Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

ments were regarded solely as a source of profit to the mother country. There was no consideration given to the matter of self-government or to liberty of trade. The love of gold seemed to be the main motive of Spanish enterprise. The local government was almost exclusively in the hands of Spanish officials. All the laws relating to the control of trade, commerce, agriculture, finance, taxation, were made by the home government. In matters of trade and industry the colonies were under the severest restrictions. They could trade with no other country than Spain. The commercial regulations were such as to prevent foreign intercourse, and tended to excite international jealousy.

The pre-eminence of Spain and Portugal during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was succeeded by the like pre-eminence of France and England during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The occupation of the St. Lawrence basin and the Mississippi valley by France and that of the Atlantic coast by England, brought these two countries into close contact and bitter rivalry for the possession of North America. The point now to be emphasized is the fact that the colonial policy of these countries was in striking harmony with that already adopted by Spain, so far as it involved the idea that the colonies existed for the commercial benefit of the mother country. The colonists were sent out either directly by the home government or under the supervision of chartered companies, to which was given the monopoly of the colonial trade. On account of the early indifference and neglect of England, the British colonies in America were suffered to develop a certain amount of selfgovernment. But their increasing commercial im

portance and the need of protecting British merchants from foreign aggressions led the home government to enact certain restrictive legislation in the form of the so-called "navigation laws." By such laws all foreign ships were forbidden to trade with the colonies; no foreigner was allowed to become a merchant in an English colony; no colonial product could be transported to a foreign country or a foreign colony without first paying duty in an English port. The purpose of such laws was to protect the British merchant marine from foreign competition, and to exploit the trade of the colonies in the interest of the mother country.

The protest against this restrictive system was, among other reasons, an important factor leading to the revolt of the American colonies, the success of which was a remote cause of the modification of the British colonial policy.

§ 2. NEW POLICY ADOPTED IN THE DOMINION OF CANADA

The first experiment made by England toward the establishment of colonial freedom was due to the peculiar situation resulting from her conquest of Canada.

The long struggle of the French and the English for the possession of North America-culminating in the Seven Years' War, or the so-called "French and Indian War"-was brought to a close soon after the middle of the eighteenth century. By the decisive. victory of Wolfe at Quebec in 1759, and the subsequent Treaty of Paris in 1763, England gained the title to all the French possessions in the St. Lawrence

basin, and substantially to all those east of the Mississippi River. The conquest of Canada brought under English rule a body of about 60,000 French people, hitherto enjoying French customs and French laws and devoted to the Catholic religion. To secure the loyalty of this foreign and hitherto hostile population was a serious problem.

The threatening attitude and possible revolution, at that time, of the neighboring English colonies on the Atlantic coast required extraordinary measures to prevent Canada from joining the American cause againt English domination. The conciliatory policy which seemed to England to be demanded by this critical situation was at first embodied in the so-called Quebec Act of 1774. By this act the previous military rule in Canada was abolished and a civil governor was appointed, assisted by an advisory council. But more than this, the act guaranteed the maintenance of the existing French customs and the French civil law, and also recognized the legal status of the Roman Catholic Church-the first official acknowledgment of that religion since the establishment of Protestantism in England. Such formal concessions of civil and religious liberty were unprecedented in English colonial history, and were evidently prompted by a stern. necessity; but they proved successful in securing the loyalty of the French people during the distressing period of the American Revolution.

The next step in the growth of the British government in Canada was due to the influx of a large English population, made up of immigrants from the mother country, and reinforced by loyalists from the United States. Since the French already occupied the lower banks of the St. Lawrence, the new population

found settlements on the upper banks of the river and the shores of Lake Ontario.

A serious racial problem was now presented. The government, under the same regime, of two peoples as diverse in law and religion as the English Protestants and the French Catholics, was found to be impracticable, and led to the so-called Constitution Act of 1791. By this act of the British parliament, Canada was divided into two parts, that lying to the east of the Ottawa river to be known as "Lower Canada," and that to the west as "Upper Canada," each part to be under its own separate government.

In answer to the demands of the people, each colony now received a bi-cameral legislature, the upper house consisting of members appointed by the Crown, and the lower house of delegates chosen by the people. All legislative acts, however, were subject to the absolute veto of the colonial governor, who represented the Crown. It may be said in passing that a form of government similar to that just described, was also granted to the maritime provinces-New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Cape Breton and Prince Edward Island.

But the most important change in the colonial government of Canada was the result of the rebellion of 1837. At this time Lord Dunham was sent to Canada to pacify the province and to suggest measures of reform. The exhaustive report (1839) which he made on this occasion has been called "the fountain head of all that England has since done for the betterment of government in the colonies." The most significant part of Lord Dunham's report was the recommendation of nothing less than complete selfgovernment, with interference from England in nothing but questions directly affecting imperial interests.

As the outcome of this recommendation there was soon established in Canada, not only a representative legislature, but a responsible ministry. The governor and the upper house, or legislative council, were still to be appointed by the Crown, and the lower house, called the house of commons, to be elected by the people. But the chief organ of the administration, the "executive council," was to be chosen from the legislature. And so by the year 1847 the various provinces of Canada may be said to have acquired all the benefits of a responsible and autonomous government.

It is a noteworthy fact that the plan for the federation of these colonies came from the colonies themselves. At a conference held in Quebec in 1864, the separate colonies united in a memorial to the British parliament, requesting to be united under a single government. The result of this movement was the passage of the British North American Act in 1867, which organized the Dominion of Canada as a federal commonwealth. The original members of this federation were Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Upper and Lower Canada-the latter colonies now receiving the names of Ontario and Quebec. The number of integral members has since been increased by the admission of British Columbia, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

It has been asserted by Professor Dicey, an eminent English constitutional writer, that the constitution of Canada is modeled after that of the United States. This proposition has been disputed by other English writers. Such a dispute, however, seems hardly necessary, since it seems quite easy to see how far the federal union of Canada corresponds to the

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »