Document Information

Date: 1865-10-20
By: True Witness
Citation: “No title”, True Witness (20 October, 1865)
Other formats: TBA

The Globe of the 9th instant admits that the Confederation scheme had, as the TRUE WITNESS of the 6th asserted, its origin, not in the external, but in the internal conditions of the country; that it was urged on and adopted not as a measure for defending the country against aggression from without, but solely with the design of settling the sectional difficulties within, betwixt Upper and Lower Canada.—This, says the Globe, is “what no one disputes”—in Canada at all events, and when the facts of the case are known.

How dishonest then must not he be who in England, and when addressing the people on the other side of the Atlantic where our parish difficulties have not been heard of, where the real facts of the case, the antecedents of Confederation, its objects and the aspirations of its promoters are all unknown, represents or represented it as a measure originating in the enthusiastic loyalty of the people of these Provinces, and as having for its primary object the military defence of British North America, and the maintenance of British connection. It is because of this dishonest attempt to enlist the sympathies of the people of England for Confederation by false pretences, by representing that measure and its object to them in an altogether false light, that they now, not unnaturally, look upon our undeniable apathy or indifference to Confederation as a proof of want of loyalty to the Crown, of our indifference to British connection, and of our readiness to link our fortunes with those of the United States. The moral injury done to Canada by the groundless falsehoods with respect to the origin and objects of the Confederation scheme industriously disseminated in England, is incalculable. To those untruths we are indebted for the sneers at Canadian loyalty in which the Times indulges at our expence; and not without good cause, were its premises founded on truth, and were we really indifferent to a measure that had its origin in motives of attachment to the British Crown, and for its objects the military defence of British North America, and the preservation of our connection with the British Empire.

The Globe adds that it despairs of effecting anything by an argument with one who, like the TRUE WITNESS, considers it just that in any Union of the two Canadas, three French Canadians should have the same political influence as four Upper Canadians. This, as an abstract proposition, the TRUE WITNESS has never maintained; but it has asserted the particular proposition that, since when Upper Canadians were in the minority, they laid down on their own behalf and reduced to practice the principle that three Upper Canadians should have the same political influence as four French Canadians—so to-day, when the order of population is reversed, they cannot complain if French Canadians insist upon applying to them the self same principle which they applied, a few years ago, to French Canadians. It may be, it is, no doubt, an unjust principle; its application to Lower Canada by the Upper Canadians was a piece of rascally dishonesty; but the latter have for ever forfeited all right to complain, if, even as they meted out to others, so also to-day it be meted out to them.

Finally, we would hint to the Globe that we have never insisted upon any kind of union with Upper Canada at all. It is Upper Canada that forces itself upon Lower Canada, whether the latter will or no. This entirely changes the aspect of the case; for we admit that it would be an injustice worthy even of Upper Canada, worthy of Liberals and Protestant Reformers, for the Lower Province to insist, first upon a union, and then to insist also that, under that Union, three of their section should have as much political influence as four of the other section.—This was how Upper Canada acted towards Lower Canada; it was conduct ungenerous, base, worthy of the reprobation of all honest men, and conduct therefore which we should regret to see imitated by Lower Canada. But we do contend, nevertheless, that if the Upper Province will persist in forcing itself upon us, if it will compel us to submit to its certainly not coveted embraces, by every law of natural justice we have the right to stipulate the conditions upon which we alone will submit to such an unloved Union. “Equality of Representation“—these are the terms upon which we will accept your proposals; accept these terms if you like, or reject them if it so pleases you to do so; we shall not break our hearts if the match be broken off to-morrow.