Unkown - "The Jargon File, Version 4.0.0*"

Edgar Allan Poe - "The Works of Edgar Allan Poe Volume 5 of the Raven Edition"

Grover Cleveland - "State of the Union Addresses of Grover Cleveland"

William Shakespeare - "The Merry Wiues of Windsor"

North America

A >> Anthony Trollope >> North America




The argument is, I think, very good; but it proves not that we are
relieved from the necessity of assisting our colonies with payments
made out of British taxes, but that we are still bound to give such
assistance, and that we shall continue to be so bound as long as we
allow these colonies to adhere to us or as they allow us to adhere
to them. In fact, the young bird is not yet fully fledged. That
illustration of the father and the child is a just one, but in
order to make it just it should be followed throughout. When the
son is in fact established on his own bottom, then the father
expects that he will live without assistance. But when the son
does so live, he is freed from all paternal control. The father,
while he expects to be obeyed, continues to fill the paternal
office of paymaster--of paymaster, at any rate, to some extent.
And so, I think, it must be with our colonies. The Canadas at
present are not independent, and have not political power of their
own apart from the political power of Great Britain. England has
declared herself neutral as regards the Northern and Southern
States, and by that neutrality the Canadas are bound; and yet the
Canadas were not consulted in the matter. Should England go to war
with France, Canada must close her ports against French vessels.
If England chooses to send her troops to Canadian barracks, Canada
cannot refuse to accept them. If England should send to Canada an
unpopular governor, Canada has no power to reject his services. As
long as Canada is a colony so called, she cannot be independent,
and should not be expected to walk alone. It is exactly the same
with the colonies of Australia, with New Zealand, with the Cape of
Good Hope, and with Jamaica. While England enjoys the prestige of
her colonies, while she boasts that such large and now populous
territories are her dependencies, she must and should be content to
pay some portion of the bill. Surely it is absurd on our part to
quarrel with Caffre warfare, with New Zealand fighting, and the
rest of it. Such complaints remind one of an ancient pater
familias who insists on having his children and his grandchildren
under the old paternal roof, and then grumbles because the
butcher's bill is high. Those who will keep large households and
bountiful tables should not be afraid of facing the butcher's bill
or unhappy at the tonnage of the coal. It is a grand thing, that
power of keeping a large table; but it ceases to be grand when the
items heaped upon it cause inward groans and outward moodiness.

Why should the colonies remain true to us as children are true to
their parents, if we grudge them the assistance which is due to a
child? They raise their own taxes, it is said, and administer
them. True; and it is well that the growing son should do
something for himself. While the father does all for him, the
son's labor belongs to the father. Then comes a middle state in
which the son does much for himself, but not all. In that middle
state now stand our prosperous colonies. Then comes the time when
the son shall stand alone by his own strength; and to that period
of manly, self-respected strength let us all hope that those
colonies are advancing. It is very hard for a mother country to
know when such a time has come; and hard also for the child-colony
to recognize justly the period of its own maturity. Whether or no
such severance may ever take place without a quarrel, without
weakness on one side and pride on the other, is a problem in the
world's history yet to be solved. The most successful child that
ever yet has gone off from a successful parent, and taken its own
path into the world, is without doubt the nation of the United
States. Their present troubles are the result and the proofs of
their success. The people that were too great to be dependent on
any nation have now spread till they are themselves too great for a
single nationality. No one now thinks that that daughter should
have remained longer subject to her mother. But the severance was
not made in amity, and the shrill notes of the old family quarrel
are still sometimes heard across the waters.

From all this the question arises whether that problem may ever be
solved with reference to the Canadas. That it will never be their
destiny to join themselves to the States of the Union, I feel fully
convinced. In the first place it is becoming evident from the
present circumstances of the Union, if it had never been made
evident by history before, that different people with different
habits, living at long distances from each other, cannot well be
brought together on equal terms under one government. That noble
ambition of the Americans that all the continent north of the
isthmus should be united under one flag, has already been thrown
from its saddle. The North and South are virtually separated, and
the day will come in which the West also will secede. As
population increases and trades arise peculiar to those different
climates, the interests of the people will differ, and a new
secession will take place beneficial alike to both parties. If
this be so, if even there be any tendency this way, it affords the
strongest argument against the probability of any future annexation
of the Canadas. And then, in the second place, the feeling of
Canada is not American, but British. If ever she be separated from
Great Britain, she will be separated as the States were separated.
She will desire to stand alone, and to enter herself as one among
the nations of the earth.

She will desire to stand alone; alone, that is without dependence
either on England or on the States. But she is so circumstanced
geographically that she can never stand alone without amalgamation
with our other North American provinces. She has an outlet to the
sea at the Gulf of St. Lawrence, but it is only a summer outlet.
Her winter outlet is by railway through the States, and no other
winter outlet is possible for her except through the sister
provinces. Before Canada can be nationally great, the line of
railway which now runs for some hundred miles below Quebec to
Riviere du Loup must be continued on through New Brunswick and Nova
Scotia to the port of Halifax.

When I was in Canada I heard the question discussed of a federal
government between the provinces of the two Canadas, New Brunswick,
and Nova Scotia. To these were added, or not added, according to
the opinion of those who spoke, the smaller outlying colonies of
Newfoundland and Prince Edward's Island. If a scheme for such a
government were projected in Downing Street, all would no doubt be
included, and a clean sweep would be made without difficulty. But
the project as made in the colonies appears in different guises, as
it comes either from Canada or from one of the other provinces.
The Canadian idea would be that the two Canadas should form two
States of such a confederation, and the other provinces a third
State. But this slight participation in power would hardly suit
the views of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. In speaking of such a
federal government as this, I shall of course be understood as
meaning a confederation acting in connection with a British
governor, and dependent upon Great Britain as far as the different
colonies are now dependent.

I cannot but think that such a confederation might be formed with
great advantage to all the colonies and to Great Britain. At
present the Canadas are in effect almost more distant from Nova
Scotia and New Brunswick than they are from England. The
intercourse between them is very slight--so slight that it may
almost be said that there is no intercourse. A few men of science
or of political importance may from time to time make their way
from one colony into the other, but even this is not common.
Beyond that they seldom see each other. Though New Brunswick
borders both with Lower Canada and with Nova Scotia, thus making
one whole of the three colonies, there is neither railroad nor
stage conveyance running from one to the other. And yet their
interests should be similar. From geographical position their
modes of life must be alike, and a close conjunction between them
is essentially necessary to give British North America any
political importance in the world. There can be no such
conjunction, no amalgamation of interests, until a railway shall
have been made joining the Canada Grand Trunk Line with the two
outlying colonies. Upper Canada can feed all England with wheat,
and could do so without any aid of railway through the States, if a
railway were made from Quebec to Halifax. But then comes the
question of the cost. The Canada Grand Trunk is at the present
moment at the lowest ebb of commercial misfortune, and with such a
fact patent to the world, what company will come forward with funds
for making four or five hundred miles of railway, through a
district of which one-half is not yet prepared for population? It
would be, I imagine, out of the question that such a speculation
should for many years give any fair commercial interest on the
money to be expended. But nevertheless to the colonies--that is,
to the enormous regions of British North America--such a railroad
would be invaluable. Under such circumstances it is for the Home
Government and the colonies between them to see how such a measure
may be carried out. As a national expenditure, to be defrayed in
the course of years by the territories interested, the sum of money
required would be very small.

But how would this affect England? And how would England be
affected by a union of the British North American colonies under
one federal government? Before this question can be answered, he
who prepares to answer it must consider what interest England has
in her colonies, and for what purpose she holds them. Does she
hold them for profit, or for glory, or for power; or does she hold
them in order that she may carry out the duty which has devolved
upon her of extending civilization, freedom, and well-being through
the new uprising nations of the world? Does she hold them, in
fact, for her own benefit, or does she hold them for theirs? I
know nothing of the ethics of the Colonial Office, and not much
perhaps of those of the House of Commons; but looking at what Great
Britain has hitherto done in the way of colonization, I cannot but
think that the national ambition looks to the welfare of the
colonists, and not to home aggrandizement. That the two may run
together is most probable. Indeed, there can be no glory to a
people so great or so readily recognized by mankind at large as
that of spreading civilization from east to west and from north to
south. But the one object should be the prosperity of the
colonists, and not profit, nor glory, nor even power, to the parent
country.

There is no virtue of which more has been said and sung than
patriotism, and none which, when pure and true, has led to finer
results. Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori. To live for one's
country also is a very beautiful and proper thing. But if we
examine closely much patriotism, that is so called, we shall find
it going hand in hand with a good deal that is selfish, and with
not a little that is devilish. It was some fine fury of patriotic
feeling which enabled the national poet to put into the mouth of
every Englishman that horrible prayer with regard to our enemies
which we sing when we wish to do honor to our sovereign. It did
not seem to him that it might be well to pray that their hearts
should be softened, and our own hearts softened also. National
success was all that a patriotic poet could desire, and therefore
in our national hymn have we gone on imploring the Lord to arise
and scatter our enemies; to confound their politics, whether they
be good or ill; and to expose their knavish tricks--such knavish
tricks being taken for granted. And then, with a steady
confidence, we used to declare how certain we were that we should
achieve all that was desirable, not exactly by trusting to our
prayer to heaven, but by relying almost exclusively on George the
Third or George the Fourth. Now I have always thought that that
was rather a poor patriotism. Luckily for us, our national conduct
has not squared itself with our national anthem. Any patriotism
must be poor which desires glory, or even profit, for a few at the
expense of the many, even though the few be brothers and the many
aliens. As a rule, patriotism is a virtue only because man's
aptitude for good is so finite that he cannot see and comprehend a
wider humanity. He can hardly bring himself to understand that
salvation should be extended to Jew and Gentile alike. The word
philanthropy has become odious, and I would fain not use it; but
the thing itself is as much higher than patriotism as heaven is
above the earth.

A wish that British North America should ever be severed from
England, or that the Australian colonies should ever be so severed,
will by many Englishmen be deemed unpatriotic. But I think that
such severance is to be wished if it be the case that the colonies
standing alone would become more prosperous than they are under
British rule. We have before us an example in the United States of
the prosperity which has attended such a rupture of old ties. I
will not now contest the point with those who say that the present
moment of an American civil war is ill chosen for vaunting that
prosperity. There stand the cities which the people have built,
and their power is attested by the world-wide importance of their
present contest. And if the States have so risen since they left
their parent's apron-string, why should not British North America
rise as high? That the time has as yet come for such rising I do
not think; but that it will soon come I do most heartily hope. The
making of the railway of which I have spoken, and the amalgamation
of the provinces would greatly tend to such an event. If
therefore, England desires to keep these colonies in a state of
dependency; if it be more essential to her to maintain her own
power with regard to them than to increase their influence; if her
main object be to keep the colonies and not to improve the
colonies, then I should say that an amalgamation of the Canadas
with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick should not be regarded with
favor by statesmen in Downing Street. But if, as I would fain
hope, and do partly believe, such ideas of national power as these
are now out of vogue with British statesmen, then I think that such
an amalgamation should receive all the support which Downing Street
can give it.

The United States severed themselves from Great Britain with a
great struggle, and after heart-burnings and bloodshed. Whether
Great Britain will ever allow any colony of hers to depart from out
of her nest, to secede and start for herself, without any struggle
or heart-burnings, with all furtherance for such purpose which an
old and powerful country can give to a new nationality then first
taking its own place in the world's arena, is a problem yet to be
solved. There is, I think, no more beautiful sight than that of a
mother, still in all the glory of womanhood, preparing the wedding
trousseau for her daughter. The child hitherto has been obedient
and submissive. She has been one of a household in which she has
held no command. She has sat at table as a child, fitting herself
in all things to the behests of others. But the day of her power
and her glory, and also of her cares and solicitude, is at hand.
She is to go forth, and do as she best may in the world under that
teaching which her old home has given her. The hour of separation
has come; and the mother, smiling through her tears, sends her
forth decked with a bounteous hand, and furnished with full stores,
so that all may be well with her as she enters on her new duties.
So is it that England should send forth her daughters. They should
not escape from her arms with shrill screams and bleeding wounds,
with ill-omened words which live so long, though the speakers of
them lie cold in their graves.

But this sending forth of a child-nation to take its own political
status in the world has never yet been done by Great Britain. I
cannot remember that such has ever been done by any great power
with reference to its dependency; by any power that was powerful
enough to keep such dependency within its grasp. But a man
thinking on these matters cannot but hope that a time will come
when such amicable severance may be effected. Great Britain cannot
think that through all coming ages she is to be the mistress of the
vast continent of Australia, lying on the other side of the globe's
surface; that she is to be the mistress of all South Africa, as
civilization shall extend northward; that the enormous territories
of British North America are to be subject forever to a veto from
Downing Street. If the history of past empires does not teach her
that this may not be so, at least the history of the United States
might so teach her. "But we have learned a lesson from those
United States," the patriot will argue who dares to hope that the
glory and extent of the British empire may remain unimpaired in
saecula saeculorum. "Since that day we have given political rights
to our colonies, and have satisfied the political longings of their
inhabitants. We do not tax their tea and stamps, but leave it to
them to tax themselves as they may please." True. But in
political aspirations the giving of an inch has ever created the
desire for an ell. If the Australian colonies even now, with their
scanty population and still young civilization, chafe against
imperial interference, will they submit to it when they feel within
their veins all the full blood of political manhood? What is the
cry even of the Canadians--of the Canadians who are thoroughly
loyal to England? Send us a faineant governor, a King Log, who
will not presume to interfere with us; a governor who will spend
his money and live like a gentleman, and care little or nothing for
politics. That is the Canadian beau ideal of a governor. They are
to govern themselves; and he who comes to them from England is to
sit among them as the silent representative of England's
protection. If that be true--and I do not think that any who know
the Canadas will deny it--must it not be presumed that they will
soon also desire a faineant minister in Downing Street? Of course
they will so desire. Men do not become milder in their aspirations
for political power the more that political power is extended to
them. Nor would it be well that they should be so humble in their
desires. Nations devoid of political power have never risen high
in the world's esteem. Even when they have been commercially
successful, commerce has not brought to them the greatness which it
has always given when joined with a strong political existence.
The Greeks are commercially rich and active; but "Greece" and
"Greek" are bywords now for all that is mean. Cuba is a colony,
and putting aside the cities of the States, the Havana is the
richest town on the other side of the Atlantic, and commercially
the greatest; but the political villainy of Cuba, her daily
importation of slaves, her breaches of treaty, and the bribery of
her all but royal governor, are known to all men. But Canada is
not dishonest; Canada is no byword for anything evil; Canada eats
her own bread in the sweat of her brow, and fears a bad word from
no man. True. But why does New York, with its suburbs boast a
million of inhabitants, while Montreal has 85,000? Why has that
babe in years, Chicago, 120,000, while Toronto has not half the
number? I do not say that Montreal and Toronto should have gone
ahead abreast with New York and Chicago. In such races one must be
first, and one last. But I do say that the Canadian towns will
have no equal chance till they are actuated by that feeling of
political independence which has created the growth of the towns in
the United States.

I do not think that the time has yet come in which Great Britain
should desire the Canadians to start for themselves. There is the
making of that railroad to be effected, and something done toward
the union of those provinces. Canada could no more stand alone
without New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, than could those latter
colonies without Canada. But I think it would be well to be
prepared for such a coming day; and that it would at any rate be
well to bring home to ourselves and realize the idea of such
secession on the part of our colonies, when the time shall have
come at which such secession may be carried out with profit and
security to them. Great Britain, should she ever send forth her
child alone into the world, must of course guarantee her security.
Such guarantees are given by treaties; and, in the wording of them,
it is presumed that such treaties will last forever. It will be
argued that in starting British North America as a political power
on its own bottom, we should bind ourself to all the expense of its
defense, while we should give up all right to any interference in
its concerns; and that, from a state of things so unprofitable as
this, there would be no prospect of a deliverance. But such
treaties, let them be worded how they will, do not last forever.
For a time, no doubt, Great Britain would be so hampered--if indeed
she would feel herself hampered by extending her name and prestige
to a country bound to her by ties such as those which would then
exist between her and this new nation. Such treaties are not
everlasting, nor can they be made to last even for ages. Those who
word them seem to think that powers and dynasties will never pass
away. But they do pass away, and the balance of power will not
keep itself fixed forever on the same pivot. The time may come--
that it may not come soon we will all desire--but the time may come
when the name and prestige of what we call British North America
will be as serviceable to Great Britain as those of Great Britain
are now serviceable to her colonies.

But what shall be the new form of government for the new kingdom?
That is a speculation very interesting to a politician, though one
which to follow out at great length in these early days would be
rather premature. That it should be a kingdom--that the political
arrangement should be one of which a crowned hereditary king should
form part--nineteen out of every twenty Englishmen would desire;
and, as I fancy, so would also nineteen out of every twenty
Canadians. A king for the United States, when they first
established themselves, was impossible. A total rupture from the
Old World and all its habits was necessary for them. The name of a
king, or monarch, or sovereign had become horrible to their ears.
Even to this day they have not learned the difference between
arbitrary power retained in the hand of one man, such as that now
held by the Emperor over the French, and such hereditary headship
in the State as that which belongs to the Crown in Great Britain.
And this was necessary, seeing that their division from us was
effected by strife, and carried out with war and bitter
animosities. In those days also there was a remnant, though but a
small remnant, of the power of tyranny left within the scope of the
British Crown. That small remnant has been removed; and to me it
seems that no form of existing government, no form of government
that ever did exist, gives or has given so large a measure of
individual freedom to all who live under it as a constitutional
monarchy in which the Crown is divested of direct political power.

I will venture then to suggest a king for this new nation; and,
seeing that we are rich in princes, there need be no difficulty in
the selection. Would it not be beautiful to see a new nation
established under such auspices, and to establish a people to whom
their independence had been given, to whom it had been freely
surrendered as soon as they were capable of holding the position
assigned to them!



CHAPTER VII.

NIAGARA.


Of all the sights on this earth of ours which tourists travel to
see--at least of all those which I have seen--I am inclined to give
the palm to the Falls of Niagara. In the catalogue of such sights
I intend to include all buildings, pictures, statues, and wonders
of art made by men's hands, and also all beauties of nature
prepared by the Creator for the delight of his creatures. This is
a long word; but, as far as my taste and judgment go, it is
justified. I know no other one thing so beautiful, so glorious,
and so powerful. I would not by this be understood as saying that
a traveler wishing to do the best with his time should first of all
places seek Niagara. In visiting Florence he may learn almost all
that modern art can teach. At Rome he will be brought to
understand the cold hearts, correct eyes, and cruel ambition of the
old Latin race. In Switzerland he will surround himself with a
flood of grandeur and loveliness, and fill himself, if he be
capable of such filling, with a flood of romance. The tropics will
unfold to him all that vegetation in its greatest richness can
produce. In Paris he will find the supreme of polish, the ne plus
ultra of varnish according to the world's capability of varnishing.
And in London he will find the supreme of power, the ne plus ultra
of work according to the world's capability of working. Any one of
such journeys may be more valuable to a man--nay, any one such
journey must be more valuable to a man--than a visit to Niagara.
At Niagara there is that fall of waters alone. But that fall is
more graceful than Giotto's tower, more noble than the Apollo. The
peaks of the Alps are not so astounding in their solitude. The
valleys of the Blue Mountains in Jamaica are less green. The
finished glaze of life in Paris is less invariable; and the full
tide of trade round the Bank of England is not so inexorably
powerful.

Copyright (c) 2007. topbookz.net. All rights reserved.