Joseph Howe and the anti-confederate opposition to Canadian federation

¶ … Confederation and the Anti- Confederates in Early Canada

"Confederation and the Anti-Confederates" relates that history has not recorded when a "group of Canadian politicians has suffered more from the national approach to Canadian history than the Anti-Confederates..." The anti-confederates are a group who were opponents in the 1860s to the British North America Act being passed as well as opposing the Canadian federation's establishment. The Anti-Confederates were accused of having little vision, being parochial, negative, cynical and without any understanding of the theoretical framework of federalism. This work holds that their side of the debate has been highly "misrepresented" as well as "completely ignored." Noted most specifically are Joseph Howe and Ike Smith who were labeled as "political opportunists" even while those in favor of Confederation were likely to benefit from the achievement of the Confederation. The three documents examined in this work are:

1) From a speech by Joseph Howe at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, 22 May 1867;

2) From a speech by William Lawrence in Nova Scotia House of Assembly; and 3) From a speech by Christopher Dunkin in Canadian House of Parliament 27 February 1865.

I. SPEECH by JOSEPH HOWE at DARTMOUTH, NOVA SCOTIA

Joseph Howe speaks against confederation of Nova Scotia to a group of old and middle age men and relates that these listeners most certainly understand that there were struggles thirty years prior to this speech "which the growth of population, wealth and intelligence rendered inevitable." Howe relates to his listeners that the reason for these struggles was the right of self-government and reminds the listeners that those rights were won from Downing Street following many struggles. Howe states that self-government was the norm and was exercised in a manner that was "never abused" for approximately 25 years but that now, those rights were "gone from us" Howe relates that there are those in Canada that hold power over the citizens of Nova Scotia that are more invasive and restrictive than before the struggles to gain self-government. Howe holds that Canadian citizens had been betrayed and their rights "bartered away." Howe relates how the right to self-taxation is gone along with control of the post office and even the military. Howe relates how the currency is to be regulated by the Canadians and that the country of Nova Scotia has been flooded with paper money and the savings banks to be handed over into Canadian hands. According to Howe, all that had been gained would be lost in the process of Confederation. Howe, an opponent to the Confederation clearly is convinced and intends to convince his listeners of the foolhardy nature that acceptance of the Confederation by Nova Scotia would represent.

III. SPEECH by CHRISTOPHER DUNKIN-CANADIAN HOUSE of PARLIAMENT

The speech of Christopher Dunkin in the Canadian House of Parliament in February 1865 relates that the Confederation which has been proposed includes seventy-two resolutions and that these in actuality affirm way beyond another "seventy-two propositions, connected with almost every principle known to have reference to the theory and practice of popular government." Dunkin states that this is "a scheme" and one that is highly complex and broad as the imagination. Dunkin states that it is not enough to deal with abstraction of union or disunion or Federal vs. Legislative union because these generalities are "cheap and easy" and completely unreliable because "The only question, how is this plan, in its entirely going to work?" Dunkin acknowledges that this question is not a simple one in the answering. Dunkin affirms that he is a unionist and a unionist who has no desire to witness Upper and Lower Canadian disunion however, Dunkin relates that he does not want to see Upper and Lower Canadian in a worse place of disservice than already existed at that time. However, political change in the view of Dunkin must "come slow" just as in the case of institutional growth if that growth and change is to be healthy in nature. While Dunkin was clearly not against the Confederation it appears that, he was against the 'way' it was proceeding and clearly demonstrates the limitations that were inherent in this process.

IV. WAITE (1864-1867)

The work of Waite (1864-1867) relates that the debates surrounding the Confederation were quite "remarkable in many ways." In the documentation of the debates it was clear that the determination of the Canadian government "to give them all the weight the occasion demanded." Each and every member was allowed an opportunity to speak resulting in more than one-thousand "stout, double-columned pages" being recorded. The timing for the debates was critical according to Waite. Never in fact, has a debate been so fully documented. Waite relates that the Quebec Chronicle was noted to have woefully stated that the discussion surrounding the Confederation had grown "stale" since nothing new was being said. However, it is reported that Christopher Dunkin quite clearly gave an "exhaustive" speech, which clearly demonstrated that the Confederation was a "shambling, illogical mixture of compromises and rule-of-thumb methods." In fact, Dunkin very clearly related to the listeners that he doubted that 33 men could develop a constitution in a mere seventeen days that would be an integration of the best that was contained in the British and American governments. It is difficult for this writer to believe that this debate could have actually grown stale considering what was at stake in this debate.