British Supremacy & Canadian Self-Government, 1839-1854Morison, J. L. (John Lyle)
History
British Supremacy & Canadian Self-Government, 1839-1854
Morison, J. L. (John Lyle)
Canada -- Politics and government -- 1841-1867
He was far too clear-sighted to think that statesmanship consists in
decisions between very definitely stated alternatives of right and
wrong. "My choice," he wrote in characteristic words, "was not between
a clearly right and clearly wrong course--_how easy is it to deal with
such cases, and how rare are they in life_--but between several
difficulties. I think I chose the least."[38] His kindly, shrewd, and
honest countenance looks at us from his portraits with no appeal of
sentiment or pathos. He asked of men that which they find it most
difficult to give--moderation, common-sense, a willingness to look at
both sides, and to {228} subordinate their egoisms to a wider good; and
he was content to do without their worship.
It is now possible to summarize the movement towards autonomy so far as
it was affected by the governors-general of the transition period.
The characteristic note in the earlier stages had been the domination
of the governor-general's mind by a clear-cut theory--that of Lord John
Russell. That theory was in itself consistent, and of a piece with the
rest of the constitution; and its merits stood out more clearly because
Canadian progressives had an unfortunate faculty for setting themselves
in the wrong--making party really appear as faction, investing
self-government with something of the menace of independence, and
treating the responsibility they sought in the most irresponsible way.
The British theory, too, as guaranteeing a definitely British
predominance in Canada, brought into rather lurid relief the mistaken
fervour of French-Canadian nationalism.
Yet Sydenham, who never consciously, or at least openly, surrendered
one detail of the system entrusted to him by Russell, found events too
much for him; and that which conquered Sydenham's resolution made short
work of any resistance Bagot may have dreamed of offering. Metcalfe
was wrong {229} in suspecting a conscious intention in Sydenham's later
measures, but he was absolutely right when he wrote, "Lord Sydenham,
whether intending it or not, did concede Responsible Government
practically, by the arrangements which he adopted, although the full
extent of the concession was not so glaringly manifested during his
administration as in that of his successor."[39]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account