Gough Barry M. Historical Dictionary of Canada

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

10 • INTRODUCTION

arrangements after 1940. The economies and transportation infrastruc-

tures of the two nations are virtually merged, and this is evidenced in

telecommunications, visual and print media, and automobile produc-

tion. National security measures, including enhanced border security

procedures, have been harmonized with those of the United States. Still,

Canada’s foreign policy has attempted to steer an independent course

as circumstances will allow. In the Vietnam War, for example, Canada

maintained neutrality. In 2003, Canada did not join the “coalition of

the willing” to wage war against Iraq. In peacekeeping, a separate and

unique mode of foreign policy in keeping with United Nation objectives

has been pursued by Canada. NATO obligations are being met through

the Afghanistan Mission.

PERIODS OF CANADIAN HISTORY

For convenience, the history of Canada may be divided into periods: the

colonial era to 1867; the national era, 1867 to 1914; national consolida-

tion, 1914 to 1945; and the modern era, in three parts: 1945 to 1982,

1982 to 1999, and the new millennium: Canada since 2000. What fol-

lows are brief profiles of these periods and a retrospective on Canadian

history which comments on present directions and future prospects.

The Colonial Era to 1867

Prior to European exploration, Canada was inhabited by many differ-

ent First Nations from the east coast to the west coast and in the Arctic.

The native societies were far from primitive. At the time that Europeans

began to explore Canada, in about 1000 CE, First Nations already knew

much about the landmass and had adapted to the climate and weather of

Canada. The natives of eastern lands incorporated agriculture, fishing,

and hunting into their ways of life; those of western plains followed

the migration patterns of the buffalo and other game. On the coasts, the

natives relied on the seas as a means of subsistence. In their respective

localities, they knew the rivers, lakes, and seas, and they had developed

technological aids to assist in their travel. The birchbark canoe and the

kayak are two important and well-known legacies, but to these could

be added techniques for survival in the wilderness, such as tent making,

10_506_Gough.indb 1010_506_Gough.indb 10 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

INTRODUCTION • 11

berry collecting, and food dehydrating. Upon contact, European explor-

ers were met by cultures that had adapted and incorporated the land into

their daily lives. The explorers adopted many of these important aids to

survival, and from natives they gained a greater degree of knowledge

about the land they were exploring than they were prepared to admit in

their writings.

The colonial era of Canadian history begins with the English claim

to Newfoundland in 1583. Sir Humphrey Gilbert, who made the claim,

found Spanish and Portuguese fishing boats in St. John’s Harbor.

British policy encouraged the fishery as a nursery of seamen, and

until 1824 Newfoundland developed as an extension of metropolitan

England. Settlement, though at first discouraged, brought desires for

self-government, which was awarded by Britain in 1855. French claims

to shoreline and inshore fisheries remained until 1906, but by 1713

English sovereignty was established over the island proper. The local

indigenes, the Beothuk, died off by 1829, partly owing to diseases and

to incursions by Mi’kmaq from Acadia.

At the same time that Newfoundland and Labrador were emerging as

fishing stations of imperial importance, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward

Island grew as places of colonization. Both of the latter began under the

French flag. The French name for Nova Scotia, especially its western

section, was Acadia. An important early colonization attempt by Sieur

de Monts and Samuel de Champlain at Port Royal marked the first Eu-

ropean agricultural settlement on what is now Canadian territory. Under

James I, the Scot Sir William Alexander received a charter to colonize

Nova Scotia. In 1713, after suffering from colonial wars and pirate

raids, Acadia passed into British hands—leaving Cape Breton and Île

Saint-Jean (as Prince Edward Island was then called) under the French

flag. Louisbourg was built as a French naval and mercantile base, and

Halifax was founded as a British counterpart or counterweight to Lou-

isbourg. In 1758, Louisbourg fell to British arms for the last time, and

in 1763 British control was complete.

After the American Revolution, Loyalists came in numbers to the

mainland or western segment of Nova Scotia, and the province of

New Brunswick was created to serve local needs. The American Tory

influence in this part of British America was profound and significant.

Prince Edward Island, meanwhile, was established as a separate colony.

Although much talk existed about a maritime union of these colonies,

10_506_Gough.indb 1110_506_Gough.indb 11 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

12 • INTRODUCTION

in association with Newfoundland, no such association came into being.

Common needs for transportation and defense encouraged a closer as-

sociation with the “Upper Provinces” of Québec and Ontario. However,

strong particularities, oligarchies, and colonial capitals encouraged

diversity, which remains as an important legacy of this period. Colo-

nial culture remained closely tied to Mother England, though in some

senses north-south links to New England contributed in another way to

the separateness and diversity of these people in comparison to those of

Newfoundland, Québec, or Ontario.

Québec claims the oldest permanent European colonization in what

is now Canada, although this claim has been disputed. In 1608, Cham-

plain established a habitation at the narrows of the St. Lawrence River,

Québec. He is regarded as the founder of New France. “On arrival I

looked for a place suitable to our settlement,” he recorded, “but I could

not find any more suitable or better situated than the point of Québec, so

called by the natives.” His men set to work clearing land, digging foun-

dations and drainage ditches, and erecting a storehouse. The habitation,

so called, had a stockade and moat for defense. Twenty-eight French-

men, including Champlain, began the winter, but owing to the severity

of that season and the scarcity of fresh food, a number died of dysentery

and scurvy. When a mutiny plot was discovered, the ringleader was

tried and hanged. But a beginning at trade and permanent occupation

had been made. France had arrived in the New World in these northern

latitudes, and the community grew, though frequently by fits and starts,

into the anchor of French empire in America. Champlain’s place in

early Canadian history is of prodigious importance, for from the nar-

rows of the St. Lawrence River an empire grew to the west, north, and

south—one with seemingly limitless possibilities though dependent for

a time on sustenance from France, peace with rival colonial powers, and

always, consent of the indigenous peoples.

From these early times, the fur trade was the engine of the colonial

economy, the lifeblood of banking, commerce, and relations with native

peoples. English pirates held Québec from 1629 to 1632, and raids by

English colonists and British forces attempted to wrest the colony of

New France away from Versailles. The Recollet, Jesuit, and Ursuline

orders made vitally important contributions to religious development;

they did so in missionary work as well as in settled jurisdictions. In

other words, the wilderness as well as the town and parish saw the

10_506_Gough.indb 1210_506_Gough.indb 12 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

INTRODUCTION • 13

cross. In those days, the Church walked hand in hand with the State.

All education came under their administration—and all social welfare,

too. Settlement was developed under rigorous administration, both

corporate and civil. The seigneurial system was a form of regulated

frontier development, designed to open new lands to colonization and

to encourage family growth. The system was not feudal as has been

imagined. Rather, it encouraged strong family land ownership and it

permitted transfer of the land title or occupancy. Moreover, and most

importantly, it built a homogeneous society in the St. Lawrence Valley

and immediate hinterland—a fundamentally important characteristic of

the early history of Canada.

Not until 1763 did the king of France relinquish claims to sovereignty

over Canada. That famous year, Québec passed officially to British

sovereignty, though military occupation had began in 1759. It is impor-

tant to understand that Québec’s subsequent prosperity and uniqueness

depended on the duality of French Canadian resourcefulness and Brit-

ish security, for in the years after 1763, a benign British policy allowed

for the continuance of French civil law and Roman Catholic practices

(including tithing), while at the same time British military capabilities

prevented armed American revolutionaries from capturing the colony

in 1775 and 1777.

By virtue of the (Royal) Proclamation of October 1763, the Prov-

ince of Québec was declared as an administrative unit of British North

America. The province did not include Newfoundland, Labrador, Nova

Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Rupert’s Land. From 1763 to 1791,

when the British government divided the territory of Québec into

Upper and Lower Canada, the governors in Québec answered to the

ultimate will of Great Britain, its parliament and ministers, but largely

and extensively directed the course of Québec’s destiny on the spot.

This was especially true during the governorships of James Murray,

Guy Carleton, and Frederick Haldimand. Carleton principally directed

the growing autonomy of Québec by the terms of the Québec Act of

1774 (of which he was the architect). This act enlarged the province’s

boundaries and trade and guaranteed its unique civil rights in law and

religion. Administration of justice was little changed during this period.

Concilial government was extended, and the ancient political and social

patterns, developed during the era of New France, were extended and

engendered. The year 1774 marked the establishment of a recognized

10_506_Gough.indb 1310_506_Gough.indb 13 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

14 • INTRODUCTION

distinct colony: with a French-speaking majority under Roman Catholi-

cism and using French civil law. What they could not change—and,

significantly, did not seek to change—the British government and

governors embraced to their own benefit and that of the new Canadian

subjects of George III. The Québec Act was unrevolutionary.

For 30 years, Québec grew and strengthened as a single unit. The

American invasions during the American Revolution were resisted and

thrown back, principally by British forces. French Canadian councilors,

clergy, administrators, merchants, and seigneurs dominated the day-to-

day workings of the province. Commerce, including banking and ship-

ping, was almost exclusively the domain of the British. Further, British

imperial legislation encouraged the fur trade in British hands, making

the St. Lawrence River the entryway, or vestibule, to the continental

interior. This measure was undertaken at the expense of the New York–

based fur trade into the Great Lakes and Ohio country. Canadian canals

and harbor installations were built to facilitate trade and overcome the

geographical obstacles of the St. Lawrence above Montréal.

Many interpretations exist on the nature and historical meaning of

the Québec Act. Bostonians claimed it was a means of raising Roman

Catholics for a Canadian militia to attack Boston. To call it a “legal

monument of British justice and generosity,” as Britannic-minded his-

torian William Kingsford did more than a century ago, is equally incor-

rect and wrongheaded. The Québec Act granted liberties but only in the

sense of that age. Governor Carleton (later Lord Dorchester) was seek-

ing to engender Québec’s population in its civic and political loyalties,

and he thought in terms of imperial defense and good administration.

In the circumstances, London released its tight control and ended the

military regime, at the same time devolving administration to a prov-

ince whose political, judicial, and economic structures were largely put

in place in the two decades before the 1763 transfer of sovereignty. The

quality of British administration contrasted sharply with the graft and

corruption during the governorship of the Marquis de Vaudreuil and un-

der chief administrator Francois Bigot. The Roman Catholic Church’s

extensive (some thought it priest-ridden) power was enhanced with the

rapid growth of the Québécois population, often called “the revenge

of the cradle.” The conquest, the Québec Act, and the division of the

Province of Québec in 1791 into Upper and Lower Canada have often

been cited by historians of Québec, especially nationalist inspired ones

10_506_Gough.indb 1410_506_Gough.indb 14 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

INTRODUCTION • 15

and above all separatists, as measures of British imperial suppression.

Those perspectives are false. The year 1791 was further proof of Lon-

don’s desire to give integrity to its colonial jurisdiction administered

in Québec City, and the representative form of legislative government

introduced that year accorded exactly with the growth of such govern-

ment in the emerging and diverse second British Empire. Using the

conquest as a symbol of oppression is in contravention and denial of

historical facts. Such repressive measures as were enacted by London

and British governors date from a later period, the 1820s and 1830s and

the age in which British ministers of state sought to reinforce crown and

parliamentary authority in an imperial context at a time of revolutionary

instability in post-Napoleonic Europe.

Throughout the first two centuries of Canadian history under Euro-

pean influence, native peoples played a significant role in the balance

of power in North America. Montagnais, Huron, Iroquois, and Ottawa

(among others less prominent) shaped the course of history in the St.

Lawrence lowlands and Great Lakes. But native numbers suffered be-

cause of disease, displacement, and warfare; they also declined because

of internecine rivalry and native diseases, many introduced even before

European contact. Natives traded for guns and ammunition, liquor,

tobacco, cloth, beads, and other commodities. In consequence, they

became dependent on European traders. In their treaty making, agents

of imperial powers did not always favor tribes, or kept them at odds

with one another. Indians were the key to the control of the empire of

the St. Lawrence, the Great Lakes area, and the northwest trade beyond

Detroit, Michilimackinac, and Grand Portage. In fact, Indians held the

balance of power in the interior; they were a decisive factor in France’s

war against Britain in North America. When, about 1757, native al-

legiance generally transferred to Britain, France lost its valued native

help in North America. Indians acted out of self-interest; their roles and

political stances were often paradoxical or ambiguous. The Iroquois

fought first against the British, then against the French, their double

intent to defeat both. Britain maintained that native alliance through the

American Revolution and the War of 1812. After 1815, as native mili-

tary support was no longer needed, Indians ceased to have such value to

the Crown. This began an era of neglect or indifference.

In the American Revolution, Canada became the bulwark of the Brit-

ish Empire in North America. Halifax, and Nova Scotia generally, was

10_506_Gough.indb 1510_506_Gough.indb 15 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

16 • INTRODUCTION

a key “anchor of empire.” So were Québec and Montréal, which were

heavily fortified. In Nova Scotia, which had many New England family

connections, there was much residual affection for the revolutionaries

of Boston and New York, but no general overt action against the Crown

occurred. Nor in the Province of Québec were there any armed risings

against the Crown. American armed invasions in 1775 by Benedict Ar-

nold and in 1777 by John Burgoyne were checked or stalled. Smallpox

wasted Arnold’s army as well. The war had important consequences:

Loyalists (refugees from republicanism) came in heavy numbers to

British North America. This, in turn, necessitated constitutional change:

the establishment of New Brunswick and Upper Canada (now Ontario)

as colonies or provinces.

The War of 1812 saw a continuance of British dominance in Québec

and the failure of assault from the United States. Upper Canada was a

battleground between U.S. and Canadian armed forces. Struggles for

command of the Great Lakes continued, and favored the Americans.

But the peace of 1814 showed no changes to the boundaries. Québec

remained untouched.

In the internal affairs of Québec, two features are noteworthy: the

evolution of the seigneurial system of landholding, a quasi-feudal ar-

rangement that allowed for patterned communities; and the prevalence

of the Roman Catholic Church and other French institutions, including

language and schools. Britain had no desire to live by the sword. As

the French-speaking population grew, which it did rapidly in the early

19th century, so did indigenous desires for colonial self-government.

Constitutional measures and means of government as instituted by the

British government were manipulated by the English minority, sowing

seeds of discontent and rebellion. Despite warnings of disaffection, the

British ministry in London did not heed the rising storm signals, and in

1837–38 came the Lower Canada rebellion, the largest insurrection in

Canadian history. Some of the rebels sought security by crossing the

border to the United States. Many were caught, tried, and convicted.

Some found guilty were shipped to Bermuda or to Tasmania. Others

were tried and hanged. One of them, Chevalier de Lorimier, on the eve

of his hanging in 1839, issued these words: “For [my countrymen] I die

on the gallows like a vile murderer, for them I leave behind my young

children and my wife with no other support, and for them I die shouting

‘Long live freedom. Long live independence.’” Those words echo down

10_506_Gough.indb 1610_506_Gough.indb 16 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

INTRODUCTION • 17

the years. As former Québec premier Bernard Landry said in 2009: “In-

dependence and freedom of nations must be pursued until it is achieved.

Nations that can be free have a duty to be. Québec can be, and it must

do it. What Chevalier de Lorimier said in 1838, we can say today, and

we will say it as long as [independence] is not done.”

In response to the rebellion, London intended remedial measures,

including commissioning a new governor, Lord Durham, to inquire into

the causes of disaffection and report accordingly. His report is regarded

as a magna carta of the British Empire, for it encouraged colonial self-

government without Britain in any way abandoning responsibilities

for foreign affairs. Durham’s report had many other recommendations,

including the introduction of municipal government and the encourage-

ment of a distant federal structure of British colonies in North America.

Eventually, in 1849, self-government was achieved by Lower Canada,

or Canada East as it was then called. Meanwhile, Montréal and the

Province of Québec had grown into a powerful focal point of Canadian

politics and financial affairs.

Ontario grew out of, or more correctly was separated from, Québec in

the year 1791. Loyalist settlers from the United States had settled lands

on the north shore of the upper St. Lawrence and of Lakes Ontario and

Erie. The freehold land tenure of Upper Canada set it apart from the

distinct seigneurial system of landholding (leasehold) in Lower Canada.

In addition, Upper Canada had a primarily English-speaking populace

which, equally, set it aside from that of Québec. Events of the War of

1812 reinforced anti-American sympathies among the Upper Canada

population. Upper Canada was renamed Canada West in 1840, and for

a time Canada West and Canada East formed a sort of double govern-

ment of co-association. Meanwhile British settlers, mainly from Ireland

and Scotland, arrived in Canada West in large numbers, on assisted

passages from Great Britain. “Late Loyalists” arrived from the United

States, taking up inexpensive lands. Religious diversity replaced an

older Anglican oligarchy, and the struggle for public lands and educa-

tion took on nonsectarian dimensions out of necessity. Public schools

and the university in Toronto (the colonial seat) responded to these

nonsectarian requirements. British assisted immigration from Ireland

and Scotland, sometimes called “shoveling out paupers,” brought thou-

sands of impoverished, land-seeking immigrants to Canada, particularly

to Ontario, and by dint of numbers mightily increased the non-Anglican

10_506_Gough.indb 1710_506_Gough.indb 17 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

18 • INTRODUCTION

nature of the original European population. Tensions between Roman

Catholic and Protestant Irish were a by-product of this immigration.

The first schools, public and private, were established in this period,

and the first colleges and universities, too. The mid-19th century was

thus profoundly important in Canada’s history.

The rapid growth of public schooling dates from approximately

1840 to 1870. Primary and elementary education became mandatory in

most British North American colonies by 1846, with Ontario a national

leader in English education curriculum development, teacher training,

and learning materials production (especially primers, textbooks, maps,

and atlases). By 1870, most colonies and provinces had high school,

or secondary, education as a mandatory requirement for students up to

age 16. Manual and technical training was in its infancy (apprentice-

ship the route to tradesman qualification), and domestic science not

yet thought of as a subject to study in schools. The centralized Ontario

curriculum, the growth of hospitals and health clinics, the founding of

institutions for the insane and criminally insane, and the establishment

of orphanages and systems of child welfare followed a general trend of

foundation and then expansion. But demand outdistanced supply, and

in the late 19th

century, despite the emergence of many volunteer orga-

nizations that had responded to societal needs, the population’s needs

remained great. A public awareness of social and health needs emerged

from this time, aided by a largely publicly funded, publicly conscious

system of education from primary through elementary and then through

high school years.

Throughout much of this era, the commerce of British North America

depended largely on resource extraction and staple trades. Key among

these were furs, fish, sawn timber, spars, gypsum, potash, and wheat.

Later, shipbuilding became a major sector of the economy, most hulls

being built for export sale. Railroad and canal development encour-

aged Canadian exports. The infrastructure of ports was strengthened.

Halifax, Montréal, Québec, and Toronto all emerged as important en-

trepôts. Meanwhile, the Montréal-based North West Company (based

on earlier practices of French traders) was succeeded by the Hudson’s

Bay Company (founded 1670), and during the 19th century the fur trade

persisted, though trade became more diversified by the company.

The 19th century saw many changes in transportation, for this was the

age of industrial steam. River and lake navigation was speeded up by

10_506_Gough.indb 1810_506_Gough.indb 18 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM

INTRODUCTION • 19

steam. Railways opened up areas for colonization and trade. Montréal

and Toronto enhanced their positions because of steam navigation and

railways. Governments, federal and provincial, provided incentives for

growth in transportation infrastructure, backing commercial ventures

with guaranteed bonds or gifts of land. A railway bridge crossing the St.

Lawrence River (opened in 1859) was an important step in realizing a

transcontinental link of empire of steam, iron, and steel. Telegraph lines

and submarine cables speeded commerce and communications. Survey-

ors, geologists, and engineers all advanced in this time a scientific and

technological understanding of the promise of Canada.

Industrial development, and with it unions and other means of

worker cooperation (and cooperatives), occurred side by side with

the rapid growth of the export trades in staples and primary products.

Commercial infrastructure, including banking, insurance, and shipping,

expanded in these same years, taking on continent-wide dimensions

with links to Britain and especially to the United States. Reciprocity

with the United States in 1854–1866 aided the north-south commercial

interchange. Meanwhile, the construction of the Erie Canal tended to

subvert the commercial empire of the St. Lawrence. The construction

of railways could not overcome, and did not attempt to overcome, the

increasing dominance of the United States in North American com-

merce. In fact, Canadian businesspeople had their eye on Chicago and

the Mississippi Valley as places for commercial expansion and British

American commercial growth.

By 1867, British North America consisted of the following colonies

or provinces: Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward

Island, New Brunswick, Canada East (old Lower Canada) and Canada

West (old Upper Canada), and British Columbia. It also included As-

siniboia and Rupert’s Land. As will be seen, only four of these jurisdic-

tions were to form the Dominion of Canada. By this time, forces mainly

external to these provinces or territories were bringing about the reasons

for a confederation of these parts: threat of American aggression after

the American Civil War and the expression of continental integration

known as Manifest Destiny; the continuing reluctance of Great Britain

to defend forever the territory of British North America and the desire

to devolve such responsibilities upon the colonies; the need to encour-

age continental free trade (and prevent disputes on cross-border trade

and fishing). In addition, internal reasons for effecting a confederation

10_506_Gough.indb 1910_506_Gough.indb 19 9/28/10 5:36 AM9/28/10 5:36 AM