Document Information

Date: 1865-05-26
By: True Witness
Citation: “No title”, True Witness (26 May, 1865)
Other formats: TBA

The Globe, as organ of a member of the Cabinet, sings to a very different tune to that which it was of yore wont to whistle, when in the cold shades of the Opposition. Not that we believe in any change of heart, or disposition, but in change only of outward circumstances. So we have seen more than once your flaming patriot, breathing fire and fury against the oppressor, touched by the magic wand of office, subside into the most exemplary of loyal placemen.

The Globe is now, and long may it continue in its present vein—death upon Annexation. It refuses to listen to such a project; it will not condescend even to discuss it. Annexation, says the Globe, “is a word which should never be uttered by any Canadian except with contempt and aversion.” For once we can with a good conscience respond Amen, even to the Globe.

For what do men propose to themselves by Annexation to the neighboring Republic? They can indeed annex its political troubles, its debt, its financial burdens, its heart burnings, its present despotism, and its future anarchy; but can they annex its soil, its climate, its more favorable material conditions? And unless they can do the latter, of what profit, even from the most sordid point of view, would be a political annexation?

If indeed the greater material prosperity of the United States over Canada could in any degree be attributed to some moral or political advantages which the United States enjoy, which their peculiar form of Government bestows upon them, and which might be expected to accrue to Canada, were the latter to assimilate its social and political conditions to those of its Southern neighbor, we could understand the meaning and the object of a Canadian cry for Annexation.—But every one knows that any material advantages of which the United States can boast, are due exclusively to the superior climatic, and the other physical, conditions of that portion of this Continent; and just as compared with regions further North, and situated towards the Arctic Ocean, Canada deserves to be spoken of as a terrestrial Paradise; so as compared with countries in lower latitudes, blest with a more, genial clime, strangers to our long dreary winters, and with a soil more bountifully endowed by nature, rich in coal above all things, and in the other elements of wealth, and of material greatness, Canada must necessarily appear to great disadvantage.

Except under very extraordinary and exceptional circumstances, we believe that the material prosperity of a country depends but little, very little, on its form of government, or its political institutions. As every man’s real happiness in this world depends more upon himself, more upon his own good conduct, his industry, sobriety, and economy, than upon his external conditions, so we believe that with communities it is only by the exertions of the individuals of which they are made up, that the resources of the country which they inhabit can be developed and put to profit. Government can do but little; and it perhaps does best then when it does least, when it refrains from all interference, and gives greatest scope to individual energy. In a country like our’s, to be let alone by Government is the summum bonum; and the colonist who attributes his want of success and bad crops to the Government, which will not do this, or which will not do that, is in nine cases out of ten a good for nothing, helpless creature, whom no government could help even if it would, whom it would not be worth while to help even were it in the power of government to help him. In short, as a general rule, the less a government governs, the better; and surely it cannot be denied that the government of Canada under Queen Victoria, leaves as much scope to individual energy and intelligence, as does that of Andy Johson. Wherein then even in a material point of view could we gain by Annexation? What would be the effect in a moral point of view it is easy to see, and the spectacle is most appalling.

We say then with respect to Annexation what we have often said with respect to the Ministerial scheme of Confederation: That therein we cannot perceive any remedy for the disadvantages under which we labor, and which must be attributed, not to anything in our political condition, but exclusively to the climatic accidents of the country. Deficient harvests, a small return for toil expended on the land, and seed sown, and the difficulty, owing to our long, interminable winters of keeping in good condition a sufficient quantity of live stock on the farm, to furnish a sufficiency of manure for the crops — these in ultimate analysis are the causes of the stagnation of trade, and general impoverishment of the country, of which certain croakers complain, and cite as an argument in favor of organic political changes. But never do they condescend to explain how such changes would apply a remedy to the evil complained of; how for instance Confederation would increase the fertility of our wheat lands; how Annexation would supply the want of turnips as winter food for cattle; or how the farmer would be enabled to take more off his land in harvest time, in the shape of food, than he had put into it, either in the shape of seed or of manure, in the season of sowing. If Confederation might be said to have the effect of shortening our winters; or if Annexation could keep the winter communications of the country open and free from ice during the whole year, then indeed we should anticipate much material benefit, to the farmer and to the merchant, from the proposed constitutional changes. But upon these points we are by no means sanguine. Whether Confederated or non-Confederated with the Lower Provinces, whether annexed or non-annexed to the United States, we fear that the Canadas will still have to contend with the same climatic disadvantages then, as they have to contend with now. We fear that every year the St. Lawrence, the outlet to the sea, will be blocked up with ice for many months, that all field labor will be suspended, that snow will still cover the face of the earth, that the average returns to the farmer will be as small as ever, and that remunerative occupation for the urban working classes during the winter will still be scarce.

But there are men who would still legislate for everything, and who believe that an Act of Parliament is a panacea or cure for every ill to which flesh, whether bucolic, or commercial is liable. Have we not seen men who believe, and go about professing the belief, that drunkenness can be put down by Act of Parliament?—and with such an instance of the extreme credulity of mortals, need we wonder that there are others who believe, and preach the doctrine that the bad harvests, the consequence of our soil and climate, can be remedied by a political poultice in the shape of Confederation according to some, of Annexation according to others?