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 
 
 V] 
 
 vQ 
 
 7. 
 
 ^^? 
 
 
 7 
 
 >^ 
 
 
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. 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couvertures de couleur 
 
 □ 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 n 
 
 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/ 
 
 Ef 
 
 D 
 
 Planches en couleur 
 
 Show through/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires 
 
 Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques 
 
 n 
 
 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 
 
 n 
 
 Maps missing/ 
 
 Des cartes gdographiques manquent 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires 
 
) 
 
 ns 
 
 la 
 
 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 : 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 yggg^ 
 
I» • 
 
 
 'C^i^ ' I f<y^\^y^ 
 
 (^1 
 
 W Closer gnion. 
 
 F. Blake Crofton. 
 
 ( 
 
 1 
 
 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. 
 
 BY 
 
 / 
 
 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. 
 
 ^ 
 
1 
 
 \ 
 
 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 
 
IV 
 
 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 
 
8 
 
 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. 
 
 re 
 
 pe ■ 
 
 y 
 
 li- 
 
 ^e 
 
 16 
 
 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 
 
 I 
 
10 
 
 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. 
 
 11 
 
 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. 
 
f 
 
 12 
 
 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. 
 
 13 
 
 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 
 
nr 
 
 14 
 
 FOR CLOSER UNION. 
 
 Hi 
 
 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. 
 
 16 
 
 
 (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 
 
16 
 
 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. 
 
 17 
 
 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 
 
18 
 
 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. 
 
 19 
 
 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 
 
20 
 
 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*. 
 
 21 
 
 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 
 
22 
 
 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. 
 
 23 
 
 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. 
 
^ 
 
 24 
 
 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. 
 
 26 
 
 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 " 
 
If 
 
 il 
 
 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. 
 
 
 Ml 
 
 MBM 
 
FOR CLOSER UNION, 
 
 27 
 
 " 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." 
 
28 
 
 FOR CLOSER UNION. 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 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. 
 
 29 
 
 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. 
 
 81 
 
 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, 
 
32 
 
 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. 
 
 38 
 
 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 
 
84 
 
 FOK C'l.OHKB UNION. 
 
 1;! 
 
 r 
 
 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. 
 
 8S 
 
 ^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. 
 
 in 
 
9$ 
 
 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. 
 
 37 
 
 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 
 
38 
 
 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. 
 
 30 
 
 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 
 
40 
 
 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. 
 
w 
 
 42 
 
 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 
 
 m 
 

 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 ? 
 
 
 i. 
 
44 
 
 FOR CLOSER UNION. 
 
 i.Jil 
 
 m 
 
 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. 
 
 m 
 
 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 
 
46 
 
 FOB CLOSER UNION. 
 
 t| 
 
 ;; 
 
 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. 
 
48 
 
 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. 
 
 49 
 
 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. 
 
f 
 
 
 60 
 
 FOR CLOSER UNION. 
 
 W' 
 
 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 — 
 
 
 I! 
 

 
 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 
 
52 
 
 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 ; 
 
 t 
 
 I, 
 
 r ' 
 
 hi ! 
 
 h 
 
 t 
 
 'I 
 
 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." 
 
[f 
 
 III 
 
 64 
 
 FOR CLOHEK UNION. 
 
 1 
 
 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. 
 
 55 
 
 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. 
 
 a 
 
 :/r 
 
 IN 
 
 l: 
 
 Mi 
 
 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. 
 
 67 
 
 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."