Document Information

Date: 1864-10-04
By: The Montreal Herald
Citation: “The French Canadians and Confederation”, The Montreal Herald (4 October, 1864)
Other formats: TBA

THE FRENCH CANADIANS AND CONFEDERATION.

—The proposed measure of Confederation has of course introduced an entirely new element into our domestic politics. Honest persons who have thought alike upon the subjects formerly at issue between public men and political parties, are naturally separated from each other when they come to think and reason upon something which they have not previously had to deal with. In these circumstances a number of young men of French race, have assumed an ultra national ground for their future political action, and have thrown themselves violently into opposition to the whole scheme as one calculated to put an end to their cherished notions of the supremacy due to their race, language, laws, and religion in Lower Canada. They profess to take their stand upon the articles of capitulation, and as the articles were ratified between England on the one side and France on the other, some of them have been foolish enough to talk of making their appeal against a constitutional decision of the majority of the people of the Country first to England and in default of her assistance to the Emperor Louis Napoleon. Of course all this is utter nonsense. The treaty only bound England as to her sovereign acts while she should remain sovereign. When, she, by the granting of responsible government, remitted the major part of this sovereignty to the people of the Country in whose behalf the stipulations were made she ceased to be under any obligations. How can she protect a people against themselves when the two houses of our Parliament can at any time override her Governor General? Of course we can have no sympathy with the fears, the wishes, and still less the proposed mode of action of these gentlemen, who we may add at present do not seem to us to have any great weight. We do not believe in Lower Canada nor Upper Canada for French or for English exclusively. We do not believe in our laws, our language, and our religion, whether they be French or English, as things to be taken as they are and established for ever, without regard to the changes of time and modes of thought, especially in despite of and to the exclusion of any part of population. We believe in Canada for all who wish to live in it. We wish for honest and equal government, which shall leave every man, every race, and every creed free to employ its own activities for the promotion of its own ends, without restraint on any other, or privilege for itself, each one influencing and being influenced by the other, as all portions of the same free society must be influenced by all other portions. We must add, however, that though we cannot sympathize with the opinions of the gentlemen already alluded to, and especially dislike the violence of their appeals to a narrow and sectional prejudice, and their hints in certain cases of applications for foreign aid, we see little difference between their views and that of the bulk of the French Canadian ministerial party, as to what ought to be the future political condition of Lower Canada. The two parties may differ as to the mode of bringing it about; but they desire the same thing. When the subject of a Confederacy was first broached, nothing could be plainer than the statements made in the journals of the ministerial party, that it been adopted by them and their friends because it would give the French element increased and exclusive control in Lower Canada and muzzle George Brown. It is true that this was said in more measured language than has been adopted by the gentlemen to whom we at first alluded; but we do not know that violence and rashness is a proof of strength, nor, therefore, that those who talk with the most prudence are to be supposed, on that account, to have the less pertinacity. Both parties, as we have said, profess to desire the same thing though by different means; nor have those who since the late crisis, were the first to express their desires, abated their pretensions, so far as we are able to discover, since they have found themselves in controversy with politicians of less influence, who are perhaps seeking popularity by louder and more vehement utterances. The dispute indeed is chiefly as to which method is the most able, and likely to be most successful in accomplishing the object common to both. The more violent politicians are represented by L’Union Nationale and to it the Minerve representing the less violent and more astute party, objects that it is arousing the vigilance of the British population by making so much noise; and that the latter being thus aroused, are likely to insist on retaining for themselves a much larger influence than will be willingly accorded them by either of these journalists. There can be no doubt that the courteous and measured tone of the Minerve is least irritating to others, and most consonant with the self-respect of those who make use of it. We may justly complain of the mere language of L’Union while we can have nothing to say against that of its opponent; but on the other hand, while we accept these tokens of good will for what they are worth, and desire to do nothing on our side to create ill-feeling, it is no less the duty than the privilege of that class of the population to which we belong to look closely below the fair words, to the acts, which may be committed while these soothing phrases are being written and spoken. It must be remembered that when once the projected Confederate constitution shall have been adopted, our condition will be fixed in an irrevocable manner, and if guarantees are not taken before hand for securing to us our just degree of freedom and influence, it will hereafter be utterly impossible for us to obtain it, when, isolated from our own race in other parts of the Confederacy, we shall be not only a minority, which would be nothing, but a contemptibly small minority scattered among another race.