pprehension on that
score. The national sentiment, however, which would naturally arise
when the new state was constituted, was a proper subject for
consideration, since it might easily result in a complete, if peaceful,
revolution.

There were other uncertain factors in the situation which gave the
opponents of Confederation an opportunity for destructive criticism.
The measure was subjected to the closest scrutiny by critics who were
well qualified to rouse any hostile feeling in the country if such
existed. Weighty attacks came from dissentient Liberals like Dorion,
Holton, and Sandfield Macdonald. A formidable opponent, too, was
Christopher Dunkin, an independent Conservative, inspired, it may be
supposed, by the distrust of constitutional change entertained by his
immediate fellow-countrymen, the English minority in Lower Canada.

Brown bore the brunt of the attack from erstwhile allies and faced it
in this fashion:

No constitution ever framed was without defect; no act of human wisdom
was ever {90} free from imperfection.... To assert then that our
scheme is without fault, would be folly. It was necessarily the work
of concession; not one of the thirty-three framers but had on some
points to yield his opinions; and, for myself, I freely admit that I
struggled earnestly, for days together, to have portions of the scheme
amended.

This was reasonable ground to take and drew some of the sting from the
criticism.

But all the criticism was not futile. Some of the defects pointed out
bore fruit in the years that followed. As already stated, the
financial terms were far from final, and a demand for larger subsidies
had soon to be met. Friction between the federal and provincial powers
arose in due course, but not precisely for the reasons given. The
administration of the national business has cost more than was
expected, and has not been free, to employ the ugly words used in these
debates, from jobbery and corruption. The cost of a progressive
railway policy has proved infinitely greater than the highest estimates
put forth by the Fathers. The duty of forming a ministry so as to give
adequate representation {91} to all the provinces has been quite as
difficult as Dunkin said it would be. To parcel out the ministerial
offices on this basis is one of the unwritten conventions of the
constitution, and has taxed the resources of successive prime ministers
to the utmost. With all his skill, as we sh