Document Information

Date: 1865-12-20
By: Ottawa Union
Citation: “Confederation”, The Ottawa Union (20 December, 1865)
Other formats: TBA

Confederation.

A late despatch from Mr. Cardwell, the Colonial Secretary, presents a new phase of the Confederation movement. The difficulty of negotiating for separate provinces with foreign countries in relation to trade, is made a reason for urging on confederation. This despatch is perhaps the most emphatic declaration we have had of the desire of the Imperial Government on the subject.

The tendency of Imperial policy for a few years past has been to lessen expenditure upon colonial dependencies. This policy has been pursued in Australia, New Zealand, and the East Indies. The giving up of the protectorate over the Ionian Islands was perhaps the first positive step towards curtailment of outer expenses.—The giving up even of Gibraltar was seriously proposed at one time. The Manchester School and the Goldwin Smith theorists have become a power in the mother country, and the same pressure which carried the Corn Laws reform is fast being brought to bear on the question of the Colonies. The great leading organ of public opinion in England the Times has become an extreme advocate of these views.

It is true that the conservative element deprecate the lopping off of the dependencies of the empire. The loss of such outposts as Malta and Gibraltar would inevitably reduce the power of control which Great Britain holds in the affairs of the world. Utilitarianism may reduce everything to a mere money standard, but those who desire the permanency and glory of the empire see with alarm a policy introduced and advocated, and gaining ground, which presages national decay. The greatest empires of the world first travelled towards ruin by abandoning their outer possessions and strongholds.

The advocacy of confederation in British America—the desire of English statesmen to throw the colonies upon self protection, and the anxiety displayed to urge on independence of Imperial control or assistance must inevitably lead to injurious results to the colonies and the empire.

The last arrival from England brings the news that the Times announces that England has no objection to extension of American territory either by Mexico or Canada provided it is done honestly and with the consent of the people. What must Canadians think of this? The conclusion must be forced upon us that the Manchester School and the Goldwin Smith School have secured the tacit consent of Mr. Cardwell to their schemes, theories, and speculations.

We have always held that the scheme of confederation tended in one direction, and that is towards the severance of the connection between this country and Great Britain. The logic of events and the passing train of circumstances point in that direction. The despatch of Mr. Cardwell and the article in the Times afford the strongest proofs of our position.

It is in this light that Confederation must be viewed. We contend that British America should exhibit no anxiety to advance the schemes of theorists. Great Britain desires that we shall decide for ourselves whether we shall set up a new nationality or remain as we are.—By accepting confederation we admit that we desire to stand alone and assume all responsibility. So far no province has decided in favor of separation. Canada alone by a corrupt combination of her politicians expresses her willingness to run the risks. Canada is the only country in which the people have been refused the opportunity to choose for themselves. A dozen ministers of diverse principles leagued together and backed by a majority in the legislature, who have not been elected upon any such issue, endeavour to force this scheme upon an unwilling people. We venture to say if the people were afforded an opportunity to decide, the scheme would be condemned. We trust that when His Excellency, the Governor General arrives from Europe his instructions will require that the people of Canada shall have an opportunity of deciding for themselves on the question of Confederation.