofton.

In connection with the above letters, tliough somewhat out of

chronological order, I reprint one of my " (ilimpse.s at Things''

(Week, Oct. 26th, 1894):—

If somebody possessing tact, energy and leisure would found an Engliiih-
speaking brotherhood, he would probably take rank among the chief benefac-
tors of mankind . The objects of such a brotherhood should be to draw together
in alTection and esteem the British Empire and the United States, to urge the
settling of all disputes speedily, and in a fair spirit of mutual compromisto, to

FOR CLOSER UNION.

vote c'lKaiiist deinagoK'ios who try to Kiviii power or place by stirring u]) hatred
or jealoiisy betweei) tlie Ilepublic oi Kinpirc. It should strive to render I?ritoiis
and A merieans proud instead of envious of each other's progress and achieve-
ments, and to incline either nation to sha])C its i)olicy rather to lielp than to
injure its fellow nation. The Knglis!-, sijcaking brotherhood should not bo
animated by any spirit of jingoism or aggressiveness. But it should feel that
the benevolent dominance of the kindred Ei;;?lish-speaking powers is the chief
earthly hope of humanity, that their growing preponderance will socri enaV)le
them to " dictate peace to the too heavily armed nations," and that an awful
responsibility will rest on him who breaks asunder the bonds by wliich Provi-
dence has joined them, and who shatters by fratricidal war the strength
assigned them for some great and benign purpose.

From the Halifax Herald," Sept. 17th, 1890.
A MORAL OF THE CRISIS.

F. Blake Ckoftox in Toronto " Week."

ire IS no
" Britain

Some of us imperial federationists have been for many yQnx^
convinced tliat— besides a fuller national life and a Avidening of
national thought, besides a reciprocity of rights and obligations,
besides the status of a peer instead of a subordinate — Canada
would gain, by federating with the Empire, the very material
advantage of increased security. In other words we felt that to
federate would be to issue a salutary notice to tl-.e nations of the
earth that the states and provinces owning allegiance to the
British crown had gone into partnership to defend, at their joint
expense and by their joint power, the just rights of each partner
from foreign aggression. It would be a general notice that all the
federated members of the Empire would ungrudgingly give to

* This journal helped the infant cause much in the Maritime Provinces, not
only by copying many articles on the subject, but also by its editorial endorse-
ments of federation at a time when it was generally deemed to lie outside the
boundaries of prudent or practical politics. The then associate-editor, Mr.
C. H. Cahan, was secretary of the Nova Scotia branch of the Imperial Federa-
tion League, but soon after its formation he was appointed leader of the Pro-
vincial opposition, which appointment ended or, I would fain hope, suspended
his outward enthusiasm. The editor and proprietor of the Herald, Mr. .1. J.
Stewart, has consistently decried "continentalism" and proclaimed the
superior grandeur and civilization of our world-empire.

FOR CLOSER UNION.

i I I

each member in its need an aid which it was pledged to recipro-
cate in their need. It would be a special notice to our neighbors
that Canada was no longer a subordinate province, but a state of
the P^mpire, co-ordinate with England, Ireland or Scotland ; one
of the directing partners, contributing and voting ; not a " depen-
dency," a " mere colony," one of the " Possessions Anglaises," as
it is classed by the postal department of France. It would be a
warning to certain blatant haters of Britain that in future, if needs
be, their octopus would fight with all its tentacles as well as with
its jaws.

In an article by the present writer entitled " Paying the Insur-
ance," which appeared over a year ago in Tlie Week, the following
paragraph occurred : — " And will Imperial Federation make our
American neighbors more disposed to settle the questions in dis-
pute betweer 1 I should certainly fancy so, for it would give
them an ai nee ivJiich they do not generalhj feel now that
Britain will fight for Canadian rights. * * * "

Does not the lately published diplomatic correspondence*
amply prove that ]Mr, Blaine calculated upon bluffing England,
and that, if he has brought his country into the unpleasant
predicament of having either to fight in an unjust cause or
to back down, this was owing to his false confidence that Britain
would never imperil her vast commerce for an unrepresented
and uncontributing ju'ovince ? More than once he betrays his
surprise and indignation at England's risking his displeasure in
defence of the rights and in deference to the arguments of a
"dependency," a "mere colony." He frets at "the interposition
of the wishes of the British province against the conclusion of a
convention between two nations." He feels that " Lord Salisbury
would have dealt more frankly," and saved him from sad embar-
rassment and the countries from the risk of a fratricidal war, " if
he had informed iNIinister Phelps that no arrangement could be
made unless Canada concurred in it."

There is reason to hope that in the present dispute the good
heart and sound sense of the American people may constrain their

* Re th6 Behring Sea dispute.

to recipro-
' neighbors
t a state of
iland ; one
a " depen-
Ljlaises," as
I'ould be a
-e, if needs
ell as with

the Insur-
) following

make our
ons in dis-
kvould give

now that

pondence*
I England,
m pleasant

cause or
at Britain
epresented
etrays his
leasure in
leuts of a

erposition
usion of a

Salisbury
ad enibar-
war, "if

could be

the good
rain their

FOR CLOSER UNION.

politicians to submit to arbitration or to abandon their preposterous
claim. Rut would it not be wise to avert, if j)ossible, a recurrence
of the dangerous misapjirehension that Canada can be bullied with
impunity ? Or is the false and mean argiiment to ; revail that, as
Britain in this instance acted effectively if slowly for ns, without
our paying anything towards her imperial establishments, we
would, therefore, be foolish to assume such uiuiecessary (?) burdens
for merely sentimental reasons (?) in the future 1

The two following paragraphs are notes by the editor of
Imperial Federation (the I^ondon organ of the League) in its
issue of June, 1888 : —

Mr. F. B. Crofton, the librarian of the Nova Scotiaii Legislature, writes to
us in reference to our notice of his lecture. " My paper," he says, " was on
' Haliburton, Thinker and Writer ' generally, not on him as an imperial
federationist alone ; and I did not claim (though the reporter says I did) the
paternity of the idea for Judge Haliburton. I only showed that he had advo-
cated it strongly long before it had been brought into its present prominence.
The idea, I believe, can be traced further back still." We trust that, if not Mr.
Crofton himself, then some other member of tlie Nova Scotia Historical
Society, will endeavor to trace the genesis o' the idea. It behoves imperial
federationists to look forward with confident expectation to the time when its
fl'-st advocate will rank with the great pioneers of luunanity, with Columbus
or the Marquis of Worcester, who, like Moses, saw the vision of the promised
land, though it was not given to them to enter therein.

Our friends in Halifax do not, however, confine themselves entirely to the
historical interest of imperial federation. If not fully prepared to let the dead
past bury its dead, they are at least ready to act in the living present. We
have seldom seen the case for federation, from the colonial point of view,
better put than in a recent letter addressed to the Da ill/ Krho. "Federation-
ists," says the writer, " hold that the responsibilities of tlic various parts of the
Empire to each other should be reciprocal Most ('anadian federationists feel
that this Dominion is not now an infant plantation ; that, to be entitled to the
full rights of an adidt nation, it should assume the duties and responsibilities of
one ; that the time is at hand when it must no longer be a ' dependency,' but a
co-ordinate and equal partner, if it is to continue in the Empire at all ; that at
present it perhaps does not deserve, and certainly does not get, the protection
and backing of the Empire as fully as the three paying partners ; and that, to
pass from this humiliating and parasitical state, only three courses are open to
it— to support diplomatic, naval and military services of its own, or to subscribe
to those of the Unted States, or to those of the British Empire. And weighing
the probable cost and worth of each, they believe that the last course is the
best "

il!li::i

11 !

i^l

2«

FOR CLOSER UNION.

The letfer allwled to in the latter pn^r.graph. was contributed
hi/ me, pseiKtoni/nnni.'ili/, to the Echo. T/te f<ti(/i/estion made in the
former editorial note teas parti// carried out in thefollonnng letter^
printed in the Februarij issue, 1889 : [f. b. c.

GENESIS OF THE FEDERATION IDEA.

To the Editor of " Imperial Federation ".•

Sir, — In a. local notice of a paper read by me before the Nova
Scotia Historical Society, on "Judge Haliburton," I was incor-
rectly reporteJ as claiming for that staunch and far-sighted
imperialist the paternity of the idea of imperial federation. In
your issue of last June, in an editorial note on my correction of
this inaccuracy (which you had reprinted in a previous issue), you
expressed a hope that I, or somebody else, would " endeavor to
trace the r/enesis of the idea ;" and you aptly observed that it
behoved federationists " to look forward with confident expecta-
tion to the time when its first advocate will rank with the great
pioneers of humanity."

Now, sir, I do not claim to have discovered the originator of
the federation idea ; but I think its fatherhood may be attributed,
somewhat more plausibly than Shakespeare's plays, to no less a
personage than Lord Bacon. At all events, Bacon clearly held,
as many imperial federationists hold to-day, that any empire so
vast as ours must either be confederated or partially dismembered.

In his letter to King James, " On the True Greatness of the
Kingdom of Great Britain," he maintains this proposition : —
" That then (and, then only, as he has just argued) greatness of
territory addeth strength, when it hath these four conditions : —

" First, that the territories be compacted, and not dispersed.

" Secondly, that the region which is the heart and seat of the
State be sufficient to support those parts which are but provinces
and additions.

" Thirdly, that the arms or martial virtue of the State be in
some degree answerable to the greatness of dominion.

MBM

FOR CLOSER UNION,

" And lastly, that no part or Province of the State he utterly
unjirnfitaJde^ hnt do confer some use or service to the Utate."

His first condition (compactness), we may assume, would not
have seemed so essential to him if the steam-engine and electric
telegraph had existed, or, at all events, if they had attained their
present development.

His second condition he explains thus : — " For the second,
concerning the principal region and those which are hut secondary,
there must evermore distinction he made hetweeu the hotli/ or
stem of the tree, and the l>on<ihs ami hranrli.es. For if the top he
over great and the stalk too slender, there can he no strength.
Noii\ the hoihj is to he accounted so much of an estate as is not
separate or distimjuished with any marJc of forel<iners, hut is united
specialli/ by the bond of naturalisation. (Italics mine.) And,
therefore, we see that when the State of Rome grew great, they
were enforced to naturalise the Latins or Italians, because the
Koman stem could not bear the Provinces and Italy both as
branches."

But why should not our Empire stand among the empires of
the world, as the banyan among the other trees, begetting many
secondary stems which maintain their connection with the parent
trunk 1 And why should not our Empire, so knit together, out-
last other empires as the banyan outlasts other trees?

In commenting on his third condition, Lord Bacon supplies
another argument against our status quo when he notes of the
Romans — " Their protecting forces did corrupt, supplant, and
enervate the natural and proper forces of all the provinces, which
relied and depended upon the succours and directions of the State
above. And when that also waxed impotent and slothful, then
the whole state laboured with her own magnitude, and in the end
fell with her own weight." This inevitable moial degeneracy of
provinces shirking their natural obligations to bear a part in their
defence is analogous to the physical degeneration of the hermit
crab, so strikingly depicted in Professor Drummond's " Natural
Law in the Spiritual World."

FOR CLOSER UNION.

But if our cardinal principle, tho need of reciprocity of
obligations and services between the provinces ami the Empire,
occurred nearly tlirec centuries back to the prescient mind of
Bacon, it recurred more vividly and more often to TIaliburton rpiite
half a century ago. And perhaps the first person who can be said
actually to have formulated a scheme for the federation of the
Empire was another far-sighted Nova Scotian, Hon. Joseph Howe.
In his pamplet, entitled "The Organization of the ?]mpire"
(Edward Stanford, London, 1866), Mr. Howe j)roposes methods
for representing the colonies in the imperial parliament, for raising
and assessing the contributions of the i)rovinces to the im])erial
services, for affiliating the provincial militia with the regular army,
(fee. The following utterance of this liigh-mimled Nova Scotian
should cheer the federationists and shame the sponges and "stick-
in-the-muds" in all the colonies : —

" Hut I will not for a rnoineiit do my fellow-colonists the injustice to suspect
that they will decline a fair coniproniise of a question which involves at once
their own protection and the consolidation and security of the Empire. At all
events, if there are any communities of British oripin anywhere who desire to
enjoy all the privileges and immunities of the Queen's subjects without paying
for and defending them, let us ascertain where and who they are— let us
measure the proportions of political repudiation now, in a season of tranq»iility—
when we have leisure to gauge the extent of the evil and to apply correctives,
rather than wait till war finds us unprepared and leaning upon presumptions in
which there is no reality."

I am, sir, yours, &c.,

F. Blake Crofton, (Halifax, Nooa Scofia).

A fuller article of mine on the same theme, which soon after-
wards appeared in 7'he Weel,- (April 5th, 18S9), contained, in
addition to the substance of the letter printed above, the following
paragraphs also : —

THE FATHERHOOD OF IMPERIAL FEDERATION.*

Eleven years before the American Kevolution, in 1765, at a
time, be it observed, when tne colonies bore something like the

* A much more copious essay on this subject has since been read by the late
Mr P. F. de Labillicre before the Royal Colonial Institute (Jan. 10, 1893), under
the title of " British Federal ion : its Rise and Progress." But his essay, too, is
very far from exhaustive, omitting the names of s&veral North American

mmm

FOR CL08KR UNION.

owing

same ratio to the Tlireo Kingdoms in wealth and importance
wliich they do at present, Thomas Pownall, formerly (lovernor of
Massachusetts Bay and South Carolina, and Lieutenant-Governor
of New Jersey, ])uMished in London the second edition of his
Aflministmtiun of the Colonies. In this work (pp. '0) he uses
these remarkable words : —

" It is, therefore, the duty of those who govern us to carry
forward this lead into our system, that Great Britain may be no
more considered as the kingdom of this isle only, with many
appendages of provinces, colonies, settlements, and other extraneous
parts, but a grand marine dominion, consisting of our possessions
in the Atlantic and in America united into a one empire, in a one
centre, where the seat of government is."

To effect this he claims '* is the precise (hdy of government at
this crisis."

To the British objection to give " the rights and privileges of
subjects living within tlie realm " to persons remote from it, whose
interests are rival and contrary, Pownall answers : " But the
scheme of giving representatives to the colonics annexes them to
and incorporates them with the realm. Their interest is contrary
to that of Great Britain only so long as they are continued in the
unnatural artificial state of being considered as external provinces ;
and they can become rivals only by continuing to increase in their
separate state ; but their being united to the realm is the very
remedy proposed."

The American objection that this union would involve a share
in the burden of the taxes, he meets by saying that •' the like
objection can never be made with propriety, reason or justice by
colonies and provinces which are constituent parts of a trading
nation protected by the British marine. . . . However, if the
colonies could . . . show any inequality or even inexpediency
in their paying any part of the taxes, which have a retrospect to
times before they were admitted to a share in the legislature,

pioneers— among them Chisholme, Halibiirton, and, strangest of all, Governor
Pownall. The history of British federation will doubtless follow its consumma-
tion ; but meantime the journalist may smooth the way for the essayist, and
the essayist for the historian.

•M

von CLOSER UNION.

tliere is no doubt but that the siiiue luoileratioii iuul justice which
tlie kingdom of Etigliuid showed towards Scotland in giving it an
e(iuivaleiit would be extended to the colonies by the kingdom of
Great Britain."

Pownall further argued that the distance of tb". colonies from
England, even fheri, was not an insuperable obstacle.

In this he differed from Burke, wlio, some years later, declared
that "nature forbade " the union ; but IJurke lived before science
had vanquished nature, or steam and electricity had annihilated
si)ace. Americans '• might flatter thi;mselves, with some appear-
ance of reason, too," said Adam Smith, " that the distance of
America Irom the seat of government could not be of very long
continuance. ... In the course of a little more than a
century perhaps the produce of American might exceed that of the
British taxation. The seat of empire would then naturally remove
itself lo that part of the empire which contributed most to the
gt.'jral defence and supjiort of the whole." This was during the
revolt of the colonies ; and the great political economist proposed
that representation with taxation should be offered to each colony
detaching itself from the confederacy. "The assembly which
deliberates and decides concerning the attairs of every part of the
empire," he said, '• in order to be pro}>erly informijd, ought cer-
tainly to have representatives from every part of it."

Perhaps the credit of publicly advocating the federation of the
empire for the first time in British America is due to David
Chisholme, a journalist of Lower Canada, who, in 1832, published
at Three Rivers a book entitled Observations on the Rights of
British Colonies to Repreaentation in the British Parliament. I
must content myself with two extracts from this most creditable
contribution to Canadian literature : —

" We have been brought up at the knee.s of that most
patriarchal power : we have largely partaken of its bounty, and
are, I hope, grateful for it ; we have rejoiced in its strength, par-
ticipated in its glory, and been proud of its dignity. Yet perpetual
pupilage, enduring servitude, are alike unworthy of child and
parent, of minor and guardian. It would forever stint the moral

FOB CL()8KK UNION.

ice which
ving it an
ngdoin of

nids from

(lechxred
re science
iiiihiliited
i fippear-
stniiCH of
ery long

than a
at of the
J remove
t to the
I ring the
;>ro]5osed
li colony

which

of the
rht cer-

of the

David

Wished

lilts of

nt. I

itable

most
^, and

par-
jetual

and
noral

and intellectual growth of the one, and degrade the other, in the
estimation of all reHecting men, .is a prond and haughty tyrant,
both unwilling to allow others to participate in his privileges, and
Incapable of entertaining one genennis sentiment. Nor, indeed,
is our ambition very great. The boon which we seek is not entire
emancipation. It is not uncontrolled liberty to do for ourselves
as we best can, like other members of the family who have gone
out from us to return r.o more. It is not the wild freedom of the
reckless and abandoned ])rotligate. We do not, like the prodigal,
ask the portion of goods that falleth to us, with the view of
taking our journey into a far country, and there wasting our sub-
stance with riotous living. Our desiie, on the contrary, is only
to continue members of the happy family in which we have been
born and brought up ; to draw both the jiaternal and fraternal
bonds tighter around us ; and to strengthen the chains of the
family communion.

*' But we desire at the same time to enjoy equal rights and
equal privileges. We desire to be jait on the same footing with
the other members of the family. Being persons of some little
means, we desire, because we think it is our right, to have some
voice in the management of it. Being joint-heirs of the inheritance
of our forefathers, we desire to be consulted in its management.
Being heirs-at-law to the patrimony of the British Constitution, we
desire to participate in the beneHts arising from it. Being of age
and of sound mind and judgment, we desire to be acknowledged as
men capable of tilling our station at the council board, particularly
when our immediate goods and chattels are to be disposed of.
Being now of mature age, we desire that our leading-strings may be
cut away from us, and that we may be permitted to pur.«ue the
course which right and nature alike dictate. We desire that the
emblems of manhood, the toga virilis may be delivered to us."

"The children of the same national family," says Mr.
Chisholme in another part of his book, *' the subjects of the same
Crown — the heirs of the same constitution — the objects of the
equal protection of our laws — the inheritors of British freedom —
and the undistinguished claimants of British justice — stretch to us,

FOB CLOHEK UNION.

ere it be too lute, the riglit liaiul of fcllowsliip ; introiluce us into
your councils ; admit u.y into your contidcuce, especially when all
we pijssess on earth is ondan^'erctl, and all will yet he well. We
shall then indeed be ouo jjcople with couinion rights, common
privileges, coiinnon laws, and common interests. ' Entreat me not
to leave thee, or to return from following after ttiee ; for whither
thou goest, I will go ; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge ; thy
people shall be my people, and thy God my God ! ' ''

Of the fdllowing two articles I cannot name the j)recise dates.
They are cojjied from the su|>plement to " Imperial Federation "
for April, 1889, but their first appearance was probably some
months earlier. They were both used as editorials.

"PUT UP OR SHUT UP."

From the HoUfat Critic'.

If our present deplorable relations with the United States do
not lead to earnest eH'orts for im[)erial federation, there will be
small hopes for the final success of the scheme. For we never can
have a stronger illustration of the dangers of our existing status
than we now have. If we were ef^ual and paying partners in the
Empire it is unlikely that the present crisis would exist at all, or
that demagogues in the Senate or elsewhere would have been so
prompt to refuse arbitration, to repudiate conventions, or to fish
for the votes of rowdies by rowdy abuse of Britain or Canada.
We know, from various utterances, that at present many Americans
assume that England will never take arms in our behalf. Only the
other day a Rei)ublican organ observed that " the new democracy
of England would never fight with us about the Canadians."
Even in Canada many people feel that xJritain will not put her
foot down so firmly or so readily in defence of Canadian interests
as in defence of Scotch or Irish or English interests. " To the
proposition that England would run any hazard in order to sustain

mmmmmm

FOR C'LOHER UNION.

our case," says tho Toronto Mail recently, " it is probably a
siiHflcient answer to say that we do not contribute to her treasury ;
that we do not allow her a voice in our internal alfairs ; that we
do not even recognise her kinship in matters of trade, but treat
her precisely as we treat the foreigner."

i>ut if a serious crisis shonhl occur under imperial federation,
our neighbours would be niuch more anxious to arrange the
difficulty than they are now. They would know that no i)rovinces
of the Em[)iro would grudge to Canada in her neiul a support
which she was pledged to recii)rocate in theirs. There would be
no question then that Canada would be backed in all her just con-
tentions — backed more prom[)tly, more fully, and more powerfully,
than she is in her present condition as a " dependency." The
strong arm of the Empire would be nerved by an awakened spirit
of imperial patriotism.

If the lovers of leading-strings really form a majority in Canada,
they might succeec. in prolonging her inglorious tutelage for ever
but for three dangers. The first danger, of course, is forcible
annexation — a possible consequence of a war with the United
States.

The second danger is that Britain may sooner or later deliber-
ately decline to go on shouldering unreciprocated responsibilities.

The third danger is that the carping abuse of Britain by cer-
tain papers in the colonies, whenever she makes a compromise or
fails to jump instantly at the throat of any foreign power in
defense of any disputed colonial right, may at last provoke
unpleasant reprisals. Suppose that some day, after an unusually
shrill chorus of barks from a certain class of Canadian journals,
some of the great British papers should retort in effect : " Gentle-
men, if you don't like the way we protect you, you are quite
welcome to protect yourselves, or to get some other protector, if
you can find one cheap enough to suit your ideas. But before you
either criticise our military, naval, and diplomatic services, or
prescribe how or when we are to employ them, would it not be
more graceful and more manly to contribute something to their
support ? To use the forcible language of your Republican
3

FOK C'l.OHKB UNION.

1;!

tti

heiKhbours, jmrhaps, gontlonion, you will kimlly * Put up ok Shut
UP ! ' " Should any considorablc portion of the Uritish press be
tensed into adoptin},' such a tone, more bitter words will follow on
both sides, and we shall meet a fate which all true friends of
Britain and Canada dread far worse than friendly annexation or
independence — we shall part in anger.

Strange to say, those who snarl and nag most at the mother
country for hesitating to risk her vast coininerce in defeiico of
every local claim, are generally i)ersons who sneer at the notion of
contributing a cent to the imperial establishments. It is a
melancholy truth that sponges commonly are both thankless and

exacting.

WHAT IS IMPERIAL FEDERATION?*

From the Halifax Kvcning Mail.

It is true there is a great deal that is vague and undetermined
as to the scope, the constitution, and the consequence of imperial
federation. The limits of the jurisdiction of imperial and local
legislatures are not settled as yet ; neither is the mode of contribut-
ing the proportionate contribution ; neither is the extent of the
imperial liabilities of the partners; neither is the method of
electing imperial representatives. It is not determined whether a
measure of commercial reciprocity between all parts of the P]mpire
will precede or follow imperial federation.

But there are some things that are pretty clear and easy to
understand in connection with imperial federation. It means a
pooling of the offensive and defensive resources of the Empire, the
gaining of strength by cohesion, the binding of the bundle of sticks
by firm cords, the hooping of the staves of the barrel, of which opera-
tions Judge Haliburton and Joseph Howe long ago clearly forsaw the

*The greater part ot this article was quoted approvingly by Lord Brasaey in
The Nineteenth Century for September, 1891.

"^*Nii9HPM

Mjps^ >:"«?;_;*

FOR ("LOHER UNION.

^P OH Shut
*'i JTc'ss be
' follow on
ffionds of
luxation or

le motjier
«fe;;co of
""tioii of

it is ;i

cless am]

mined
perial
' local
I'ibut-
F the
d of
ler a
pire

to
s a
the
3ks
ra-
he

need. It involves the rei)re.sentation of the s(?lf-j,'overning colonies
in some imperial legislative body, and their i)articipation in the
imperial government and imperial expenses. It means paying
our shot and shouldering our reciprocal responsibilities like Ih'itons.
The consummation of the sclkeme Avi! make us part owners in
ever> imperial establishment in every part of the world— peers
with our fellow- iJritons instead of colonists or dependents. It is
like going into partnership with one's moiher instead of staying
tied to her apron-strings. Federation would force the thoughts of
our public men to expand. It would oblige our voters to consider
their imperial as well as their provincial interests. It wouM breed
statesmen instead of " parochial politicians." It would not be as
costly as indei)endence, and certainly not more costly than union
with the United States.

It is the only practicable alternative to ainiexation. Senator
Sherman is only one of many who believe that, before very long,
''Canada will be rei)resr.nted either at Westminster or at
Washington." Rev. Joseph Cook, as he travelled over the British
Empire and realized its vastness, exclaimed to himself, *' Confed-
eration or disintegration ! " Haliburton came to the same
conclusion half a century ago. At the fir^t meeting of the
Federation League in London the same sentiment would have been
embodied in a resolution, but for the remonstrances of a prominent
Canadian. * * * Mr. Dalton McCarthy, President
of the League in Canada, in his lately published letter, hints that
subsequent events tend to prove the sentiment true. Our recent
troubles with the United States certainly argue that we cannot
prudently wait as we are till we are rich enough and populous
enough for independence.

FOB cxobEk rxiox.

Krorn thfc Hulifrxx Critif:*, May 23. 1?*5.

Mrn*;. flf; SUi^'l, an Principal Grant remarked, wanted Goethe
Ut i-x\A'a\u his philof/iphy in a couple of sentences. And there
aie Honif; provincial writers who arc inclined to settle the affairs of
the univerne in an editorial. One of the^^e sages has disposed of
'uu\>*tthi\ federation as *' idiotic." Wf^re I to imitate this flippancy,
I »hould xpeak of thowi Canadians who favor the present colonial
Htatus }jh the mean school of politicians ; of those who prefer
independence, as the humptious .schr^jl ; of those who lean towards
annexation, as the discre't or fru^^al school ; of those who hoptc for
imperial federation, «s the patriotic school. Patriotism means,
etymological ly, a love for the (.ouninj of <Mr faihers.

From The Critic, Aug, 24, 1888

The British Empire and the United States comprise almost a
qii'irter of the land area of the earth, more than a quarter of its
po[)ulatiori, and more than half of its wealth, power and civilization.
No otli(;r great power is growing ho fast as either of them. Allied,
they might "dominate the world and dictate peace to the too
lutavily armed nations." The Pjritisher or Yankee who cannot
rer;ognize the ;^ratid position of his race, and its lir itless possibilities
and responsihilities, is a dolt. The Britisher or Yankee who does
recognize thcise things, arid yet, for fancied party advantage, stirs up
ill-feeling between the two great kindred powers, is an enemy of
mankind. In risking a fratricidal war between them, he I'sks the
loss of their controlling influence in the world — ■and this for a small
and uncertain gain. Like Judas, such a man would betray his
masttsr for a moderate consideration, but I don't think he would
have Judus's .scruples about pocketing the boodle.

• Hoitu! of tny notes and articles In The Critic on behalf of imperial unification
wore anoiiymouH, some Higned with a iweudonym, and Home with my owii name.
I have not at tcmitted to llnd them all, for they appeared off and on for several
yoarH, and are UHually short, while The Critic is without an index.

FOB CLOSER UNION.

From The Critic, Aug. 31, 1888.
IMPERIAL FEDERATION AND THE FRENCH CANADIANS.

Several French-Canadian politicians of both parties have lately
declared against imperial federation. " The French Canadians,"
Bays Professor Goldwin Smith in MaoniUan's Magazine, " are bent
on the consolidation of their own nationality, and are radically
hostile to imperial federation or anything that would tighten their
tie to Great Britain. It is surprising to me that anyone with this
pf tent fact before his eyes can talk about imperial federation with
reference to Canada." If French Canadians could make the
present position of Canada last for ever, or if they could replace it
by Independence, it might indeed be vain to " talk about imperial
federation with reference to Canada."

French Canadians could not feel the national pride and com-
placence that Anglo-Saxons would feel either in a federated and
fortified British Empire or in a great American republic. Their
yearnings for a national life, their ambitions as a race, could be.«5t
be satisKed by making this Dominion independent. In it they
have fair hopes of dominating, through their wonderful fecundity,
and by fostering immigration from France. Most of them would
probably be willing to bear their shares of the enormous outlay
that would be needed for building and keeping up a navy, for
increasing the militia, and for maintaining consular and diplomatic
services.

But the chances are that few British Canadians will finally
prefer the most costly and precarious of the conditions open for
their choice. On mature reflection most of them will see that the
status of full partners with one of the great English-speaking
powers would be not only cheaper, but also more secure and more
res])ected and envied in the world at large. British Canadians
could fuse with either, and rejoice, not with reserve as aliens, but
thoroughly as brethren, in its augmented strength.

Once convinced that Amwxation is the only jiradicahle alterna-
tive to imperial federation, there is every reason to hope that the

FOR CLOSER UNION.

Ill:

vast bulk of French Canaiiians will prefer the latter. At
Washington the public documents would not be published in
French as well as English, as they are at Ottawa, and deputies
could not speak in either language at their option in Congress as
they can in the Dominion Parliament. French Canadians could
not make the successful forays on the American that they now do
on the Canadian treasury ; in American politics they could never
hold the balance of power which they already hold, or win the
preponderance which they already hope for, in Canadinn politics.
Under annexation some of their rights might be jeopardized, under
imperial federation they will all be guaranteed : the constitution
of the League, which every imperial federatinnist signs, _,rovides
that " no scheme of federation should interfere with the existing
rights of Local Parliaments as regards local affair?." " Xous n'
avons rien a craindre de la metropole," said La Minerve not long
ago. " Nous n' avons pas a redouter 1' absorption ni V ecrasement
de sa part ; * * ses relations avec nous ne peuvent guere exercer
d' influence mauvaise sur ce que nous tenons par dessus tout a
conserver, sur 1' heritage national qui nous est cher, et pour lequel
la fusion Americaine signifierait la mine." (" AVe have nothing to
fear from the imperial government. We have neither to appre-
hend absorption nor effacement on its part ; * * its relations
with us could hardly exercise an evil influence upon that which
we hold it paramount to preserve, upon the national heritage which
is dear to us, and for which fusion with America would mean
ruin.")

And there is little doubt that the Catholic hierarchy of Quebec
would favor imperial federation as against annexation. " Between
a close union with the United States and a closer union with
England," says La Minerve, commenting on the notable
speech of our Archbishop, " Mgr. O'Brien would rather lean
to the latter. And we believe that this sentiment would be
that of the episcopate in general. Every time that the country
has found itself obliged to make a similar cho'ce (s 'est trouve dans
cette alfentatice), we have seen the bishops reject friendship and
close fellowship with America. This is what they did in 1775, and

FOR CLOSER UNION.

what they did again in 1867 when they recommended Confedera-
tion as a safeguard against annexation. We must believe that
they are convinced, in their caie and foresight as pastors, that the
danger for us. for our religious and national interests, is not from
the side of England but from the side of the United States."

From the Halifax Herald, Sept. 21 1888.
IMPERIAL FEDERATION AND HOME RULE.

(From the Critic.)
Mr. Parnell's letter to Mr. C. J. Rhodes, in which he favors
the retention of Irish representatives at Westminster and imperial
federation also, (if the colonies desire it), is an event of the very
highest importance. Its immediate and significant result was a
gift by Mr. Rhodes of $50,000 to the funds of the Irish party.

It was not to be expected that ultra Tories would be instantan-
eously converted to Home Rule even though accompanied by
imperial federation. Yet it is with some surprise and regret that I
find the official organ of the Federation League pooh-poohing the
importance of Mr. Parnell's utterances and denying that its columns
have anything to do with Home Rule. Surely a schema which
involves the delegating of all imperial affairs to an impeiial parlia-
ment or council (in which all contributing partners will have
representatives) involves also the delegating of all local affairs to
local parliaments. What the precise limits should be of the
jurisdiction of imperial and local parliaments it would be for
statesmen and conventions to define ; but I should think that the
legislature of Ireland or Scotland should have equal rights and
powers with the legislature of Canada.

Why any one should fear separation or rebellion if Irish Home
Rule should come thus, as a corollary to imperial federation,
puzzles me. The followers of Mr. Parnell have long ago thrown
the dynamiters overboard. Like Archbishop O'Brien, they

FOR CLOSER UNION.

■;ii

recognize that the means used for a -worthy end must be " within
the Ten Commandments." Tt is said that they have lately even
declined the co-operation of the Fenians. Mr. Parnell has admitted
that effective safeguards of union should be provided in every
scheme of Home Kule. But under imperial federation few safe-
guards would bo needed. There would then be no danger of the
disunionists gaining the ascendency in Ireland. If they ever did,
they would find rebellion vain. They would have to deal with
Britain reinforced by her new partners, then fired with imperial
pride and patriotism, and ever growing in numbers and resources.
Ungrateful and irreconcilable, rebels would then find no sympathy
from outside nations. No politicians in the colonies, few politicians
in the United States, could fancy it expedient to afi'ect sympathy
with their cause. If they did, they would lose more votes than
they would gain.

I sympathize with the present efforts of Mr. Parnell to wash
from his garment the slime of the vipers that clung to its skirts.
Many men are now quietly rallying to the cause of Home Rule
who, like Mr. Rhodes himself, declined to work for it in seeming
concert with vandals and murderers. An Irish rector of an English
parish, not long ago a pronounced ** unionist," wrote me lately that
he is a " Gladstonian home-ruler." An imperialist myself, I now
am for Home Rule in the interests of imperial union. An Irishman
myself, I am for imperial union in the interests of Ireland. The
cohesion and strength of the federated empire would be weakened
and its glory would be dimmed, if it weie not sustained by all the
gallantry and all the genius of my native land.

The empire for Ireland and Ireland for the empire, and a
brotherly alliance with the United States — here is a cause that is
worth working for or suffering for, if it only can be crowned with
success. We could then induce the overburdened nations to disarm,
by guaranteeing tlu-ir integrity. We could reduce the total labor
of mankind. We could end the slave trade. There would be
" peace on earth, goodwill toward men," and no more " Irish vote "
to be angled for with unclean bait. Ireland would be one of an
imperial brotherhood of nations, and the august history of the

FOK CLOSER UNION. 41

federation would be illuminated by the talent, dash and imagina-
tion of her sons.

In "The Critic" for October 12 and 19, 1888, I printed a
full resume of Hon. Joseph Howe's very interesting and advanced
scheme for strengthening the empire. This scheme was proposed
in 1866, in a pamphlet published by Ed. Stanford (London), and
■entitled " The Organization of the Empire." The far-sighted and
broad-minded Nova Scotian statesman clearly showed the dangers
•of our present status and boldly outlined a scheme for general
•defence and colonial representation — even advising the imperial
government to ask the colonies for an early answer to an oifer of
reciprocal rights and responsibilities.

In the early part of December, 1888, the future of Canada was
•discussed in the Halifax " Morning Chronicle " by Hon. J. W.
Longley, Senator Power, and B. Russell, now M. P. for Halifa.v.
The shortest and least important contribution to this discussion
■was my letter, which contained the following paragraphs : —

From the Morning Chronicle, Dec. 7, 1888.
* # # * * *

i am an imperial federationist, but I am in accord with the
policy outlined in the Gh.ronide's editorial — against national extra-
vagance and the corruption of constituencies, for free trade and the
largest amount of reciprocity with the United States which can be
obtained without a sacrifice of princi[)le or self-respect. Should
either political party positively pronounce against the strengthening
of the empire (so long as the empire remains fair and friendly to
Canada) that party will lose many adherents whose loyalty to the
empire is stronger than their party feelings. Whether it would
gain enough votes to offset those lost by such a policy can only be
a matter of speculation at present.

FOR CLOSER UNION.

Meantime, I feel with the Attorney-General that it is both
legitimate and desirable to debate thnrou^'hly the pros and cons of
all the political conditions into one of which we i.. :st pass when
our tutelage is at an end. His views on this point are certainly
broad and liberal. While I recognise the ability and moderation
of Senator Power's letter, I regret that he sees fit to deprecate
such discussions as " something worse than useless," because he
thinks they have a tendency to unsettle men's minds and to call
their attention away from subjects of vital and immediate conse-
quence. The question whetlior this country is to secure fair treat-
ment and fair trade with our neighbors by joining the United
States or by confederating with our own empire, may not be of
" immediate " but it certainly is of " vital consequence." I hold
with Hon. Joseph Howe that it is " the question of questions for
\\s ^W, far transwmlinri 171 importance am/ other within the range
of domestic or foreign ]ioUtics."

* # . * * ^ i(.

The recklessness on this subject is not with the thinkers or
agitators, but with those who want us to drift on, like lotus-eaters
in a mist, looking out for neither rocks nor harbors until we happen
on them. There are some papers and some people who appear to
believe in providing against danger on the ostrich's principle, by
sticking their heads in a bush and feeling happy. Governor
Thomas Pownall was an agitaborwho ten years before the American
revolution, urged giving Americans representation in the imperial
parli!iment,'they paying a fair contribution to the imperial esiablish-
ments. Had the advice of this agitator been taken by P,ritons at
home and abroad, our enijiire might now " dominate the world and
dictate peace to the too heavily armed nations."

•* If foresight be fussiness, if prudence be fnssiness, if wariness
be fussiness, then I am a very fussy politician," said Lord Rosebery
tne other day at Edinburgh. " Absence of fussiness may have
every merit, but it does not preserve the empire. If the empire
broke up for want of foresight, it might be some consolation to
those non-fussy people to say, ' Had we seen this a little earlier,
we might have averted it.' It would be no consolation to me T

FOR CLOSER UNION. 43

s»ippope Mr. Pitt was called fussy when he said that a reform of
})arliament was inevitable, and bioiight in a reform bill in early
youth. I suppose Mr. Bright and ^Ir. Cobden were fussy when
they said that free trade was coming, and that they would have a
hand in bringing it about as soon as possible. I suppose Sir
Robert Peel was fussy when he made parliament accept free tiade,
and so enabled us to ride safely through the revolution of 1848.
On the other hand, just think what we have to thank that want
of fussiness for — how it has helped us, and what a sublime policy
it has been ! It is the want of this fussiness that has led us into
many imprudent wars, that has led us into campaigns without any
provision for our soldiers. * * * It was want of fussiness
that lost us the United Stales. It is a splendid quality this want
of fussiness ; it is a chivalrous quality ; it is a gentlemanly
quality. But, for my part, I would rather be fussy with Bright,
Cobden and Peel — aye, I would rather be fussy with the geese that
saved the Capitol than abide by those splendid doctrines of negation
that lead too surely to national disaster."

In the United States a nu^iiber of people have lately been
" fussing " for the annexation of Canada. Methods for effecting it
have been proposed in congress and in many newspapers. It is
said that a society has been formed to promote it. Why should
not those Canadians who are hostile to this movement take some
precautions to defeat it ?

Besides are not our relations with the United States in our
present colonial state attended by frequent dangers and humilia-
tions ? Are our powerful neighbors disposed to arrange all matters
in dispute between us fairly and permanently 1 Is not their
aggressiveness sustained largely by the idea, right or wrong, that
Great Britain will not declare wnr for the rights of an unrepresented
and uncontributing dependency ? And are not many of our news-
papers repeatedly twitting Great Britain with surrenders and back-
downs ? And can our neighbors be depended upon to be more fair
and reasonable to us until we cither join their republic or else
become a co-ordinate member of a banded Pan-Britannic empire,
every province of which will have contracted to sustain the just
rights of every other province ?

FOR CLOSER UNION.

i.Jil

Senator Power sugf^ests that the great expense incurred by
Canada in building the Canadian Pacific Railroad, which has
strengthened the military position of the empire, should exempt her
from any contributions to imperial services for some years to come.
I think there is much force in this contention. * * * But
why need this prevent Canadians from discussing or pronouncing
for the principle of imperial federation.

In another place the Senator observes that " when England
gives us notice that the present connection cannot last longer in
its existing form, or when some convulsion now unexpected takes
place, it will be time eujiigh for us to deal with the question of
our future place in the world's assembly of nations." If it be right
that Canada should assume a reciprocity of obligations with the
other members of the empire, it would seem more gracious and
more fail- that she should spontaneously offer to do so. If it be
wrong, she should not do so by persuasion or by compulsion. If
she waits for an unexpected "convulsion," she may find she has
waited too long. It is during peace that nations should take
precautions to avert war.

From Imperial Federation, September, 1891.
FEDERATION-SOON OR NEVER.

Mr, F. Blake Crofton, of Halifax, Nova Scotia, signs an article
in the Dominion Hhistrated unner the above heading. The warn-
ing, though its tone is not loud, strikes a deep note. He says : —
In his article, ** Canada and Imperial Federation," in the March
number of the Fortnightly Review, Mr. J. W. Longley advocates
Canadian independence. But he is not anxious for an early
decision for or against it, although ho terms it a " great injustice
to the public spirit of the Canadian people to suppose that they
will always be content to enjoy the benefits of British connection

B'h

FOB CLOSER UNION. 46

without sharing its bunleiis niul resijonsibilities." He rightly
thinks that the ciiances of gaining and maintaining independence
■will not be lessened by waiting. " The period has not yet been
reached," he remarks, " when Canada siiall feel strong enough to
^tand alone. This involves difficulties and responsibilities. Besides
the present generation contains many who are extremely, perhaps
bigotedly, attached to Britain and British rule, and who would be
unwilling to listen to any i»roposal involving separation * *
But old generations are passing away and new generations are
arising ; and in proportion as thv. ountry develops in population,
wealth and power, these ancient prejudices will disappear, and each
day will see the spirit of national pride grow stronger. * *
The germ has been planted^ and the idea is manifestly growing
in the heart of young Canad.a."

Here Mr. Longley indirectly gives a most grave warning to
those whose first aspiration is the coherence of our grand empire,
and who decline to consider other alternatives while any hope of
federation remains. To them " now is the accepted time, note is
the day of salvation." Goldwin Smith in his " Canada and the
Canadian Question" alludes thus scornfully to those imperial
federationists who think it too early to reveal their plan : — " They
say it is not yet time for the disclosure. Not yet time, when the
last strand of political connection is worn almost to the last thread
and when every day the sentiment opposed to centralization is
implanting itself more deeply in colonial hearts ! While we are
bidden to wait patiently for the tide, the tide is running strongly
the other way." This is the utterance of an opponent of federation
and is, I hope, a little pessimistic. But many of the most
thoughtful friends of the movement feel the time has come to ask
for a verdict for or against the principle (if not for or against a
specific scheme^ of imperial federation. Mr. Stead, in a recent
number of the "Review of Eeviews," observed that " time was the
essence of the contract." Judge Haliburton thought the establish-
ment of lines of steamers ushered in the era " when the treatment
of adults should supersede that of children." Hon. Joseph Howe
thought the epoch had arrived in 1866. His brochure on "The
Organization of the Empire," which was published in that year in

FOB CLOSER UNION.

;;

London, contains the following, among its many ringing sontences :
— "If there are any communities of British origin anywhere who
desire to enjoy all the privileges and immunities of the Queen's
subject without paying for and defending tiiem, let us ascertain
who and where they are — let us measure the i)roportions of politi-
cal repudiation now, in a season of tranquility — when we have
leisure to gauge the extent of the evil and to apply correctives,
rather than wait till war finds us uni)repared and leaning upon
presunii)tions in which there is no reality," Mr. BU.'.ie evidently
believes the time for federating the empire has gone by. He made
a plea for federation in his Aurora speech in 1874, but has dropped
the subject since. And in his late letter he prefaces his opinion
that the future of Canada should be settled by deliberation and not
by drift with these sigiiiticant words, " while not disguising my
view that events have already (jreatly narroiced our aj^parent range
and impeded our apparent liberty of action."

Though not, I trust, already past, the time for attaining full
national life in equal partnership with other members of the empire
is certainly passing. Canada is becoming more and more the " be-
all and end-all " for Canadians, as Australia is for Australians.*
Some advocates of imperial federation are unwilling to accept it
unless it be linked with an imperial zollverein or some favorite fad
of their own. Others pretend to favour it only to stave off
annexation until Canada is strong enough for independence. If
the chief dependencies of the empire are ever to vote that the
majestic whole is of more importance even than its nearest and
dearest part, and that the coherence of the whole requires a
reciprocity of rights and obligations between its co-ordinate parts,
the vote muse be taken soon.

But for the dangers attending the half century or so that must
elapse before the country is sufficiently rich and populous for a
secure independence — dangers that imperil the supremacy with
Providence seems to offer the Anglo-Saxon race for a benehcent
end — the present verdict of Canada would doubtless be for the

*The threatening attitude of tiie United States and, more lately, of Germany-
lias since decidedly checked this tendency and fanned the flame of imperial
patriotism in all the great colonies.

FOR CLOHKR UNION. 47

atatuH quo, and its ulliiuate verdict lor independence. To all of

lis >vho recognize thene dangers it is gratifying to see so much

discussion of the future of Canada, so many i)ractical protests

against " the inglorious policy of drift." The symptoms are that

this country is not going to cling blindly to its mother's skirts

until it is shaken off with a rebuff" — unless, indeed, the rebuff

sliould come unexpectedly soon. Most thoughtful Canadians —

and it now seems likely that the thoughtful minority may move

the inert mass — are in sympathy with the stirring appeal of

Professor Roberts* : —

" But thou, my country, dream not thou !
Wake, and behold how night is done-
How on thy breast, and o'er thy brow,
Bursts the uprising sun ! "

From " Scraps and Snaps " in The Dominion Illustrated Monthly for 1892, p. 551.

In his recent plea for freedom in the discussion of our national

future, Attorney-General Longley is in error in assuming that " the

especial advocates of the imperial federation idea always seek to

deprive the subject of the character of a fair debate upon its merits"

and appeal only to sentiment. Some imperial federationists, of

whom I am a humble one, desire to have the question of our future

decided upon its merits alone. If we appeal to sentiment, we

appeal to principle and self-interest also. If Ave believe the

federation of the empire to be the grandest, most honourable and

most stimulating of our possible destinies, we also believe it to be

the most prudent, secure and economical of all t!;e proposed changes

in our political status. I hold with Mr. Longley that the fair

advocates of annexation should be given a fair hearing. A cause

that cannot bear discussion is not worth fighting lor :

" He either fears his fate too much,
Or his deserts are small.
That dares not put it to the touch
To gain or lose it all."

*This talented Canadian author strongly advocates imperial federation in
his recent " History of Canada." Although this work is published in Boston it
fearlessly exposes several fables which are taught as truths to our American
cousins.

FOR CLOSKR UNION.

•

l-'S-
it- .

To argue for ntinexatiou creates no reasonable presumption that
a man, even an official, is a traitor. •' Traitor " is derived from
frado, and means a person who befraijtt or would betray something
or somebody. " Treason " comes from the same Latin word»
through frahixon, and injplies trearhcri/. Because a general
recommends making peace on terms wliich his government decline,
are we therefore to jump at the conclusion that he is likely ta
betray an army or a fortress to the enemy, and are we to brand
him as untrustworthy and to clamour for his resignation ? Because
a man advises a girl to marry for money, are we to assume that, if
she objects, he will aid her suitor in abducting her 1 Though not
traitorous, it would however, be spiritless and base to favour
annexation to a foreign nation while it maintained a bullying or
threatening attitude to the Empire or Canada. It is a characteristic
of curs to fawn upon their persecutors and to lick the hands that
smite them.

# * # # # #

In the same article Mr. Longley says : — '* Whether my moral
instincts be right or wrong, I propose to be guided solely by ray
conceptions of the best interests of Canada." !Now though a
Canadian's main consideration should be the interests of Canada,
surely he should not be guided solely by them. He should be
capable of feeling a wider patriotism, and he should not brush
aside the obligations of honour or gratitude. Being a citizen of
the British Empire, as well as a Canadian, he should not ignore
the interests of that empire, and he should have some regard for
the welfare of his race and of mankind. But I am glad to perceive
that* Mr. Longley's moral instincts are much better than he repre-
sents them to be, for he makes his imaginary advocate of annex-
ation show a proper concern for the interests of the motherland
and the English-speaking race : —

" In so doing we shall be rendering the greatest service in our

*Mr. Longley's imperial patriotism would seem to have been steadily grow-
ing warmer since he first turned his thoughts to the future of Canada. It is an
open secret that the spirited editorial in the Halifax Morning Chronicle which
was promptly evoked by Mr. Cleveland's Venezuelan Message was from Mr.
Longley's pen. A large part of this article is approvingly quoted in one of the
pamphlets issued by the Imperial Federation Defence Committee.

FOR CLOSER UNION.

power to the grcnt nation to which wo now belong and to which
we are bound by so many ties of honour and aflfection. To the
great English-speaking communities which have sprung from her
loins, Great Britain must look for her allies and supporters in her
great civilizing mission in the world. The only cause of friction
between Britain and her greatest otFspring is Canada. The petty
di8[)utes about lish(!ries, seals, canals, railways and bonding
privileges are the sole remaining hindrance to an absolutely friendly
alliance. Let us then with Britain's consent seek an equal alliance
with our separated brothers and make our changed allegiance the
occasion of a treaty of perpetual friendship and mutual defence
between the two great nations of the English race."

From " Scraps and Snaps," in The Dominion Illustrated Monthly for 1892, p. 681.

It was of a knight enamoured of his liege lord's wife that
Tennyson wrote,

" HU honour rooted in dishonour stood
And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true."

But the poet's oxymoron can be applied with equal aptness to
thousands of political partisans whose allegiance to their party is
stronger than their patriotism ; and who are ready to sacrifice their
free will and principles rather than " desert " their leader. Some
of these gentry glory in their shame. I have heard a rather noisy
champion of the " national policy " announce before several
witnesses that if Sir Charles should declare for free trade he would
promptly follow him ; and by the by this =' stalwart " has had his
reward. The political atmosphere will be much healthier when it
is generally felt that the whole is worthy of more consideration
than any of its parts ; that loyalty to one's country is more
admirable than loyalty to one's party, that loyalty to Canada should
be paramount to loyalty to any single province, and that loyalty
to the British Empire — if we are to remain under its flag and its
protection — is more essential than loyalty to any parish or
constituency.

FOR CLOSER UNION.

From "Glimpses at Things," in The Week, Sept. 7, 1894.

The paper of mo.st interest to Canadians in the twenty-fifth
vohinie of the " Proceedings of the Koyal Colonial Institute," is
Sir Charles Tiipper's " Canada in relation to the unity of the
Empire." It was read before the Institute on the 8th of last May,
and, as will be remembered, evoked sharp criticisms, which are
fully reported in the volume now before me. At Sir Charles
Tupper's views on the subject have been pretty well advertised, I
shall devote my space chiefly to presenting the arguments of his
critics.

Sir -loiiN CoLOMB observed in the course of his remarks ; —
" There is a true and a false imperialism, and I say it is a false
imperialism for our great colonies to refuse to look their obligations
in the face. It means peril and disaster in the time of war. The
other point I wish to make is this— that if Canada were to join the
United States, ... or to become an independent nation, she
would have to pay for defence far more heavily than she does now.
Switzerland has a population of under three millions ; Canada has
a population of five millions ; Switzerland has a revenue of three
and three-quarter millions ; Canada has a revenue of seven and a
quarter millions ; on defence Switzerland pays £1,200,000 a year,
while Canada pays only £282,000 a year.

I pass the consideration of the Canadian Pacific Railway. I
admit that that was a great undertaking, for which Canada deserves
every credit. But who is going to defend that line in case Canada
is attacked by the United States ("Canadian troops.") Wh&t,
5,000,000 people alone against 60,000,000 1 Has the gentleman
studied war? I say that that railway has added to the responsi-
bilities of the Empire for an invading army getting possession

of it could domituite Canada from one end to the other

It is not by fine phrases and grand perorations that this empire
is to be preserved, but by facing the facts

Two portions of the Empire desire, and rightly desire, to im-
prove their communications, and with that view seek to establish
a cable and a mail route. Now, these portions of the Empire —

FOR CLOSER UNION. 51

Canada and Australasia — have an aggregate population equal to
that of Scotland, Ireland and Wales all put together, Thoy have
a revenue nearly equal to about one-half the total revenue of the
United Kingdom, and they have a sea-trade nearly double that of
Eussia. They come and ask us to find a considerable portion of
the money, and base their claim on the ground that the work would
contribute to the safety of the Empire in time of war. Now, a
cable and a sea-line cannot defend themselves, and I ask, does it
show hostility to inquire who is going to pay for the defence ?. . . .
We are asked to subsidise a line of fast mail steamers in oruer to
create a new line. But the reason we subsidise such steamers is
in order to take them off their routes when war breaks out — not to

keep them on the lines, but to take them off That being so,

away goes the theory that there will be this alternative route in

war I see nothing in the paper to recall to the minds of the

loyal people of Canada the fact that they have great im[)erial
duties to perform.'*

Mr. K. R. Dobbll, who generally agreed with the lecturer,
observed : — " I am glad Sir John Colomb v/ishes to strengthen
those bonds (between the colonies and Great Britain), because the
last occasion I heard him speak I thought there must have been
many Sir John Colombs when Great Britain lost the Colonies that
now form the United States."

This seems a little hard, considering that Sir John Colomb has
always been willing to couple imperial representation with all
taxation for imperial purposes. Towards the close of his s[)eech, Mr.
Dobell remarked : ''Never since the world's history began has there
been such an exam^jle of a country which hao expended blood and
treasure to establish and strengthen her colonies and then hand
the heirship of them over to the inhabitants. To Canada, Great
Britain handed over the fortresses and crown lands and all the
money she had expended for 100 years, without asking one penny
in return ; and quite recently she handed over to a mere handful
the colony of Western Australia — a country which may be valued
by millions. I would desire to crush and stamp out sentiments
such as those expressed by Sir John Colomb about the colonies

FOB CLOSER UNION.

not being prepared to do their utmost for the defence of this great
Empire. My own impression is that there is not a man in Canada
to-day who would not be prepared to spend liis life and fortune to
maintain the honour and dignity of this great Empire."

This confident outburst does credit to the heart of ^Ir. Dobell.
Yet Hon. Joseph Howe, who was quite as loyal and nearly as
sanguine as Mr. Dobell, agreed with Sir John Colomb that it was
true statesmanship for Britain to have a definite contract or com-
pact with her colonies and to cease leaning on presumptions.

in ;

r '

hi !

Among several other eminent men who took part in the
discussion at the Royal Colonial Institute was Mr. G. R Parkin,
the apostle of federation, who values the whole Empire more than
any part of it, and who has declined a safe nomination for the
Imperial Parliament that he may be able to fight more freely and
effectively for his great cause. " Now," he aiked, " why has the
Dominion been able to spend these immense si., us in the directions
indicated (on internal improvements) instead of giving a larger
part of it to military and naval defence 1 Because, in the good
course of Providence, she like other British colonies, was under
the protection of the mightiest power that ever held a shield over
a people, and which practically said, ' You need not spend your
money in preparing to fight ; we leave you free to develop your

enormous resources.' Incidently we have been doing our best

to build up the Empire. But the time must come when every
Canadian must ask, * How is our flag and our extending commerce
protected ? ' The question I have asked is ' Do you pretend that
we are not to take part in the defence of the Empire and pay for
the army and navy 1 ' and in almost every large (.'anadian town I
have declared that I would be ashamed of the name Canadian if
Ave were not willing to take the responsibility of our increasing
growth."

In his speech closing the debate Sir Charles Tupper* made this

•The record ot this gentleman in connection with the federation movement
is criticised in a pamphlet entitled " Sir Charles Tupper, Bart., and the Unifica-
tion of the Empire." (T.C.Allen & Co., Halifax, N. S., 1896. Price 10 cents.)
According to the pamphleteer, " it would not seem that Sir Charles remained
long In this quasi-repentant mood. In the Canadian Magazine for February,

FOR CLOSER UNION. 53

important oxplauation : " When I referred to tlie services Canada
lias rendered to tlie unity and strength of the Empire by various
measures taken since the confederation, I mentioned thoin not as
a full dischar'je of the, ohlUjations of Canada to the Empire, hut as
an earnest and as the best j^^'ssihle evilense of what she would be
prepared to do in the future." I have italicized these words the
better to disprove a cruel suspicion that Sir Charles was ])reparinfr,
for supjiosed party expediency, to betray the grandest cause he
ever espoused,

1896, he has an article extolling the past and present services of Canada to the
Empire, with never a hint as to her further obligations in the f ntiire. The
object of his article appears to be to kill the Imperial Federation Defence Com'
mittee— an offspring of the slain Imperial Federation Leagne. of too limited a
scope to fire imperial enthusiasm. The motto of those desiring to nnify the
Empire, in my humble opinion, should be ' thoroutrh '-fiill citizenship, full
obligations, full responsibilities, full representation, full rights, full privileges,
and full home rule for every federating partner."

In vievk'of the ungrateful vi^ay in which a few organ.: supporting Sir Charles
have lately scouted the idea of Canada's acknowlcdi,'ing any indebtedness
(except for favors to come) to the protecting mother-land, I will quote the
end of the aforesaid pamphlet :

"Sir Charles Tupper has proclaimed that his coming campaign will bo
fought (partly) for our Imperial interests. I could serve with more cntliusiasm
under some leader who had never worked, consciously or unconsciously
against the unification of the Empire— under a Howe (p(i7' excellence), or a
Macdonald, or a Thompson, or a Lauricr. But if Sir Charles Tupper has
repented in the eleventh hour; if he should appeal more to honour and justice
and patriotism than to penurious instincts ; if he should a'^ . ocate for \is a
square reciprocity of rights and obligations ; if his desire should be to enlarge
our issues, to broaden our thoughts, and to remove the millstone of provincial-
ism from the bowed neck of our intellectual progress ; if he should wish
Britons to confederate in the spirit of Howe and Haliburton, for the strengthen-
ing of the Empire and the attainment of full imperial citizenship by Canadians ;
if he should urge Canada to ask lOr imperial representation icith a fair imperial
contribution, and to claim a coordinate instead of a subordinate status ; then, if
his propaganda is opposed by the Liberal party, he shall have my voice and vote.
And further, if, as I do not anticipate myself, t the insular pride and conserva-

t There is doubtless a large section of the Conservative party in England
which would object to the United Kingdom resigning its chieftainship in the
Empire by sharing with the colonies the control of the imperial establishments
and policy. But if the great colonies asked for full partnership, that section, I
believe, would be overpowered. It would be opposed by the more progressive
portion of the Conservative party and by practically all the Liberals. It was
the supposed indifference of the (till lately unaroused) colonies that caused the
apparent reluctance of most Englishmen to pronounce for the unification of the
Empire. Mr. Ijabouchere, who has always pooh-poohed imperial federation,
observes (writing as "Scrutator" in Truth, November 14th, 1895): "In this
country there are many who would strengthen the tie that binds our colonies to
us. In the colonies there are none. An Australian, for instance, looks at the
matter from an Australian standpoint, and he would be a fool if ho did not. As
things stand, he has the best of the bargain."

III

FOR CLOHEK UNION.

From "GliinpHCH at ThingH," in The Week, Jan. 4, 1895.

1 think it was in 1887, at tlio tinio- of tlio Queen's Jubilee,
that Senator Slierniun was rash enough to prophecy that in ten
years Canada would be represented either at Westminster or
Washington. It is still possible, however, that the Dominion may
express itself before the close of 1897 in favour of representation
(with its necessary adjuncts) in Congress or the Imperial Parlia-
ment. Senator Gallinger's unconventional, though not impolite,
invitation to Canada, may posssibly suggest to some British member
of Parliament to introduce a somewhat similar resolution, offering
full partnershii) in the Empire to Canada and the other great
Colonies. Some such offer is likely to be made if Home Rule
should ever be given to Ireland, Scotland, and England. * * The
Parliament at Westminster being then a purely Imperial Legisla-
ture, and being relieved of most of its present business, would be
better prepared to receive colonial representatives. And the
autonomous realms of Ireland and Scotland being represented in
the Imperial Parliament, and contributing to the Imperial establish-
ments, would bring into bolder relief the fact that other realms of
the Empire, ecj^ually great and equally autonomous, were not so
represented and did not so contribute, d ustice, manliness, security
anil education demand that Canada should soon cease to be a
subordinate and become either a co-ordinate or an independent
state ; and I should, therefore, like to see her deciding, earnestly
but peacefully, between the rival invitations of her mother and her
cousins, whether tiiese invitations be formally or informally made,
or whether they be expressed or merely understood.

tism of Great Britain shonld hesitate to give lis full representation at West-
minster. I will light ill the ranks of Sir Chai'lcs against that insular pride and
conservatism.

But if Sir Charles is only going to strain our relations with the mother
country by trying tc dictate a selttsh policy which free-trade Britain must
refuse, unless she sacrifices her principles to her affection ; if ho proposes an
unattainable arrangement, to rally his divided followers and win the votes of
unreflecting loyalists ; if he asks Canada to apply informd pauperis, for admis-
sion to a mongrel federation ; if he is merely mouthing phrases about the unity
of our grand Empire while ready to stab, as heretofore, sincerer patriots who
dissent from his stingy and parasitic imperialism ; then all true loyalists should
stand by the party whose British policy invites and encourages British trade."

FOR CLOSER UNIOK.

From Imperial Fcdcrotion, October, 1892.

"SAM SLICK" AS A PROPHET.

In an article upon Thomas Chandlor llaliburton, that appeared
a few months ago in the Aflantic Month///, Mr. F. lUake Crofton
(vvliose name as a writer is not unknown to reaiUn-s of this Journal)
recalled some extremely interesting particulars concerning
Haliburton's feelings on the colonial question and his anticipation
of a reat deal that has to bo taught people over again with painful
iteration, after the lapse of all but half a century since the [)ubli-
cation of " Sam Slick." Mr. Blake Crofton says :— " Haliburton
fretted under the cramping influence of belonging to an unrepre-
sented dependency of the ]iritish Emi)ire. He has compared the
colonies to ponds which rear frogs, but want only outlets and in-
lets to become lakes and produce fine Hsh. He observed that the
stanzas of Gray's Elegy beginning, ' Perhaps in this neglected spot
is laid,' might be aptly inscribed over the gate of any colonial
cemetery ; for to those who rested there, as completely as to the
peasants who slept in the church-yard at Stoke Poges, ' their lot
forbade ' either to * sway the rod of emjjire,' or to ' read their
history in a nation^s eyes.'

" It is a curious coincidence," he continues, " that his ablest
depredator, Professor Felton, of Harvard College, shared
Haliburton's views on this subject. In his review of • The
Attache,' in the North American Bevieiv for January, 1844, Felton
attributed what he terms .' the antiquated political absurdities ' of
the judge to * the belitting effects of the colonial system on
the intellects of colonists.' ' A full and complete national
existence,' added the Harvard professor, ' is requisite to the form-
ation of a manly, intellectual character. What great work of
literature or art has the colonial mind ever produced 1 What free,
creative action of genius can take place under the withering sense
of inferiority that a distant dependency of a great Empire can
never escape from 1 Any consciousness of nationality, however
humble the nation may be, is preferable to the second-hand
nationality of a colony of the mightiest Emi)ire that ever flourished.

FOR CLOSER UNI()I«J.

:/r

i'rf

m ■

it :

The intense national i)ri(le wliicli acts so forcibly in the United
States is soinotliing vastly better than the intellectual jjaralysis
that (leadens the energies of men in the British North American
Provinces.'

"To give (Canadians full national life, with its wider horizon
and more stimulating intellectual envirotnnent, Haliburton proposed
an imperial federation, in which his country should be a full
partner. The words 'Colonies' and ' l)ei)endencies,' he urged,
should be disused ; all the Britisli possessions should be ' integral
parts of one great whole.' He thought the time was already at
hand when 'the treatment of adults should supersede that of
children' in the case of colonies possessing resi)onsil)le government
Hut he was not of those who want to obtain all the i)rivileges of
manhood, and to shirk its obligations and responsibilities. He did
not clamour for the right to make treaties and have them enforced
by the imperial services without offering something in return.
He did not desire representation without taxation, as some
parasitic colonists do to-day. He wanted to see Britons and
colonists ' united as one people, having the same rights and
privileges, each bearing a share of the public burdens, and all
having a voice in the general g(wernment.' Professor Drumnioml
has strikingly described the deterioration of the hermit-crab
resulting from its habitually evading the natural responsibility of
self-defence. Haliburton evidently feared an analogous fate for a
nation permanently evading the same responsibility ; and he tried
sarcasm as well as argument to rouse his countrymen from their
ignoble content. ' Don't use that word " ours " till you are
entitled to it,' said the clockmaker. ' Be formal and everlastin'
polite Say " your " empire, " your " army, etc., and never strut
under borrowed i)lames.'

" But Haliburton advociited imi)crial federation not only to
improve the status of the colonies, but also to strengthen the
Empire, which, in its present state, he aptly likened to a barrel
without hoops, and to a bundle of sticks, which must either be
bound together more securely or else fall apart "

The Atlantic article which is quoted above contained also the
following paragraph : — " If Haliburton hoped to see the British

FOR CLOSER UNION.

Empire federated and made what Professor Hosiiier gracefully
calls a great world-Venice, through which indeed the seas shall
flow, — to unite, however, not to divide, — he anticipated Professor
Hosmer's belief that this federation would probably lead to a
greater fraternity between the two great English-speaking powers.
He did not fear, like Mr. Andrew Carnegie, that imperial federa-
tion would arouse an implacable jealousy in the United States, but
rather trusted ^.lat the increasing grandeur of both powers might
enlarge their mutual respect and the jtrideof each in their common
race. Indeed, Haliburton's imagination had conceived the very
grandest of all the schemes propounded for the welfare and civili-
zation of mankind, — an Anglo-American union or alliance, " dnmi-
nating the world and dictating peace to the too heavily armed
nations."

" Now we are two great nations," observed Sam Slick in
" Wise Saws," " the greatest by a long chalk of any in the world —
speak the same language, have the same religion, and our constitu-
tions don't differ no great odds. We ought to draw closer than we
ilo. We are big enough, equal enough, and strong en(jugh not to
be jealous of each other. United, we are more nor a match for
all the other nations put together, and can defy tiieir fleets, armies
and millions. Single, we couldn't stand against all, and if one
was to fall, where would the other be ? Mournin' over the grave
that covers a relative whose place can never be filled. It is
authors of silly books, editors of silly papers, and demagogues of
silly parties that lielps to estrange us. I wish there was a gibbet
high enough and strong enough to hang up all these enemies of
mankind on."