Canada and the StatesWatkin, E. W. (Edward William), Sir
History
Canada and the States
Watkin, E. W. (Edward William), Sir
Canada -- Description and travel; Canada -- History; United States -- Description and travel
permanent occupation or conquest by any enemy who may attack it. It is
urged that Canada has an extended frontier; but are no other States
similarly placed in that respect? What country has the largest
frontier? What is the extent of our own frontier? Why, the whole coast
of the United Kingdom; and we might as well say that it would be
necessary for the security of this country that we should line our
whole coast with defensive works because we may be attacked at any
point of that great and extensive frontier. I maintain, therefore, that
there is nothing that has passed--nothing that is now passing--between
the Government of the United States and our Government which justifies
any man in saying that the relations between the two countries are
likely, as far as present circumstances go, to assume a character of
hostility leading to war. But, then, the hon. member for Birmingham
says that any danger which might threaten Canada and our North American
Provinces must arise from political disputes between England and the
United States. And, therefore, the hon. gentleman says the Canadians
will find that their best security is, not in fortifications or in
British support, but in separating themselves from Great Britain. Now,
in the first place, that happens not to be the wish or inclination of
the Canadians. The Canadians are most anxious to maintain the
connection with this country. They are proud of that connection; they
think it for their interest; they are willing to make every exertion
that their population and resources enable them to achieve, and, in
conjunction with the efforts of this country, to preserve that
connection, and prevent themselves from being absorbed by a
neighbouring power. Is it not, therefore, alike the duty and interest
of this country, for the sake of that reputation which is the power and
strength of a nation, when we find the Canadas and our other Provinces
desirous of maintaining the connection, to do that which we may have
the means of doing in assisting them to maintain that connection and
remain united with Great Britain? But, sir, is it true that the only
danger which a smaller colonial state runs from a more powerful and
larger neighbour arises from quarrels that may exist between the Mother
Country and the foreign state? I say that is a total fallacy. Suppose
these provinces separated from this country--suppose them erected into
a monarchy, a republic, or any other form, of Government, are there not
motives that might lead a stronger neighbour to pick a quarrel with
that smaller state with a view to its annexation? Is there nothing like
territorial ambition pervading the policy of great military states? The
example of the world should teach us that as far as the danger of
invasion and annexation is concerned, that danger would be increased to
Canada by a separation from Great Britain, and when she is deprived of
the protection that the military power and resources of this country
may afford.
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