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
Never was man better fitted for his work. He came, a Scotsman, to a
colony one-third Scottish, and the name of Bruce was itself soporific
to the opposition of a perfervid section of the reformers. His wife
was the daughter of Lord Durham, whom Canadians regarded as the
beginner of a new age of Canadian constitutionalism. He had been
appointed by a Whig Government, and Earl Grey, the new Colonial
Secretary, was already learned in liberal theory, both in politics and
economics, and understood that Britons, abroad as at home, {191} must
have liberty to misgovern themselves. Elgin's personal qualities were
precisely those best fitted to control a self-governing community. Not
only was he saved from extreme views by his caution and sense of
humour, but he had, to an extraordinary degree, the power of seeing
both sides, and more especially the other side, of any question. In
Canada too, as later in China and India, he exhibited qualities of
humanity which some might term quixotic;[2] and, as will be illustrated
very fully below, his gifts of tact and _bonhomie_ made him a
singularly persuasive force in international affairs, and secured for
Britain at least one clear diplomatic victory over America.
Following on a succession of short-lived and troubled governorships,
under which, while the principle of government had remained constant,
nothing else had done so, Elgin had practically to begin Durham's work
afresh, and build without much regard for the foundations laid since
1841. The alternatives before him were a grant of really responsible
government, or a rebellion, with annexation to the United States as its
probable end. The {192} new Governor saw very clearly the dangers of
his predecessor's policy. "The distinction," he wrote at a later date,
"between Lord Metcalfe's policy and mine is twofold. In the first
place he profoundly distrusted the whole Liberal party in the
province--that great party which, excepting at extraordinary
conjunctures, has always carried with it the mass of the
constituencies. He believed its designs to be revolutionary, just as
the Tory party in England believed those of the Whigs and Reformers to
be in 1832. And, secondly, he imagined that when circumstances forced
the party upon him, he could check these revolutionary tendencies by
manifesting his distrust of them, more especially in the matter of the
distribution of patronage, thereby relieving them in a great measure
from that responsibility, which is in all free countries the most
effectual security against the abuse of power, and tempting them to
endeavour to combine the role of popular tribunes with the prestige of
ministers of the crown."[3]
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