Scott W. See. The History of Canada. Second Edition

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Territories would have been constitutional, and would certainly be

constitutional to-day if, in my opinion, we had not been attacked. . . .

I know that through the grace of God I am the founder of

Manitoba. I know that though I have no open road for my influence, I

have big influence, concentrated as a big amount of vapour in an

engine. I believe by what I suffered for fifteen years, by what I have

done for Manitoba and the people of the North-West, that my words

are worth something. If I give offence, I do not speak to insult. Yes,

you are the pioneers of civilization, the whites are the pioneers of

civilization, but they bring among the Indians demoralization. . . .

As to religion, what is my belief? What is my insanity about that?

My insanity, your Honors, gentlemen of the jury, is that I wish to

leave Rome aside, inasmuch as it is the cause of division between

Catholics and Protestants. I did not wish to force my views, because

in Batoche to the half-breeds that followed me I used the word, carte

blanche. If I have any influence in the new world it is to help in that

way and even if it takes 200 years to become practical, then after my

death that will bring out practical results, and then my children ’ s

children will shake hands with the Protestants of the new world in a

friendly manner. I do not wish these evils which exist in Europe to be

continued, as much as I can influence it, among the half-breeds. . . .

My condition is helpless, so helpless that my good lawyers, and they

have done it by conviction . . .my condition seems to be so helpless

that they have recourse to try and prove insanity to try and save me in

that way. If I am insane, of course I don’t know it, it is a property of

insanity to be unable to know it. But what is the kind of mission that I

have? Practical results.

Louis Riel on Trial 327

Sifton’s Rationale for

Immigration

Historians typically give Wilfrid Laurier’s interior minister, Clifford

Sifton, a great deal of credit for putting together a comprehensive

design for bringing immigrants to Canada. The full scope of the

impact of the substantial immigration during Laurier’s administra-

tion is still being explored, but in his many writings and speeches

Sifton left doubt as to the kind of settlers he envisioned would make

the most appropriate new Canadians and provide the muscle for

making the West an agricultural heartland. The following excerpt

comes from one of Sifton’s most celebrated statements; it was

published in Maclean’s in 1922, long after Sifton had left his position

as interior minister. Observe his recognition of the source of a

substantial number of immigrants from the United States and Great

Britain, his characterization of peasants, and his expectations that

those peasants would become the docile and hardworking backbone

of the Canadian West.

People who do not know anything at all about the policy which was

followed by the Department of the Interior under my direction quite

commonly make the statement that my policy for Immigration was

quantity and not quality. As a matter of fact that statement is the

direct opposite of the fact. . . .

Howard Palmer, ed., Immigration and the Rise of Multiculturalism (Toronto:

Copp Clark, 1975), 34–38.

Sifton’s Rationale for Immigration 329

When I speak of quality I have in mind, I think, something that is

quite different from what is in the mind of the average writer or

speaker upon the question of Immigration. I think a stalwart peasant

is a sheep-skin coat, born on the soil, whose forefathers have been

farmers for ten generations, with a stout wife and a half-dozen

children, is good quality. A Trades Union artisan who will not work

more than eight hours a day and will not work that long if he can help

it, will not work on a farm at all and has to be fed by the public when

his work is slack is, in my judgment, quantity and very bad quantity. I

am indifferent as to whether or not he is British-born. It matters not

what his nationality is; such men are not wanted in Canada, and the

more of them we get the more trouble we shall have.

I am of the deliberate opinion that about 500,000 farmers could be

actually put on land in the next ten years by a thorough, systematic

and energetic organization, backed with all needful legal authority

and money. . . .

There is the practical question of ways and means. Where and how

shall we put these settlers? So far as the United States is concerned I

am quite clear in my views as to the methods that should be

adopted. . . .If I were working for the purpose of getting American

settlers into our North West I should endeavor to work through [land

and colonization companies]. . . .

As to the other places from which settlers can be procured, I could

turn loose the organization upon the North of England and Scotland.

There are some young mechanics in the North of England and

Scottish towns who have been born on the land and brought up by

farmers. Very nearly all of them are willing to emigrate. I would

search out individually every one of these men that can be got, as well

as farm laborers and the sons of small farmers. I would make a most

intensive search, because experience shows that these men are of the

very best blood in the world and every one of them that can be

procured is an asset to the country.

In Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Bohemia, Hungary and

Galicia there are hundreds of thousands of hardy peasants, men of the

type above described, farmers for ten or fifteen generations, who are

anxious to leave Europe and start life under better conditions in a new

330 Sifton’s Rationale for Immigration

country. These men are workers. They have been bred for generations

to work from daylight to dark. They have never done anything else

and they never expect to do anything else. We have some hundreds of

thousands of them in Canada now and they are among our most

useful and productive people.

Sifton’s Rationale for Immigration 331

The Necessity for Victory

As the Great War deepened and the fighting between the Allied and

Central powers settled into a virtual stalemate along the killing

grounds of a ragged series of trenches that came to be known as the

Western Front, the call to supply reinforcements became a thorny

political issue. Prime Minister Borden, who had long been an

advocate of his country’s unflagging support in the war effort,

traveled to Europe in 1917 to meet with Canada’s allies and visit the

troops. He returned more convinced than ever that the struggle was of

paramount importance for Canada’s future, and quickly steered the

government’s attention to a conscription plan to offset declining

enlistments. The following excerpt from one of Borden’s speeches in

the House of Commons in May 1917 provides an excellent

illustration of his thoughts on Canada’ s war effort.

Now, as to our efforts in this war—and here I approach a subject of

great gravity and seriousness, and, I hope with a full sense of the

responsibility that devolves upon myself and upon my colleagues, and

not only upon us but upon members of the Parliament and the people

of this country. We have four Canadian divisions at the front. For the

immediate future there are sufficient reinforcements. But four

divisions cannot be maintained without thorough provision for

future requirements. . . .I think that no true Canadian, realizing all

that is at stake in this war, can bring himself to consider with

toleration or seriousness any suggestion for the relaxation of our

efforts. The months immediately before us may be decisive. . . .I

Robert L. Borden, Canada at War (Ottawa: s.n., 1917) [CIHM microfiche series;

#76128].

The Necessity for Victory 333

myself stated to Parliament that nothing but voluntary enlistment was

proposed by the Government. But I return to Canada impressed at

once with the extreme gravity of the situation, and with a sense of

responsibility for our further effort at the most critical period of the

war. It is apparent to me that the voluntary system will not yield

further substantial results. I hoped that it would. The Government

has made every effort within its power, so far as I can judge. If any

effective effort to stimulate voluntary recruiting still remains to be

made, I should like to know what it is. The people have cooperated

with the Government in a most splendid manner along the lines of

voluntary enlistment. Men and women alike have interested

themselves in filling up the ranks of regiments that were organized.

Everything possible has been done, it seems to me, in the way of

voluntary enlistment.

All citizens are liable to military service for the defence of their

country, and I conceive that the battle for Canadian liberty and

autonomy is being fought today on the plains of France and of

Belgium. There are other places besides the soil of a country itself

where the battle for its liberties and its institutions can be fought; and

I venture to think that, if this war should end in defeat, Canada, in all

the years to come, would be under the shadow of German military

domination. . . .

Now, the question arises as to what is our duty. . . .I believe the time

has come when the authority of the state should be invoked to

provide reinforcements necessary to sustain the gallant men at the

front who have held the line for months, who have proved themselves

more than a match for the best troops that the enemy could send

against them, and who are fighting in France and Belgium that

Canada may live in the future. No one who has not seen the positions

which our men have taken, whether at Vimy Ridge, at Courcelette, or

elsewhere, can realize the magnitude of the task that is before them, or

the splendid courage and resourcefulness which its accomplishment

demands. Nor can any one realize the conditions under which war is

being carried on. I have been somewhat in the midst of things at the

front. Yet I feel that I cannot realize what the life in the trenches

means, though I know that I can realize it better than those who have

not been as near to the front as I have been. I bring back to the people

of Canada from these men a message that they need our help, that

they need to be supported, that they need to be sustained, that

334 The Necessity for Victory

reinforcements must be sent to them. Thousands of them have made

the supreme sacrifice for our liberty and preservation. Common

gratitude, apart from all other considerations, should bring the whole

force of this nation behind them. . . .

Therefore, it is my duty to announce to the House that early

proposals will be made on the part of the Government to provide, by

compulsory military enlistment on a selective basis, such reinforce-

ments as may be necessary to maintain the Canadian army today in

the field as one of the finest fighting units of the Empire.

The Necessity for Victory 335