Throughout this period he was not always on the side of Brown and the
Opposition stalwarts. On the important question of the tariff he
voted with the government. In 1858 Cayley had introduced a budget
with additions to existing duties. He was bending to the drift of
opinion in favour of protection for the juvenile industries of
Canada, and was also in search of increased revenue. Galt, who
became finance minister in 1858, was influenced by similar
considerations. He imposed duties of 20% and 25% on manufactured
goods, with the aim of seeking more public revenue and incidentally
providing protection to Canadian manufacturers. To George Brown and
his followers who had absorbed the free trade doctrines of British
liberalism Galt's protective principles were heresy. Brown's organ,
the Toronto _Globe_, thundered against them as pernicious. But
McGee, a frank protectionist, championed them as necessary for the
development of industrial as well as agrarian activity. "Where there
were no producing cities as well as consuming cities, there had been
no prosperity--the urban and the rural population must bear some
adequate proportion to each other before security and safety could be
established." This creed was similar to that preached in the same
period by Horace Greeley in the republic to the south. It has
continued since to have an influence on Canadian and American
statesmen.
In the four years that McGee sat on the opposition benches, the
gravest question facing the United Canadas was the fate of the union.
Largely on the recommendation of Lord Durham and Lord Sydenham, the
two provinces had been united in 1841. But, contrary to Durham's
intention, little attempt had been made to merge into one the two
peoples, the French of the lower province and the British of the
upper. Complete fusion was perhaps impossible. In any case it had
been made difficult by the provision of the Union Act that equal
representation should be conceded to each province. The two sections
of the country thus being recognized as distinct units, the members
of the legislature, as representatives of one or the other unit,
contended for sectional advantages. At the outset the population of
Lower Canada had been larger by 150,000, but in the passage of a few
years the situation was reversed. The Upper Canadian members now
became sensitive that their province was not receiving benefits
commensurate with their numbers. In George Brown they had an
eloquent and fearless advocate. In his opinion, the union was a
complete failure because it did not succeed in creating a united
people. In addition he considered that it upheld an injustice, for
it allowed one community to govern another more numerous. His case
was stated emphatically in the _Globe_ "It must be obvious to every
intelligent man that to accomplish the great ends contemplated by the
union, and to draw closer the bonds of sympathy uniting the people of
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account