|
John Hillyard Cameron,
better known on the whole as a lawyer than a politician, nevertheless
filled no inconspicuous position in public life. He was born at
Blandesque, near St. Omer, Pas de Calais, France, on the 14th April,
1817. [Morgan gives Beaucaire, Languedue, as his birthplace; but the
statement in the text, with other biographical data, was kindly
furnished us by Mrs. Hillyard Cameron.] His father, Angus Cameron,
belonged to the 79th Highlanders, and the son was born during the
occupation of France by the allied armies. The family was purely
Highland, hailing from Glennevis, Inverness-shire. Mr. Angus Cameron had
seen active service both in the Peninsula and at Waterloo. In 1825 he
removed with his family to Canada, and became Captain and Paymaster of
the Royal Canadian Rifles. John Hillyard Cameron entered Upper Canada
College in 1831, and whilst there carried off some of the highest
honours in the gift of that institution. There was no University in
those days; the next step, consequently, was his preliminary training
for a profession. Mr. Cameron studied law first under Attorney-General
Boulton, and subsequently under Mr. J. S. Spragge, until lately
Chancellor and now Chief Justice of Ontario. With the latter, on his
call and admission, he entered into partnership, and commenced a
brilliant career in the profession of his choice. From a very early date
Mr. Cameron made his mark, notwithstanding the eminent rivals with whom
he had to compete. In 1843 the law reports were committed to his care,
and for some years he laboured at a digest of Upper Canadian precedents.
He was, in fact, the first compiler of regular legal reports. In 1846 he
was appointed a bencher of the Law Society, Queen’s Counsel, and
Solicitor-General. Soon after Mr. Rolland Macdonald resigned his seat
for Cornwall, upon which Mr. Cameron was returned by a considerable
majority over Mr. Mattice, a resident candidate. In 1847, when his
chief, Mr. Draper, retired to the bench, the Attorney-Generalship was
offered to him; but he declined, urging the claims of Mr. Sherwood. As
some reward for his disinterestedness and consideration for his party,
he was made a member of the Executive Council contrary to established
usage. In 1848 he went out of office with his party, and never again
entered it.
In the year 1851, he was
not a candidate for re-election; but in 1854 he was returned for
Toronto, with Mr. Bowes as his colleague. Again, in 1857, he declined
re-election; but, in 1858, he opposed Mr. Brown, who had vacated the
seat on his appointment to office, but was defeated by a considerable
majority. In 1861, he was elected for Peel, and retained the seat until
1872, when he failed again, but was soon after returned for Cardwell,
which he represented until his death. At the crisis in the McNab
Government, Mr. Cameron was, strongly pressed by a large section of the
party as the gallant knight’s successor, but the movement was
unsuccessful, and Mr. J. A. Macdonald succeeded to the vacant place. As
a lawyer, the hon. gentleman was facile princeps. His opinion was
eagerly sought for when any legal knot required untying, and his success
with juries was proverbial. As a speaker, when thoroughly aroused by the
subject, Mr. Cameron had few equals. There was a fervour and an
earnestness in his oratory which never failed to fascinate from his
admirable language and impressive delivery. During his life, Mr. Cameron
filled innumerable positions in the city of Toronto: in the volunteers,
in joint-stock companies of various sorts, in the Universities, and in
the Church Synod. One cannot help thinking that much of the energy which
might have been of essential service to his country was, to a great
extent, dissipated by these multifarious occupations. There was one
obstacle, however, to Mr. Cameron’s success as a statesman. He was
unyielding in principle, and, unfortunately, represented the losing side
in politics. A staunch Conservative of the old school, he opposed to the
last the secularization of the reserves, and the elective principle as
applied to the Legislative Council. On the other hand, he strongly
advocated equal representation at the proper time, and was staunch and
faithful where the interests of his own Province were concerned. His
legal abilities were always at the service of the Church of England, and
he was the right arm of Bishop Strachan in organizing the Synod and
establishing Trinity University. Mr. Cameron died at Toronto in the
house in which he had so long lived, on the 14th of November, 1876, in
the sixtieth year of his age.
It may be well now to
turn to the most prominent Scottish representatives on the Reform side.
The lion, George Brown has been so recently removed from our midst,
under deeply tragical circumstances, and his long and eventful career
presents so many points for controversy that it is an exceedingly
delicate task to undertake even a slight sketch of his life and public
services. Mr. Brown represents a class of statesmen whom it is most
difficult to appraise at their just value, because of the warp of
partizanship on one side or the other. A public man of strong will, high
principle, and indomitable energy will always be in the thick of the
fight, and at a moment when the smoke of the battle is yet visible
between the spectator and the illimitable azure, there is the present
danger of misconception, even where none is consciously intended. Some
of the political episodes in Mr. Brown’s life have been alluded to,
with more or less fulness, in previous pages; but he was so marked a
figure on the public stage, during nearly thirty years, that, at the
risk of repetition, much of the ground must be re-traversed.
George Brown—as he was
content to be known during his life—was born in the city of Edinburgh,
in 1821. His father, Mr. Peter Brown, whose snow-white hair and
venerable form are not yet forgotten in Toronto, was a merchant, and had
served, if we mistake not, as a "bailie" in the Scottish
capital. At the age of thirteen, like many of his countrymen, young
George went to London to try his fortune, little dreaming that, thirty
years after, he would repair thither, as a Canadian minister, to be
presented at court. Up to the age of seventeen, he followed mercantile
pursuits; but business reverses had meanwhile overtaken his father, and
the family removed to New York in 1838. After four years’ indifferent
success in trade, Mr. Peter Brown, in 1842, established a paper in that
city, entitled the British Chronicle intended to be the organ of
British opinion in the United States. The father, like his son, was a
staunch loyalist, and he appears to have criticized American
institutions and manners with a freedom not palatable to the New
Yorkers. While, in the commercial metropolis of the United States, he
published a work, entitled "The Fame and Glory of England
Vindicated," as a reply to Lester’s "Shame and Glory of
England." [Mr. Peter Brown’s work, which lies before us, will
bear perusal, even at this day, for its trenchant and outspoken defence
of the old land against the ignorant aspersions which delighted the
Americans of that day. It appeared in 1842, with the pseudonym of
"Liberties," and on that title-page are Burns’ lines
beginning, "Some books are lies from end to end." – the word
"ministers" in the stanza being italicized, as Mr. Lester had
been in the diplomatic service of the United States.]
Mr. George Brown pushed
the circulation and advertising of the British Chronicle with
untiring energy in the United States, and was engaged in so doing when
an event occurred which changed the current of his life. The disruption
movement was going on in Scotland, and both father and son threw
themselves heart and soul with Dr. Chalmers and the opponents of
patronage in the Scottish Kirk. The Clergy Reserve question, in Canada,
also attracted their attention, and Mr. Brown went to Canada to extend
the circulation of the New York paper, early in 1843. The friends of the
Free Church were anxiously looking for some able and vigorous journalist
to expound their views through the press. Mr. Brown appeared to be the
very man needed. Moreover, the Hon. S. B. Harrison had had an interview
with him, and, being astonished with the keen insight into the public
affairs of Canada, acquired in so short a time, introduced him to
Messrs. Baldwin and Hincks. The result of this visit was the appearance
of the Banner at Toronto, on the 18th of August, 1843, instead of
the New York British Chronicle. This journal was primarily a
religious organ; still it took an active part in politics, on the Reform
side. It soon became evident that the paper was founded on too narrow a
basis, and, therefore, on the 5th of March, 1844, the first number of
the Globe was issued.
The times were out of
joint, for Lord Metcalfe was at the helm, and it seemed at one time as
if the battle of responsible government must be fought over again. The
Governor-General could not divest himself of the notion that he ought to
be the moving-power in the State. Now, under any system of free
parliamentary rule, no principle can be clearer than this, that
Ministers are under the unqualified responsibility "of deciding
what shall be done in the Crown’s name, in every branch of
administration, and every department of policy, coupled only with the
alternative of ceasing to be Ministers, if what they may advisedly deem
to be the requisite power of action be denied them." The Governor,
like the Sovereign, cannot "assume or claim for himself
preponderating, or even independent, power in any department of the
State." [Todd’s Parliamentary Government in the British
Colonies, p. 18.] Now, at this period, Lord Metcalfe had a Cabinet
which enjoyed the confidence of the people’s representatives from both
sections of the Province. It was constitutionally responsible for all
his public acts; and yet he chose, of his own motion, and without
consulting his Ministers, to make personal appointments from the ranks
of their opponents. Mr. Powell, for example, was named Clerk of the
Peace, and the Speakership of the Legislative Council was offered to Mr.
Sherwood. The Governor-General had, in fact, a nominal and a real
cabinet—the latter consisting of the chiefs of the Opposition, his own
Secretary and Mr. Gowan being the intermediaries between them. The
consequence necessarily was the resignation of his constitutional
advisers, when self-respect, as well as constitutional principle alike
impelled them to seek relief from the false position in which they had
been placed. The Globe, as well as the Examiner and other
Liberal journals, battled vigorously for the principle of responsible
government, thus placed in jeopardy, but Lord Metcalfe, by personally
conducting the canvass, succeeded in securing a majority for himself,
and the party for whose triumph he had risked everything, even honour.
[It is impossible to give more than this brief outline of a memorable
crisis. The literature of the subject is voluminous enough. In a volume
of pamphlets kindly placed at our service by Mr. Macara, of Goderich,
will be found, on the Governor’s side, the addresses presented to him,
with his replies, as they were sent down to the House, with a special
message; and the defence put forth by "Leonidas" (the Rev. Dr.
Ryerson). On the other side, are the reply of "Legion" (Hon.
R.B. Sullivan) to "Leonidas," the Address of the Reform
Association, and an account of its first general meeting. The files of
the Examiners have also been consulted, as they throw
considerable light on this controversy from a Reform point of view.]
Meanwhile the Globe continued
on the even tenor of its way. Until the elections of 1847, it remained
in Opposition, and was characterized by the caustic, not to say
slashing, style of its editorials. On the formation of the Baldwin-Lafontaine
Administration in 1848, Mr. Brown found himself once more on the sunny
side of politics. He cordially supported the Government from conviction,
and his journal became the recognised organ. In 1849, occurred the riots
over the Rebellion Losses Bill, and in the same year Mr. Brown served on
a commission of inquiry into the management of the Provincial
Penitentiary. When Parliament met in the following May, the symptoms of
disunion had begun to manifest themselves in the Reform party. The
"Clear Grits" took shape as an independent branch, under
Messrs. Malcolm Cameron, Rolph and others, with the Examiner and
subsequently the North American, as their organ. Mr. Brown
remained faithful to his leaders, because although he was quite as
staunch in the cause of Clergy Reserve secularization as the new party,
he considered that the other "planks" of their platform were
ultra-Radical and hinted at dangerous constitutional changes. In 1851,
however, all was altered; Messrs. Baldwin and Lafontaine retired from
public life, and the reins of power fell to those in whom Mr. Brown felt
less confidence. In 1851, he was defeated in a contest with Mr. W. L.
Mackenzie, Mr. Ranald McKinnon, and Mr. Case, for Haldimand. [Mr. Case
appears to have been a local Ministerial candidate, since, according to
Mr. Brown, he had promised support to him; but the votes recorded for
both would not have elected the latter. At the close of the poll, the
numbers were, Mackenzie, 462; McKinnon (Conservative), 399; Brown, 283;
and Case, 113. – Examiner, April 16th, 1851.]
Towards the close of the year, however, he entered the House for the
first time as member for Kent, having defeated Messrs. Larwill and
Rankin. [The poll at the close stood, Brown, 836; Larwill, 739; Rankin,
486. – Ibid., Dec. 24th, 1851.] At both these
elections, especially at the former, the strong Protestant attitude of
Mr. Brown, no doubt, did him some injury. It was the Papal Aggression
year in England, and the Globe had caught the fever in its post
virulent form. Hitherto, the Upper Canadian Roman Catholics had been,
for the most part, Reformers; but their ardour was cooled by the hostile
attitude of their leaders. Nor did the crusade, which followed, tend to
conciliate them. The attacks made upon the corporate institutions of the
Church and upon separate schools, still further estranged them.
Mr. Brown took his seat
in August, 1852, and, strange to say, found himself suddenly transformed
into the leader of the "Clear Grits," against whom he had
previously battled. It can hardly be said that there was any
inconsistency in his conduct. He had lost the chiefs in whom he reposed
confidence, and distrusted Mr. Hincks. At the general election of 1854,
it should be remarked, although Mr. Hincks personally obtained a double
return for Renfrew and South Oxford, he found himself in a minority. Mr.
Brown defeated his Postmaster-General, the Hon. Malcolm Cameron, in
Lambton, and there were signs of an impending break-up. Mr. Brown was
the recognised leader, of the Upper Canadian Reform Opposition, and Mr.
Dorion of the French Liberals, while Sir Allan McNab was head of the
Conservative Opposition. The Ministry met its first reverse on the
Speakership. Mr. Cartier was its nominee, and Mr. Sicotte was proposed
by Mr. Dorion. The choice of the Opposition candidate was, in every
respect, a shrewd as well as a good one. The member for St. Hyacinthe
was known to be able and dignified; and in political opinion he was safe
and moderate. On a division he triumphed by a majority of three. [The
vote stood sixty-two to fifty-nine. The majority included all three
sections of the Opposition, and the list is interesting if only for the
heterogeneous character.] Mr. Hincks at once retired from office and
from public life, which be reentered years afterwards. The result was
that, contrary to Mr. Brown’s intention, he found he had only
succeeded in placing the Conservatives in power. ["Upon such a
consummation as this Mr. Brown had not counted, and he opposed the new
Government as vigorously as he had opposed the old one." Canadian
Portrait Gallery, ii., p. 15.] He still retained his post as leader
of the Opposition, and had a powerful engine in the Globe, which
had become a daily paper in October, 1858, and exercised great influence
throughout the country. Notwithstanding that the Government secularized
the reserves, abolished the feudal tenure in Lower Canada, and made the
Legislative Council elective, the Opposition leader was not satisfied.
Upon his flag was inscribed "Representation by Population,"
and he nailed it to the mast. Passing over the intervening period upon
which we have already dwelt, we may come at once to the defeat of the
Macdonald-Cartier Government in 1858 by a majority of fourteen. It was
the first session of a new parliament, and as Ministers could hardly
demand a dissolution, they resigned.
Mr. Brown was at once
called upon by the Governor to form a Cabinet; but in doing so, he
warned the hon. gentleman that a dissolution would not be granted him,
should he find himself in a minority in the House. It is quite possible
that Sir Edmund Head may have thought that it would save after-trouble
if he frankly made this announcement in advance. Still it was an unsound
step to take, and was aptly met by Mr. Brown in his reply. [In a
memorandum dated July 31st, his Excellency had defined his
position with tolerable clearness. He would give no pledge or promise to
dissolve Parliament; but would consent, after the granting of a supply,
to a prorogation. Mr. Brown, in reply, "submitted that until they
have assumed the functions of constitutional advisers of the Crown, he
and his proposed colleagues will not be in a position to discuss the
important measures and questions of public policy referred to in his
Excellency’s memorandum."] From the tenor of the letter, it seems
clear that the proposed Premier had not attempted to make any antecedent
bargain with the Governor on the subject of dissolution. In fact, he
considered it improper even to enter upon its discussion. Sir Edmund
Head’s memorandum certainly looks very much like an explicit
declaration that he would not accept Mr. Brown and his colleagues, and
that they might just as well save themselves the trouble of being sworn
in, and the expense and risk of going to the country.
At the same time it may
be a question whether it were prudent of the new Premier to take office
under the circumstances. No doubt he thought that to decline the task
would appear to be a sign of weakness, and resolved to place the
responsibility of refusing a dissolution clearly upon the Governor’s
shoulders. Sir Edmund, on the other hand, had much to say in defence of
his attitude. There was a House fresh from the people; the late
government had been defeated by a fortuitous combination of hostile
local interests temporarily uniting on a division. There was no proof
that the late Ministers had lost the confidence of the House, and there
was not the slightest possibility that a general election would place
Mr. Brown in a stronger position than he now occupied. The new Ministers
were, however, sworn in on the second of August, and their first demand
was for a dissolution. This his Excellency peremptorily refused, [All
the correspondence, memoranda, &c., will be found in Todd: Parliamentary
Government in the British Colonies, pp. 529-536.] more especially as
the respective Houses had at once, and in the absence of Ministers,
passed a vote of non-confidence in the Brown-Dorion Government. Upon
this fact his Excellency laid considerable stress, pointing out that as
there were a hundred and two members present, the votes of the remaining
twenty-seven, even supposing them to have voted in a body with the
Government, would have left it in the minority still. [For Mr. Langevin’s
non-confidence amendment seventy-one votes were recorded; against it
thirty-one, only four Lower Canadians members being found in the
minority. A similar motion was carried in the Legislative Council by
sixteen to eight.]
When Mr. Brown presented
himself before the electors of East Toronto, he was already out of
office; nevertheless he was returned by a handsome majority over Mr. J.
Hillyard Cameron. In 1859, the Reform Convention was held in the St.
Lawrence Hall, Toronto, at which delegates from all parts of Canada were
present. It was at once recognised that further agitation in favour of
the bare principle of representation according to population was futile.
A federal union of the two Provinces was proposed, with two or more
local legislatures, and "some joint authority" to which should
be committed matters of common concern to all. In February, 1860, Mr.
Brown submitted the resolutions to the House; but, as already stated,
they were negatived by large majorities. In the following year, the
general election took place, and Mr. Brown lost his seat for East
Toronto, his successful competitor being Mr. (afterwards
Lieutenant-Governor) Crawford. Soon after he was prostrated by the first
serious illness of his life, and on his recovery repaired to Europe.
While there he married Miss Nelson, daughter of the well-known Edinburgh
publisher, Mr. Thomas Nelson. On his return he found the Sandfield
Macdonald Government in power, but declined to give it his support
through the press. To his mind Ministers had abandoned the Upper
Canadian cause and deserved to be regarded as traitors.
In 1863, Dr. Connor,
Solicitor-General West, was elevated to the Bench, and Mr. Brown at once
resolved to be a candidate. He was elected by an overwhelming majority
for South Oxford, and continued to represent it in the House until
confederation. He opposed the non-confidence motion of Mr. J. A.
Macdonald, but at the same time, gave Ministers to understand that he
only preferred them because he would not aid in re-instating the Tories.
His speech on this occasion was a vigorous attack on the Ministry, and a
defence of the resolutions adopted at the Convention of 1859. As we have
seen, the Liberals were in a minority of five, and a dissolution took
place. In the following year the Macdonald-Dorion Ministry collapsed.
The Tache-Macdonald
Government succeeded no better than its predecessor, and, in 1864, it
was evident that some radical change of a constitutional nature was
imperatively demanded. Party government had been tried and failed;
coalitions on the old lines had proved useless; yet now the problem had
to be faced by both sides of the House. Mr. Brown, notwithstanding the
outcries raised from time to time against him, had produced a state of
things in which it became obviously necessary to re-arrange the
constitutional relations of the Provinces, so as to secure fair
representation to the west. Into the history of the negotiations which
took place on this occasion, we need not enter. The basis of agreement
between the party leaders was a confederation of all the British North
American Colonies. Three seats in the Cabinet were placed at Mr. Brown’s
disposal. Personally he desired to remain outside, but his presence was
insisted upon. He in turn objected to act under Mr. J. A. Macdonald, and
Sir Etienne Tache was made Premier, with Messrs. Brown, Macdougall and
Mowat, as Reform representatives; but the last named having been
appointed Vice-Chancellor, was succeeded by Mr. (Sir W. P.) Howland, in
November. In the formation of this coalition, there seems no room for
the assertion that either party had abandoned its principles. It was a
stern necessity, and the honour due to both for the patriotism displayed
throughout must be equally divided. How long the hopeless struggle might
have been protracted, it is difficult to conjecture; certainly, the time
had come, when, for the country’s sake, some combined effort was
demanded of the hostile camps. That they recognised the gravity of the
crisis, and concluded an honourable truce, must always give them an
ample title to the gratitude of Canadians.
It happened, fortunately,
at this time, that the Maritime Provinces were contemplating a smaller
union amongst themselves, and the opportunity was embraced of submitting
the larger scheme. Eight members of the Canadian Government attended the
Conference at Charlottetown, P. E. I., and unfolded the project they had
in view. The narrower measure was abandoned, and the Conference
adjourned, to meet at Quebec on the 10th of October. Meanwhile, Mr.
Brown and his colleagues addressed public gatherings in New Brunswick
and Nova Scotia, and, when the adjourned meeting assembled, a protracted
discussion, lasting during seventeen days, took place. During these
debates, Mr. Brown was no longer the impetuous agitator of the past.
Partizanship had been swallowed up in disinterested public spirit, and
he spoke in a dignified spirit of patriotism exceedingly honourable to
his nature. The outlines of the scheme were adopted, and Messrs Brown,
Cartier, Galt and Macdonald, after having obtained the sanction of
Parliament, repaired to England to secure the necessary legislation.
Unhappily, a dispute arose in the Cabinet over the renewal of the
Reciprocity Treaty, which would expire by effluxion of time in 1866. It
was proposed to send a deputation to Washington to negotiate for a new
treaty, but Mr. Brown objected, on the ground that, as the American
President had given notice of his desire to terminate the treaty, any
advances should come from the other side. He also disapproved of the
terms to be submitted; because they appeared too favourable to the
United States. In consequence of this difference of opinion, Mr. Brown
resigned his office in December, 1865, and, for a time, took little or
no part in active political life. It is difficult to judge accurately as
between the parties concerned here, because the negotiations came to
nothing. The American Government and Senate were deeply incensed both
against Britain and Canada, and nothing was, from the first, likely to
come of it. That being the case, it would seem that Mr. Brown acted
hastily in withdrawing his hand from the work of confederation before it
was completed. At the most, when the treaty seemed likely to be
concluded and ratified, it was open to him to retire without in the
slightest degree compromising himself.
At the first general
election after the Dominion had been constituted, Mr. Brown contested
South Ontario with Mr. T. N. Gibbs, and was defeated, his opponent being
returned by a majority of seventy-one. The step was bold even to
rashness, and it deprived the House of Mr. Brown’s service
thenceforth. In 1873, soon after the accession to power of Mr.
Mackenzie, Mr. Brown was called to the Senate and remained a member
until his untimely death. In 1874 he was despatched to Washington to aid
the British Ambassador in negotiating a reciprocity treaty. The attempt
was so far successful that President Grant approved of the draft; but on
its submission, according to the American constitution, to the Senate,
that body refused to ratify it. The political course of Mr. Brown from
1867 to 1880 will come under notice hereafter; meanwhile it may be said
that he took no prominent part in public affairs except through the
medium of his journal. To it and to his agricultural experiment at Bow
Park, he devoted his best energies, working with indomitable energy, and
with much of his old fire. On the 25th of March, 1880, the people of
Toronto were astounded by the report that he had been shot by a man
named Bennett, a workman formerly in the Globe press-room.
Unhappily the rumour was too well founded. The prisoner, who had been
discharged for irregular habits, appears to have repaired to Mr. Brown’s
office with the intention of intimidating him. At any rate, in the
course of the altercation, Bennett was in the acts of drawing a revolver
when Mr. Brown seized him by the arm. Whether, as the prisoner protested
to the last, the weapon was accidentally discharged or not, cannot now
be known. Certainly some wild rhapsodical scraps found on his person
would seem to show that, under certain circumstances, he contemplated
homicide. Much reliance, however, cannot be placed on this evidence,
since the man, naturally of a flighty temperament, had certainly been
made wilder by dissipation. At all events, the Senator was wounded in
the thigh, and although he made light of the injury, it soon became
evident that his system had suffered a serious shock. Notwithstanding
every effort, he expired on the ninth of May, 1880, in the sixty-second
year of his age.
The Hon. George Brown is
a singular instance of what will, energy, and firm adherence to settled
principle may do for a man who enters life with no extraneous
advantages. Whatever may be thought of his persistence in urging
measures which appeared at the time impracticable, no one can now
venture to assert that he was not justified by the event. His prolonged
agitation in favour of representation according to population was
unsuccessful immediately, but triumphed in the end, although not in the
way he anticipated. The "joint authority" resolutions were
tentative experiments; but when the leaders on both sides recognised the
mischief, and combined in seeking a remedy, it was soon found. The
constitutional question having been removed from the arena of mere party
strife, became a matter of patriotic concern, and the solution dawned
upon men with all the power of a new revelation. Had Mr. Brown’s
public career produced no riper fruit than the confederation schemer and
without his co-operation, its accomplishment was impossible, his claim
to the title of statesman would still be unimpeachable. It has been
said, and with some truth, that he was at times overbearing and
dictatorial—a fault he shared in common with all strong men who have
made their mark in history. He was so thoroughly convinced that he was
always on the right side, that he never appears to have been able to
enter into the convictions, equally strong and sincere, which moved
others to oppose him. Hence much of the caustic writing in which he
indulged as a journalist, and the denunciatory vein which runs through
most of his utterances prior to the Coalition of 1864. As a speaker, he
was hardly an orator; yet he possessed a singular power of swaying
audiences. Nearly always his opening sentences were hesitating—not to
say stuttering; but when thoroughly heated, the flow of burning words
was as impetuous as a mountain torrent. The secret of his power lay not
in eloquence, but in the earnestness with which he made an audience feel
that conscientious feeling was the motive power. Outside politics, there
could hardly have been a more genial and kind-hearted man, and those who
had the good fortune to be thrown in contact with him, could hardly
realize the fact that he was the fiery and impetuous tribune of the
people who, at times, could be lashed into a fury of trenchant and
mordant invective. [Our authorities here have been especially the Canadian
Portrait Gallery, ii., p. 31. with Taylor’s Portraits, &c.,
part x., p. 189, Morgan’s Celebrated Canadians, p. 769,
Turcotte, and McMullen.]
It seems natural to
follow up the departed Senator with a slight account of his successor in
the Reform leadership, although the more conspicuous work of his public
life falls without the period under consideration. The Hon. Alexander
Mackenzie was born on the 28th of January, 1822, at Logierait, near the
confluence of the Tay and the Tummel, in one of the most picturesque
districts of the Perthshire Highlands. His father was an architect and
contractor, and he was designed for the same occupation, beginning, as
is the practical fashion in Scotland, with a solid grounding in masonry.
He had previously finished his preliminary education, for thereafter he
was the director of his own studies at the old cathedral city of Dunkeld
and at Perth. His father died in 1836, leaving behind him seven sons,
all of whom subsequently settled in Canada. Of these, Mr. Mackenzie was
the third; another who entered public life, with great promise, Mr. Hope
F. Mackenzie, sat for Lambton and North Oxford, but was too early called
away. In 1842, he emigrated to Canada, and was joined by the brother
just mentioned, in the following year; and four years after the
remaining five also settled in Ontario. Mr. Alexander Mackenzie’s
first place of residence was Kingston, where he worked as a journeyman,
setting up soon after as a builder and contractor, on his own account.
This was at Sarnia, in Western Ontario, and there, at a time when the
tide of political passion ran high, he settled down to the serious work
of life. A Whig in Scotland, he brought his Liberal principles with him,
and naturally opposed the reactionary views of Lord Metcalfe. In 1848,
he hailed the accession of Messrs. Baldwin and Lafontaine to office with
delight; but, like Mr. Brown, felt dissatisfied with the Hincks-Morin
Cabinet which succeeded them. In 1852, the Lambton Shield appeared
at Sarnia, with Mr. Mackenzie as editor. For two years he fought through
its columns, and when the Observer—transferred from Lanark—appeared,
the Shield dropped out of existence. Mr. Hope Mackenzie was the
first of the family who entered Parliament. He had been defeated in
1857, by Mr. Malcolm Cameron, but, in 1859, he was elected. In 1861, as
his brother, on business grounds, declined re-election, Mr. Alexander
Mackenzie entered Parliament for the same constituency. Mr. Hope
Mackenzie afterwards sat for North Oxford, if we mistake not, up to the
time of his death.
In Parliament, Mr.
Mackenzie soon made his mark, not so much by eloquence, as by the plain,
honest and firm statement of his opinions. He supported Mr. Sandfield
Macdonald, because he saw in his continuance in office the only hope of
the Reform party. When the project of Confederation took definite shape,
he strongly favoured it; yet so persistent were his opinions that he
felt considerable dislike to the coalition of 1864. Nevertheless, he
gave the new experiment a fair trial, for the sake of the principle at
stake. [Both the brothers Mackenzie voted for Confederation in 1865,
with the majority.] When Mr. Brown retired from office, Mr. Mackenzie
was offered the vacant Presidency of the Council, but declined; simply
because he entirely approved of his leader’s action. In 1867, on the
defeat of Mr. Brown, in South Ontario, Mr. Mackenzie succeeded to the
leadership of the Opposition. What followed belongs to a subsequent
chapter. Meanwhile, we may note the chief events in the hon. gentleman’s
career up to the present time. Between December 1871, and October, 1872,
he filled the office of Treasurer of Ontario, in Mr. Blake’s
administration. The passage of Mr. Costigan’s Bill directed against
"dual representation," forced both leaders to make their
choice between the Houses, and they elected to sit in the Dominion
Parliament. In 1873, Sir John Macdonald resigned in consequence of the
Pacific Railway troubles, to which we shall have occasion to revert
hereafter. Mr. Mackenzie, as the leader of the Opposition, became
Premier in November, 1873, and held that high office until October,
1878, when, the party having suffered defeat at the polls, his Cabinet
resigned. Since then, he has been in Opposition, but continued leader of
the party until 1880, when he was succeeded by Mr. Blake.
The salient
characteristics of Mr. Mackenzie are not far to seek. The secret of his
success in public life has been staunch adhesion to principle,
reinforced by an earnest and unwavering advocacy of it. As a speaker, he
is, perhaps, seen at his best in the collection of speeches he delivered
in Scotland during his Premiership. They were expository, informing and
impressive, glowing with a fervid enthusiasm, essentially patriotic. In
Canada, as a statesman, Mr. Mackenzie’s temper has often been severely
tried by imputations he felt were undeserved, and which he naturally
repelled with indignation. When he took office, he was entirely a
novice, and yet his practical sagacity and common sense carried him
through the bulk of the difficulties which encompassed him. No Minister
ever worked harder in his department than Mr. Mackenzie; for it was not
in him to "scamp" work. He has often been accused of
narrowness of view, and impatience of dissent; but so far as the charge
is true, it is a fault of temperament, and not of heart. The most
earnest men are not usually the most tolerant; indeed the absence of
stern and uncompromising fidelity to principle is as frequently as not
an evidence of the absence of principle altogether. The facile spirit
which tolerates all opinions is sometimes, though not always, the sign
that earnest conviction is not to be looked for. Mr. Mackenzie is a warm
partisan by nature and training, and could be no other than he is. His
faults lie on the surface, open to criticism; and these have too often
been dwelt upon by writers who do not care to sound the depth of solid
worth that constitutes his chief claim to public esteem and regard.
The Hon. Oliver Mowat
naturally comes next in order, because he was, like Mr. Mackenzie, an
intimate friend and a staunch supporter of Mr. Brown, and also because
he, too, has been a Premier, although not of the Dominion. His father
came from the "far awa’ north," being a native of Canisbay,
Caithness. Like many other parents of distinguished sons, he was a
soldier, and served throughout the Peninsular war. In 1816 he removed to
Canada, his war-like occupation having gone, and soon after settled in
Kingston; there he remained until his death. His wife, whom he married
here, was also from Caithness, and of their children, Oliver was the
eldest. He was born on the 22nd of July, 1820, so that he had
arrived at the age of seventeen when the stirring times of the Rebellion
awakened the old Conservative city of Kingston. Mr. Mowat was educated
at such schools as were accessible at the time, and finished under the
Rev. John Cruickshank, who also was dominie to Sir John Macdonald and
Mr. J. Hillyard Cameron. He appears to have been an apt scholar, and to
have displayed a readiness in learning, and a fondness for it, beyond
his years. When the Rebellion broke out, young Mowat became a volunteer,
and, judging from his environment at the time, we have a shrewd
suspicion that he was, temporarily, a good Tory. Somewhere about this
time he entered the office of Mr. J. A. Macdonald, his senior by only
five or six years, who had lately been called to the bar. For four years
the future Premier of Ontario was an articled clerk to the future
Premier of the Dominion. Their paths have diverged politically since;
yet one would like to believe that the memory of the old time still
serves as a link of connection between them. Mr. Mowat then removed to
Toronto, and completed his terms with Mr. Robert E. Burns, subsequently
a Superior Court Judge. In 1842 he was called to the bar, and, after an
interval of practice at Kingston, again left for Toronto, where he
entered into partnership with Mr. Burns. Mr. (afterwards Chancellor)
Vankoughnet subsequently joined the firm, which continued to exist after
the retirement of Judge Burns. Mr. Mowat confined himself entirely to
equity practice; and when the Court of Chancery was remodelled under the
Act introduced by the Hon. W. H. Blake—a measure sorely needed,
although it was vigorously resisted by the Opposition [Mr. W. L.
Mackenzie moved a motion, in 1851, which completely changed the
complexion of party politics. It was aimed at the very existence of this
Court, and, although lost by a majority of four, was supported by the
major part of the Upper Canada representatives. Mr. Baldwin resigned in
consequence, and Mr. Lafontaine shortly afterwards followed him into
retirement.] - Mr. Mowat admittedly stood at the head of its bar.
The future Premier of
Ontario did not enter public life until the year 1857, when he defeated
Mr. (Judge) Morrison in South Ontario by a majority of nearly 800. In
the same year, and the one succeeding, Mr. Mowat served as an Alderman
in the Toronto City Council. He appeared in Parliament, for the first
time, in February, 1858, and proved Mr. Brown’s ablest associate.
Within a few months his eloquence and earnestness had brought him to the
front rank, and when the short-lived Brown-Dorion Government was formed,
in August, he was appointed Provincial Secretary. In 1861, he attempted
to dislodge the Premier at Kingston, but failed, and was compelled to
fall back upon his old constituency. In consequence of an adverse vote
on the Militia Bill, the Government resigned, but Mr. Mowat did not take
office at once under Mr. Sandfield Macdonald. He preferred to stand
aloof, not being satisfied with the attitude of the new Premier on the
representation question. When the Cabinet was reconstructed, in 1863,
however, the hon. gentleman became Postmaster-General; but his tenure of
office only lasted for about ten months. Once more, in June 1864, he
became Postmaster General in the Coalition Government, Messrs. Brown and
Macdougall being his Reform colleagues. In November of the same year,
however, he accepted the Vice-Chancellorship of Upper Canada vice Mr.
Esten deceased. The remainder of his career lies outside our present
period. It is only necessary to note here that in October, 1872, Mr.
Mowat resigned his judicial office, and became Premier and
Attorney-General of Ontario, a post he still occupies. There was
considerable exception taken at the time to the hon. gentleman’s
action. It was stigmatized as degrading to the judicial office, as
tending to destroy public confidence in the independence of the Bench,
and so forth. But it must never be forgotten that a judge does
not lose his rights as a citizen, and when he resigns his position he
ought to suffer no political disqualification because he has been upon
the Bench. It was urged that all the Vice Chancellor’s judgments,
where partisan bias could be suspected, might be impugned. Yet, in
England, the highest judicial seat is occupied by a member of the
Government, and no charge of partisanship has ever been made against
Earl Cairns or Lord Selborne, or any of their illustrious predecessors
for at least a hundred and fifty years. The indignation aroused was
caused not so much at the step itself as at the surprise occasioned by
it. The removal of Messrs. Blake and Mackenzie had left the
Ontario Government party helpless, and when Mr. Mowat appeared from
above as a deus e machina, it was only natural that the
Opposition should feel chagrined at a move by which they were
checkmated.
Into the policy of the
Ontario Government since 1872 it is not necessary to enter here. It may
suffice to say that Mr. Mowat has proved a cautious and intelligent
administrator; rather conservative in spirit than otherwise. Early in
his second public term, the Premier declared that he should endeavour,
as a public man, always to act as a "Christian politician."
The phrase has been lightly treated by some of his opponents; yet it is
hard to detect any impropriety in the hon. gentleman’s setting before
himself the highest ideal known in a Christian land. In his intentions,
at all events, Mr. Mowat has always kept this lofty standard in view,
although, like most other leaders, he has not always had his own way.
Whatever his faults, he is an eminently conscientious man, endowed with
great talents, a facile power of expression, and unflagging industry.
That amidst the political crises of nine years he has kept his place in
the confidence of the people is a sufficient evidence of the sterling
qualities he possesses.
The third Reform member
of the Coalition Government of 1864, was the honourable William
Macdougall. Although by birth a Canadian, and the son of a Canadian, his
grandfather hailed from the Scottish Highlands, was a U. E. Loyalist,
and served in the Commissariat Department of the British army during the
Revolution. He subsequently settled at Shelburne, Nova Scotia, but
removed to Upper Canada, like other loyal settlers by the sea, when
Governor Simcoe arrived. His son Daniel married, and the subject of this
sketch was born to him on the 25th of January, 1822. William Macdougall
received a tolerable grounding at school, and attended Victoria College
for a brief period; but he was for the most part, self-educated. At the
age of eighteen, he entered the law office of Mr. James Hervey Price,
subsequently Commissioner of Crown Lands in the Baldwin-Lafontaine
Cabinet. In 1847, Mr. Macdougall was made an attorney, and practised for
a short time; but he was early lured into the seductive path of
journalism, and it was not until 1862, that he applied for his call at
the bar. Having a practical knowledge of agriculture, his first venture
was the Canada Farmer, which he established shortly after
entering upon legal practice. This journal was subsequently merged into
the Canadian Agriculturist, which was also edited by him up to
the year 1848.
It was not long before a
schism occurred in the Reform party, and Mr. Macdougall espoused the
side of the "Clear Grits," led at that time by Mr. Malcolm
Cameron and Dr. Rolph. Their only organ was the Examiner, edited
with distinguished ability by Mr. Lindsey. It, however, hardly expressed
the views of the advanced Reformers, and in 1850, Mr. Macdougall
launched the North American, in opposition to the Government and
the Globe. At that time the "platform" of the new party
seemed extremely radical, yet singularly enough, almost every
"plank" has been adopted since. The extension of the elective
principle to the Legislative and Municipal bodies, the abolition of any
property qualification for members of Parliament, the extension of the
franchise to householders, vote by ballot, representation based on
population, the severance of Church and State with religious equality,
modification of the usury laws, the abolition of the right of
primogeniture, a decimal currency, and free navigation of the St.
Lawrence, have all been brought to pass. Mr. Mowat’s Judicature Act is
the adoption of another; and the only "planks" still unadopted
are biennial Parliaments, and the power of regulating commercial
intercourse with other nations; of these the latter has been virtually
conceded. At that time the Conservatives and orthodox Liberals united in
stigmatizing the "platform" as extreme and mischievous. In
1853, Mr. Macdougall represented Canada at the World’s Fair in New
York.
Next year the Hincks-Morin
Cabinet was formed, and the North American became its organ,
without, however, surrendering its independence or casting away a plank
of the platform. It was natural that Mr. Macdougall, whose influence
began to be felt in the country, should aspire to a seat in Parliament,
and few public men had so early an opportunity of learning the sweet
uses of adversity. In 1854 he suffered two defeats—in North Wentworth
and Waterloo, and in 1857 in Perth, where he was beaten by Mr. T. M.
Daly, a strong local candidate of Conservative politics. During the
latter year Mr. Brown and he were reconciled, the North American was
merged in the Globe, and Mr. Macdougall occupied a position on
the editorial staff of the latter. In 1858, he first succeeded in
entering the House. Mr. Brown had secured a double return, and elected
to sit for Toronto, and Mr. Macdougall was returned for North Oxford,
over the Hon. J. C. Morrison. During his early Parliamentary career, Mr.
Macdougall was a staunch advocate of representation according to
population, and other radical reforms, and supported Mr. Brown with
vigour and ability. Possessed of a singularly calm and immobile
demeanour, a cool head, and logical mind, he proved an able first
lieutenant to his chief. [Mr. Torcotte, whose views are always
Conservative, or rather strongly Lower Canadian, terms him a worthy
adept of his leader – "adepte digne de M. Brown." – Le
Canada, ii. 411.] His conspicuous debating power was of great value
to the party; but, as usual, a spirit of independence caused him to be
restive in party harness, and, in 1860, he and Mr. Brown parted company.
The honourable gentleman, in 1862, entered the Macdonald-Sicotte
Government, and remained with his new leader until the defeat of 1864.
In that year he was returned for North Lanark, and continued to sit for
it for some years. In 1863, feeling that the struggle for equal
representation was fatal under existing circumstances, he formally
announced his abandonment of the principle, a step which, of course,
widened the breach between him and his old chief. Next year, however,
the old allies once more came together as members of the Coalition
Government. Mr. Macdougall took part in both the Union Conferences, in
Canada, and was present, in London, during 1864, when the terms of
Confederation were finally settled. He had previously acted as a
Commissioner to open up trade with Mexico and the West Indies.
Amongst the subjects
which peculiarly attracted Mr. Macdougall’s attention was the future
destiny of the North-West, and its acquisition by the Dominion. He had
visited England with Sir George Cartier on the subject, and succeeded in
bringing the negotiations, by which that vast territory was annexed to
the Dominion, to a successful issue. It was natural, therefore, that
when the new country was organized, Mr. Macdougall should be appointed
its Governor. Then arose the troubles, which prevented his entrance into
the country. The French half-breeds, on the pretext that their feelings
in the matter had not been consulted, rose in rebellion, established a
Provisional Government under Riel, and forcibly kept the new Governor
out of the country. This episode will naturally fall into place when the
Northwest comes under consideration. Meanwhile, it is only necessary to
remark that Mr. Macdougall did all he could to pacify the malcontents,
and finally retired from the scene when he found that he had neither a
sufficient force, nor the satisfactory backing required, to enable him
to assert his authority. In 1870, Mr. Sandfield Macdonald, the Premier
of Ontario, appointed him Government trustee on the Canada Southern
Railway, and in the following year he was nominated a Commissioner on
the part of the Province to adjust its North-Western boundary. In 1872,
he was defeated in North Lanark, and in 1873 visited Europe on a
two-fold errand: first, to obtain a settlement of the fishery question,
and secondly, to stir up the spirit of emigration in Scandinavia.
Until 1875, Mr.
Macdougall’s voice was not heard in the legislative halls, but in that
year he secured election as member for South Simcoe, in the local
Legislature of Ontario. During the three years which followed, he
opposed Mr. Mowat’s Government, and was virtually the leader of his
party. When the general election of September, 1878, arrived, the hon.
gentleman once more contested a seat for the Dominion House. He was
elected for Halton over a strong local candidate by the small majority
of eighteen—the result being, Macdougall, 1,708, McCraney, 1690.
During the years which have elapsed, the hon. gentleman has practised
law, and although he labours under considerable disadvantages, not to be
overcome by one who has followed his profession only fitfully, he has
made his mark in connection with causes celebres like the
Campbell divorce and Mercer will cases. No one can read his argument
before the Supreme Court in the latter suit, without regretting that he
did not earlier apply himself to the legal profession. As a legislator,
his labours have been fruitful to a degree hardly suspected by those who
have not followed the course of public events. It has been said that Mr.
Macdougall has many enemies, and this is, in a sense, true. The
political free-lance is never regarded with cordiality by party leaders.
If independent at all hazards, a public man must expect to be more or
less distrusted by those who prize above all things party discipline.
Mr. Macdougall, as his whole course proves, has always preferred to
think for himself, and he has paid the penalty of his rashness.
Certainly he cannot be charged with self-seeking, for he is to-day a
poor man, and seems never to have mastered the art of becoming a rich
one. He has some notable faults which have probably furnished a pretext
for distrust in some quarters. His manner is cold and unsympathetic, and
he delights too much in abstract appeals to a logical sense, often
non-existent at all, and only occasionally touches the hearts of his
auditors. Still, as a speaker, he is singularly clear and incisive; the
marble is cold, yet it is marble all the same. With a more genial humour
and broader sympathies, he would certainly have stood in the foremost
rank as a statesman. In private life, where the judgment is less in play
than the affections, Mr. Macdougall is an eminently agreeable friend,
relative and companion; and even in public, where he cannot altogether
divest himself of a certain formal stiffness—a cool, logical suit of
buckram—he is telling and moving also on occasion. Perhaps in the
future the Dominion will yet gather richer fruit from his admitted
vigour and ability.
The Finance Minister of
the Coalition Government next demands attention. Alexander Tilloch Galt,
was born at Chelsea, London, England, the 6th of September, 1817; but,
in all but the accident of birth, he is a Scot. His father, John Galt,
the well-known Scottish novelist and colonizer, will demand attention in
a future volume, when reference will be made to special areas of
Scottish settlement. The son early displayed literary ability, and, at
the age of fourteen, contributed to Fraser’s Magazine. But Mr.
Galt’s career was not destined to be a literary one. His father’s
connection with Canada directed the sons’ attention to this country,
and all three of them settled here. [The only other who still survives
is the Hon. Thomas Galt, one of the judges in the Court of Queen’s
Bench of Ontario. He is a Scot by birth.] At the age of sixteen,
Alexander became a clerk in the service of the British and American Land
Company, whose operations were confined to the eastern townships of
Lower Canada, near the frontier. The affairs of this corporation were
not in a flourishing condition; but by Mr. Galt’s energy they were
placed on a most satisfactory footing. [When he retired in 1856, the
Directors stated that during his engagement of sixteen years, "the
position of the Company was changed from one of almost hopeless
insolvency to that of a valuable and remunerative undertaking."]
Mr. Galt entered public
life in 1849 as member for the county of Sherbrooke. He was a Liberal in
politics; still he opposed the Rebellion Losses Bill, and appeared to
have despaired at that time of Canada’s future. He was one of the
signers of the celebrated annexation manifesto of that year, although he
has always been distinctly loyal, and is now an ardent champion of
British connection. There can be no doubt that this remarkable
pronunciamento was the outcome of temporary irritation on the part of
the signers, and by no means expressed their settled convictions. When
Toronto became the seat of Government, Mr. Galt resigned his seat, and
remained in private life until 1853 when, a vacancy occurring, he was
returned for Sherbrooke, which he continued to represent until he once
more retired in 1872. During the early years of his second political
period, he usually supported the Liberal party; but in 1857, when the
representation and other vexed questions began to be urged with
vehemence, Mr. Galt became what may be termed a Conservative Liberal.
The hon. gentleman has made himself known by his rare skill in matters
of finance, and it was early predicted that he would, sooner or later,
be entrusted with the management of the department in which he excelled.
He was strongly opposed to radical changes in the constitution, and
about this time proposed a union of all the Provinces in an exhaustive
and eloquent speech, which, however, produced no immediate effect. The
time for that project had not yet arrived.
When the Brown-Dorion
Government resigned, in August, 1858, Sir Edmund Head called upon Mr.
Galt to form an administration; but, after a brief trial, he gave up the
attempt. So far his attention had chiefly been given to railway
enterprise. From 1852, onward, he had been government director of the
Grand Trunk and St. Lawrence and Atlantic, and devoted his conspicuous
abilities to their service. When the Cartier-Macdonald Government was
formed, in 1858, Mr. Galt became Inspector-General, as the Finance
Minister was at that time called, in place of Hon. W. Cayley, and
remained in office until the defeat of the Government on the Militia
Bill, in 1862. During this period, he had ample room for the display of
his ability and fertility of resource. The finances were certainly in a
bad way, and no small credit is due to him for the services rendered the
state at a trying period of its history. A financial statement from Mr.
Galt was always looked forward to as something worth the hearing; from
the lucidity of its style, no less than from the plainness of its
expositions. He was singularly clear-headed, self-possessed, and gifted
with a power of imperturbable good humour that always made its way with
the House. In 1864, he found himself once more in office as Finance
Minister, retaining it till August, 1866. During this time the hon.
gentleman was actively engaged in promoting his favourite scheme of
confederation. He continued in the Cabinet after the Coalition, and was
a member of the two conferences at Charlottetown and Quebec, and one of
the delegates to England. In 1865, he was sent to Washington as joint
plenipotentiary with the British Ambassador to negotiate a reciprocity
treaty. As before stated, the effort failed, and in the following year
he resigned. The difference between himself and his colleagues arose out
of the school question. Mr. Galt insisted that, before confederation,
the rights of the Protestant minority in Lower Canada should be assured,
and his views appear to have prevailed with the Cabinet; but the note of
alarm was sounded from the majority, and the Bill introduced was
withdrawn. Mr. Galt at once tendered his resignation. In July, 1867,
however, he again became Finance Minister, but only filled the office
until the following November, when he finally retired, to be succeeded
by Sir John Rose. It has been said [Weekly Globe, June 2, 1876.]
that the reason for his retirement has never been fully made known, but
the cause is not far to seek. The ex-Finance Minister has never been a
strong partisan, and may well have chafed under the official restraint
put upon his independence. In his own department, for which he was
immediately responsible before the eyes of the people, matters do not
appear to have gone to his mind. The Pacific Railway and Washington
Treaty discussions subsequently show that it was only a question of time
when he should leave the Cabinet. Not long after his withdrawal, he
moved a vote of censure upon the financial policy of the Government, and
there can be little question that the prospect of an unjustifiable
expenditure, which he was powerless to prevent, drove him from the
Cabinet. In 1872, Mr. Galt declined re-election, and has not since
re-entered Parliament. In 1878, he became Sir Alexander Galt, of the
Order of St. Michael and St. George; and, in the same year, declined the
Ministry of Finance, rendered vacant by the retirement of Sir John Rose.
In 1875, he defined his policy in a letter to the Hon. Jas. Ferrier, on
the pressing questions of the time. Opposed to the Pacific Railway, he
expressed his alarm at the serious increase of the Dominion debt, and
advocated what was afterwards known as the National Policy, while still,
as he stated, theoretically a free-trader. In 1877, he was named a
Commissioner, on behalf of Great Britain, on the Halifax Arbitration on
the Fishery Question under the Washington treaty, and brought the affair
to satisfactory conclusion. Sir Alexander Galt has been engaged in
commercial negotiations with France and Spain which, for reasons
diplomatic, have not as yet borne their fruit. He is now High
Commissioner of the Dominion in London, where he has been of invaluable
service in adjusting questions of finance, emigration, &c., with the
Imperial Government.
A man of varied talents,
and singular gifts of persuasive address and executive power, one cannot
help regretting that he has not been oftener and for longer periods in
the Government of his country. In the House, there has never been a more
finished debater—during the present generation at all events. Fluent
in speech, singularly clear and plain in unfolding facts and figures, he
has always commanded the ear of the Assembly. Of a singularly
good-natured and placable disposition, he has never failed to attract
personally even those whom differences of opinion may have made his
political opponents. No more attractive public character will be found
in the ranks of our living statesmen, and it may not be too much to hope
that, in the future, Canada may enjoy the full benefit of his varied
talents and consummate tact. Some of Sir Alexander’s best speeches
have been published in pamphlet form, as well as one brochure on Canada
from 1849 to 1859, and another on the effects of Ultramontanism in
Canada.
The Hon. Joseph Curran
Morrison, whom we have had occasion to mention previously, was the
eldest son of Mr. Hugh Morrison, a native of Sutherlandshire. He himself
was born in Ireland, but the accident of birth has not prevented him
from acknowledging his true nationality, and like his brother Angus,
formerly M. P., and Mayor of Toronto, he is a member of St. Andrew’s
Society. He came to the country at an early age, and completed his
education at Upper Canada College. Called to the Bar in 1839, he at once
entered into partnership with the late Hon. W. H. Blake, the future
Chancellor. He was subsequently, after Mr. Blake’s elevation to the
bench, a member of the firm of Macdonald, Morrison & Connor, which
was facetiously termed "the flourishing concern" by the
"Clear Grit" Reformers. He first secured a seat for West York
at the general election of 1847, and became an ardent supporter of the
Baldwin-Lafontaine Cabinet, but took no office under the Government. In
1851, he suffered defeat; but was almost immediately returned for the
town of Niagara in place of Mr. Hincks, who had received a double return
but elected to sit for Oxford. When the basis of the Hincks-Morin
Administration was enlarged by the introduction of Messrs. Malcolm
Cameron and Rolph, Mr. Morrison became Solicitor-General, and retained
the office until the defeat of the Government in 1854, a period of
nearly nine months. In 1856, he entered the Executive Council as
Receiver-General in the Taché-Macdonald Cabinet, and retained the
office until February, 1858, when the Macdonald-Cartier Cabinet was
formed. He had previously been an unsuccessful candidate for South
Ontario (1857), and for North Oxford (1858). In February, 1860, he once
more took the Solicitor-Generalship. Up to this time Mr. Morrison had
been Registrar of Toronto, and was consequently out of Parliament. After
suffering defeat in Grey, the hon. gentleman resigned, and finally
retired from public life. In March, 1862, Mr. Morrison took his seat on
the Bench as a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas. In 1863, he was
raised to the Queen’s Bench, and in 1877 to the Court of Appeal. He is
now the senior puisne judge of Ontario. Judge Morrison has held many
important offices in connection with higher education, among others the
Chancellorship of the University of Toronto. As a politician, he had few
opportunities of distinguishing himself; but he has made his mark at the
bar and on the bench, and is highly esteemed by all with whom he has
been brought in contact whether in public or private life.
The Hon. Adam Wilson,
Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, also for a brief period
figured in Parliamentary life. Yet he is above all things a lawyer. Mr.
Wilson was born in Edinburgh, and came to this country in 1830. For a
time he devoted himself to commercial pursuits, but abandoned them for
the legal profession. He studied under the old firm of Baldwin and
Sullivan, and after his call to the Bar, 1839, became a partner. He was
subsequently at the head of the firms formed on Mr. Baldwin’s
retirement, the last being those of Wilson, Patterson and Beaty, in
common law, and Wilson and Hector in chancery practice. In 1856 he was
appointed to the commission for the consolidation of the Statutes of
Canada and Upper Canada respectively—a task requiring great legal
acumen, and unflagging industry. In the previous year he was chosen an
Alderman of Toronto, and, in 1859, was the first Mayor of the city
elected by the people. During this time he had charge of several
important cases, such as the prosecutions arising out of the Russell
election frauds, and the suits against Ministers in 1858-9 on account of
the "double shuffle." When Mr. Hartman died in 1859, Mr.
Wilson was returned for North York, Mr. Baldwin’s old constituency,
and continued to represent it until his elevation to the Bench. In 1861,
he opposed the Hon. (now Lieutenant-Governor) J. B. Robinson in West
Toronto, but was defeated by a majority of about two hundred and fifty.
From May, 1862, to May, 1864, Mr. Wilson was Solicitor-General in the
Sandfield Macdonald Government, but retired upon his appointment to a
judgeship in the Queen’s Bench. After several changes, he is now Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas. As a politician, Mr. Wilson was always a
Baldwin Reformer, and although he acted with Mr. Brown during his
Parliamentary career, his conservative leanings were often apparent. As
a judge, he stands above reproach either in respect of learning or
integrity. As a man, he is eminently courteous and considerate, a friend
and an adviser to all who desire his advice or friendship. He has made
little commotion in the political world; indeed he has not cared to do
so. Yet in the honest discharge of duty, in strict and undeviating
attachment to the principles of justice and upright dealing, few men
have ever adorned the Bench who will leave a better record behind them
than the Hon. Adam Wilson.
Sir John Rose, Bart., G.
C. M. G., was born in Aberdeenshire, in the year 1821. Educated at King’s
College in the old city on the Dee, he removed to Canada, and was
admitted to the bar at Montreal in 1842. In 1851 he entered Parliament
for the commercial metropolis, having as his colleagues, Mr. (now Chief
Justice) Dorion and Mr. T. D’Arcy McGee. In November of the same year
he became Solicitor-General East, and was called to the Cabinet early in
1859, as Commissioner of Public Works—an office he resigned in 1861,
retiring temporarily from Parliament. In 1861, he served as Imperial
Commissioner on the Oregon matter, but again entered the House as member
for Huntingdon at confederation. In November, 1867, he succeeded Sir A.
T. Galt as Minister of Finance. This office he held for the better part
of two years, when he resigned and was succeeded by Sir Francis Hincks.
Sir John Rose retired from public life on account of ill-health on both
occasions referred to. A public man of singular ability and unspotted
reputation, he found himself unable to stand the wear and tear of
official life. For some years past he has resided in England, and
conducted business there as a banker at the head of a firm of
established reputation. Although removed from amongst us the ex-Finance
Minister has been of eminent service to successive Governments of
Canada. Shrewd and prudent in business habits, he has always been ready
to aid the Dominion with counsel and active assistance, without regard
to party differences.
The Hon. James Patton
also deserves a brief notice. Born at Prescott, Ont., on the 10th of
June, 1824, he was the fourth son of Mr. Andrew Patton, deceased, of St.
Andrews, Fifeshire, and formerly a major in the 45th regiment of the
line. Mr. Patton’s eldest brother was for some years rector of
Cornwall; he himself was brought up to the law, commencing his studies
under the Hon. J. Hillyard Cameron. In 1843 at the opening of King’s
College, Toronto, he matriculated, and graduated in 1847, as B. C. L.
Called to the bar, he practised first at Barrie. At an early period of
his career, Mr. Patton took a deep interest in politics. The agitation
consequent upon the passage of the Rebellion Losses Bill appears to have
acted as a stimulus to his Conservative instincts. In 1852, he
established the Barrie Herald as the mouthpiece of his party, and
conducted it for several years. Meanwhile he was engaged also in legal
journalism and literature, and, in 1855, aided in the publication of the
Upper Canada Law Journal. Mr. Patton’s political ambition does
not appear to have been over-active, since he uniformly declined to
become a candidate for Parliamentary honours. In 1856, however, he
contested successfully the Saugeen Division (Bruce, Grey and North
Simcoe), immediately after the Legislative Council had been made
elective. [The votes recorded were for Mr. Patton, 1712; for Mr.
(afterwards the Hon.) J. McMurrich, 1469; for James Beaty, 1158.] As a
member of the Upper House, the Hon. Mr. Patton was a staunch
Conservative, and it was he who moved the vote of non-confidence in the
Brown-Dorion Government of 1858, carried as already mentioned by sixteen
to eight. At the ensuing election he was defeated by the Hon. Mr.
McMurrich, and has not since entered Parliament. Mr. Patton has taken a
deep interest in educational matters, particularly in the affairs of his
alma mater, the University of Toronto. He has served as
Vice-Chancellor of that institution, and was first president of the
Toronto University Association, a body formed to secure the restoration
of the rights of graduates in convocation. Of late years he has chiefly
devoted himself to the practice of his profession, as a partner of Sir
John Macdonald, and in the spring of 1881 he received the appointment of
Collector of Customs at the port of Toronto.
The Hon. John Young [For
many of the particulars in this sketch, the writer is indebted to the Weekly
Globe, June 9th, 1876, and the Montreal Herald,
April 15th, 1878.] was born at Ayr, on the 4th of March,
1811, and educated at the parish school, like so many other Scots who
have risen to eminence in the world. For some time he was himself a
school-teacher in the neighbourhood of his native town; but, in 1826, he
made his way to Canada, and began as a clerk in the mercantile
establishment of Mr. John Torrance. In 1835, when only twenty-four years
of age, he entered into partnership with Mr. David Torrance, at Quebec.
Before the outbreak of the rebellion, he took the liberty of
representing to Lord Gosford, the Governor of that day, the
"breakers ahead," and suggested the establishment of volunteer
companies; but his counsels were unheeded. When the storm burst, Mr.
Young at once volunteered to aid in raising a regiment, a task
accomplished within twenty-four hours. Meanwhile he had removed to
Montreal, which, with characteristic prescience, the young Scot saw
would be the future centre of trade. In the commercial metropolis he was
a member of the firm of Stephens Young & Co. During the Metcalfe
crisis, Mr. Young was returning officer, and at once searched for and
seized arms wherever found. His vigorous action secured the peace of the
city, and his name was specially mentioned in the Governor’s dispatch
to Downing Street. It would be impossible here to enter upon all the
enterprises with which his name was associated. His heart was thoroughly
devoted to the interests of Montreal, its harbour, its railway
connections, its trade, and also its culture. In 1846, he espoused the
principles of free-trade with ardent enthusiasm and remained faithful to
them throughout life.
In 1851, although he had
not been previously a member of Parliament, Mr. Young’s administrative
ability and knowledge of trade were so well recognised that he was
chosen as Commissioner of Public Works on the formation of the Hincks-Morin
Cabinet. He found a seat for the city of Montreal, and continued to
represent it until 1857, when ill-health compelled him to retire. In
1863, he was unsuccessful as a candidate for Montreal West, but in 1872
succeeded by a majority of 800. In the House of Commons he figured as a
member of the Opposition; but, local interests again pressing upon him,
he finally retired in 1874. He was President of the Board of Trade, and
during the later years of his life filled the office of Harbour
Commissioner of the port of Montreal. He was a man of stalwart frame and
fine presence, genial, no less than able and vigorous. Unhappily a
sunstroke, supervening upon a long-standing affection of the heart, laid
him low, and he died on the 12th of April, 1878, universally mourned by
all classes in the city he had loved and served so well.
The Hon. James Ferrier is
another old mercantile resident of Montreal, who, notwithstanding the
brief space at our command, deserves special notice. He was born in
Fifeshire, so far back as 1800. When just of age he removed to Canada,
and at once entered upon his business career. Like Mr. Young, his
affections were bound up in the city of his adoption. In the
corporation, in the militia, in the banks, assurance companies, the
railways, and institutions devoted to culture, he was always to be found
at the post of duty. Nor did he forget his native land, for, more than
once, he presided over the St. Andrew’s Society, and aided in other
benevolent efforts. Perhaps, however, he himself, in the evening of his
days, would take superior pride in his work for religion and temperance.
A Wesleyan, like not a few of the Montreal Scots, he proved himself a
power in his church. For many years he was a Sunday-school
Superintendent— perhaps, indeed, he has not yet resigned the position.
In missionary effort, no Montrealer has exerted himself with more energy
and single-mindedness. His public life has not been an eventful one. A
Conservative in politics, he has sat in the Upper House since 1847, and
is still a member of the Senate.
The Hon. David Christie
was connected with the sister Province. Born at Edinburgh, in the autumn
of 1818, he came to Canada, while yet a lad, in 1833. In 1851, Mr.
Christie first entered Parliament, as member for Wentworth; in 1855, he
was returned for East Brant, but resigned in 1858, to become a candidate
for the Legislative Council in the Erie division. He succeeded by the
very large majority of twelve hundred and fifty-nine over Dr. Brown.
This seat he retained until the Union, when he was made a Senator of the
Dominion. When Mr. Mackenzie succeeded to power, on the 7th November,
1873, Mr. Christie entered the Cabinet as Secretary of State; but early
in the following January he became Speaker of the Senate, an office he
filled with great dignity and credit until the administration resigned,
in October, 1878. Mr. Christie will chiefly be remembered hereafter in
connection with Upper Canadian agriculture. As early as 1846, he was
active in organizing the Provincial Agricultural Association, and proved
its most active spirit for many years, filling the Presidential chair
for the last time in 1870. He was one of the prime movers in the
establishment of the Agricultural College; but his efforts in the cause
of culture did not stop there. He served on the Senate of the Toronto
University, and was vigorously active in many other positions of useful
activity. Mr. Christie, notwithstanding the early age at which he left
the fatherland, was above all things a Scot. Blunt and straightforward
in manner, inflexible in matters of principle, he worked hard in every
effort to advance his adopted country. In politics unmistakably a
Liberal, nevertheless he did not break with the old leaders so early as
some of his future allies. "Douce Davie," his recalcitrant
brethren used to call him in those days gone by; certainly, however, he
never wavered in the course he had marked out for himself but died, as
he had lived, a strict and uncompromising Reformer. Mr. Christie died at
Paris, Ontario, towards the close of 1880, in the sixty-third year of
his age.
|
