operated during the first two decades of the
Victorian era. But an examination of early Victorian imperialism
demands, as a first condition, the dismissal of such prejudices and
misjudgments as are implicit in recent terms like "Little-Englander"
and "Imperialist." It is, indeed, one of the objects of this chapter
to show how little modern party cries correspond to the ideas prevalent
from 1840 to 1860, and to exhibit as the central movement in imperial
matters the gradual development of a doctrine for the colonies, and
more especially for Canada, not dissimilar to that which dominated the
economic theory of the day under the title of _laissez faire_.
{231}
It is important to limit the scope of the inquiry, for the problem of
Canadian autonomy was strictly practical and very pressing. There is
little need to exhibit the otiose or irresponsible opinions of men or
groups of men, which had no direct influence on events. Little, for
example, need be said of the views of the British populace. No doubt
Joseph Hume expressed views in which he had many sympathizers
throughout the country; but his constituents were too ill-informed on
Canadian politics to make their opinions worthy of study; and their
heated debates, carried on in mutual improvement societies, had even
less influence in controlling the actions of government than had the
speeches of their leader in Parliament.[1] After the sensational
beginning of the reign in Canada, public opinion directed its attention
to Canadian affairs only when fresh sensations offered themselves, and
usually exhibited an indifference which was not without its advantages
to the authorities. "People here are beginning to forget Canada, which
is the best thing they can do," wrote Grey {232} to Elgin after the
Rebellion Losses troubles had fallen quiet.
The British press, too, need claim little attention. On the confession
of those mainly concerned, it was wonderfully ignorant and misleading
on Canadian subjects. Elgin, who was not indifferent to newspaper
criticism, complained bitterly of the unfairness and haphazard methods
of the British papers, neglecting, as they did, the real issues, and
emphasizing irritating but unimportant troubles. "The English press,"
he wrote, after an important viceregal visit to Boston in 1851, "wholly
ignores our proceedings both at Boston and Montreal, and yet one would
think it was worth while to get the Queen of England as much cheered in
Ne
|