Diary in America Volume II Part 29

I have quoted largely from Lord Durham's Report, as in most points relative to _Lower Canada_, especially as to the causes which produced the rebellion, the unwarrantable conduct of the Legislative a.s.sembly, and his opinions as to the character of the French Canadians, I consider that the remarks are correct: they are corroborated by my own opinions and observations: but I think that the information he has received relative to _Upper Canada_ is not only very imperfect, but certainly derived from parties who were not to be trusted: take one simple instance. His lords.h.i.+p says in his Report, that the pet.i.tioners in favour of Mathews and Lount, who were executed, amounted to 30,000, whereas it is established, that the whole number of six natures only amounted to 4,574. Those who deceive his lords.h.i.+p in one point would deceive him in another; indeed his lords.h.i.+p had a task of peculiar difficulty, going out as he did, vested with such powers, and the intents of his mission being so well known. It is not those who are in high office that are likely to ascertain the truth, which is much more likely to be communicated to a humble individual like myself, who travels through a country and hears what is said on both sides. The causes stated by his lords.h.i.+p for discontent in Upper Canada are not correct. I have before said, and I repeat it, that they may almost be reduced to the following: the check put upon their enterprise and industry by the acts of the Lower Canadian a.s.sembly; and the favour shewn to the French by the Colonial Office, aided by the machinations of the American party, who fomented any appearance of discontent.

There is in his lords.h.i.+p's Report, an apparent leaning towards the United States, and its inst.i.tutions, at which I confess that I am surprised. Why his lords.h.i.+p, after shewing that the representative government did all they possibly could to overthrow the const.i.tution, should propose an increase of power to that representative government, unless, indeed, he would establish a democracy in the provinces, I am at a loss to imagine.

That a representative body similar to that which attempted to overturn the const.i.tution in Lower Canada can work well, and even usefully reform when in the hands of loyal English subjects, is acknowledged by his lords.h.i.+p, who says, "the course of the Parliamentary contest in Upper Canada has not been marked by that singular neglect of the great duties of a legislative body, which I have remarked in the proceedings of the Parliament of Lower Canada. The statute book of the Upper Province abounds with useful and well-constructed measures of reform, and presents an honourable contrast to that of the Lower Province."

Indeed, unless I have misunderstood his lords.h.i.+p he appears to be inconsistent, for in one portion he claims the extension of the power of the representative, and in another he complains of the want of vigorous administration of the royal prerogative, for he says:--

"The defective system of administration in Lower Canada, commences at the very _source_ of power; and the efficiency of the public service is impaired throughout by the entire want in the colony of any vigorous administration of the prerogative of the crown."

To increase the power of the representative is to increase the power of the people, in fact to make them the _source_ of power; and yet his lords.h.i.+p in this sentence acknowledges that the crown is the _source_ of power, and that a more vigorous administration of its prerogative is required.

There are other points commented upon in his lords.h.i.+p's Report, which claim earnest consideration: one is, that of the propriety of munic.i.p.al inst.i.tutions. Local improvements, when left in the hands of representative a.s.semblies, are seldom judicious or impartial, and should therefore be made over either to the inhabitants or executive. The system of towns.h.i.+ps has certainly been one great cause of the prosperity of the United States, each towns.h.i.+p taxing itself for its own improvement. Although the great roads extending through the whole of the Union are in the hands of the Federal Government, and the States Government take up the improvement on an extensive scale in the States themselves, the towns.h.i.+ps, knowing exactly what they require, tax themselves for their minor advantages. The system in England is much the same, although perhaps not so well regulated as in America. Are not, however, munic.i.p.al inst.i.tutions valuable in another point of view?

Do they not prepare the people for legislating? are they not the rudiments of legislation by which a free people learn to tax themselves?

And indeed, it may also be asked, would not the petty influence and authority confided to those who are ambitious by their townsmen satisfy their ambition, and prevent them from becoming demagogues and disturbing the country?

Whatever may be the future arrangements for ruling these provinces, it appears to me that there are two great evils in the present system; one is, that the governors of the provinces have not sufficient discretionary power, and the other, that they are so often removed. The evils arising from the first cause have been pointed out in Lord Durham's Report:--

"The complete and unavoidable ignorance in which the British public, and even the great body of its legislators, are with respect to the real interests of distant communities, so entirely different from their own, produces a general indifference, which nothing but so me great colonial crisis ever dispels; and responsibility to Parliament, or to the public opinion of Great Britain, would, except on these great and rare occasions, be positively mischievous, if it were not impossible. The repeated changes caused by political events at home having no connexion with colonial affairs, have left, to most of the various representatives of the Colonial Department in Parliament, too little time to acquire even an elementary knowledge of the condition of those numerous and heterogeneous communities for which they have had both to administer and legislate. The persons with whom the real management of these affairs has or ought to have rested, have been the permanent but utterly irresponsible members of the office. Thus the real government of the colony has been entirely dissevered from the slight nominal responsibility which exists. Apart even from this great and primary evil of the system, the presence of multifarious business thus thrown on the Colonial Office, and the repeated changes of its ostensible directors, have produced disorders in the management of public business which have occasioned serious mischief, and very great irritation. This is not my own opinion merely; for I do but repeat that of a select committee of the House of a.s.sembly in Upper Canada, who, in a Report dated February 8, 1838, say, 'It appears to your committee, that one of the chief causes of dissatisfaction with the administration of colonial affairs arises from the frequent changes in the office of secretary of state, to whom the Colonial department is intrusted. Since the time the late Lord Bathurst retired from that charge, in 1827, your committee believe there has not been less than eight colonial ministers, and that the policy of each successive statesman has been more or less marked by a difference from that of his predecessor. This frequency of change in itself almost necessarily entails two evils; _first_, an imperfect knowledge of the affairs of the colonies on the part of the chief secretary, and the consequent necessity of submitting important details to the subordinate officers of the department; and, _second_, the want of stability and firmness in the general policy of the Government, and which, of course, creates much uneasiness on the part of the Governors, and other officers of the colonies, as to what measures may be approved.

"'But undoubtedly (continues the Report) by far the greatest objection to the system is the impossibility it occasions of any colonial minister, unaided by persons possessing local knowledge, becoming acquainted with the wants, wishes, feelings, and prejudices of the inhabitants of the colonies, during his temporary continuance in office, and of deciding satisfactorily upon the conflicting statements and claims that are brought before him. A firm, unflinching resolution to adhere to the principles of the const.i.tution, and to maintain the just and necessary powers of the crown, would do much towards supplying the want of local information. But it would be performing more than can be reasonably expected from human sagacity, if any man, or set of men, should always decide in an unexceptionable manner on subjects that have their origin thousands of miles from the seat of the Imperial Government, where they reside, and of which they have no personal knowledge whatever; and therefore wrong may be often done to individuals, or a false view taken of some important political question, that in the end may throw a whole community into difficulty and dissension, not from the absence of the most anxious desire to do right, but from an imperfect knowledge of facts upon which to form an opinion.'"

This is all very true. There is nothing so difficult as to legislate for a colony from home. The very best theory is useless; it requires that you should be on the spot, and adapt your measures to the circ.u.mstances and the growing wants of the country. I may add that it is wrong for the Home Government to consider the government given to the colony as permanent. All that the mother-country can do is to give it one which, in theory, appears best adapted to secure the true freedom and happiness of the people; but leaving that form of government to be occasionally modified, so as to meet the changes which the colony may require, and to conform with its wants and its rising interests: all of which being unforeseen could not be provided for by the prescience of man. The governor, therefore, of a colony should be invested with more discretionary power.

The constant removal of the governor from the colony is also much to be deprecated. On his first arrival, he can only have formed theoretical views, which, in all probability, he will have to discard in a few months. He finds himself surrounded by people in office, interested in their own peculiar policy, and viewing things through their own medium.

In all colonies you will usually find an oligarchy, cemented by mutual interest and family connection, and so bound up together as to become formidable if opposed to the Government. Into the hands of these people a governor must, to a certain degree, fall; and must remain in them until he has had time to see clearly and to judge for himself. But by the time that he has just disenthralled himself, he is removed, and another appointed in his place, and the work has to commence _de novo_.

Lord Durham has proposed that the Canadas should be united, and there certainly are some benefits which would arise _could_ their union take place. He a.s.serts most positively that the French party must be annihilated. He says:--"It must henceforth be the first and steady purpose of the British Government to establish an English population, with English laws and language in this province, and to trust its government to none but a decidedly English legislature." This is plain and clear; but how is it to be effected? The land of Lower Canada is still in the hands of the French, and nearly five hundred thousand out of six hundred thousand of the population are French.

How, then, are we to make the Lower Canadas English? We may buy up the seigneuries; we may insist upon the English language being used in the a.s.sembly and courts of law, in public doc.u.ments, etcetera; we may alter the laws to correspond with those of the mother-country; but will that make the province English? We may even insist that none but English-born subjects, or Canadian-born English, shall be elected to the House of a.s.sembly, or hold any public office; but will that make the province English? Certainly not. There is no want of English-born demagogues, as well as French, in the province. The elections of the Lower province are decided by the Canadian French, who are in the majority, and they would find no difficulty in obtaining representatives who would continue the former system of controlling the executive and advocating rebellion. Is it, then, by altogether taking away from the Canadian French the elective franchise and giving it entirely into the hands of the English, that the province is to be made English? If so, although I admit the French have proved themselves undeserving, and have by their rebellion forfeited their birth-right, you then place them in the situation of an injured, oppressed, and sacrificed people; reducing them to a state of slavery which, notwithstanding their offences, would still be odious to the present age. By what means, therefore, does his lords.h.i.+p intend that the province shall become English--by immigration?

That requires time; and before the immigration necessary can take place the Canadas may be again thrown into a rebellion by the French machinations. In our future legislation for the Canadas, we must always bear in mind that the French population will be opposed to the Government and to the mother-country; and that there is no chance of a better state of feeling in the Lower province until they shall become amalgamated and swallowed up by British immigration. Until that takes place, the union of the Canadas will only create a conflict between the two races, as opposed to each other as fire and water, and nearly equal in numbers. It will be an immense cauldron, bubbling, steaming, and boiling over--an incessant scene of strife and irritation--a source of anxiety and expense to the mother-country, and, so far from going a-head, I should not be surprised if, in twenty years hence, the English population should be found to be smaller than it now is. Political dissensions would paralyse enterprise, frighten away capital, and, in all probability, involve us in a conflict with the United States.

Until, therefore, I understand how the Lower Province is to become British, I cannot think a union between the Canadas advisable.

Whether his lords.h.i.+p is aware of it or not, I cannot say; but there appears to me to be a strong inclination to democracy in all his proposed plans, and an evident leaning towards the inst.i.tutions of the United States. He wishes to make the Executive Government responsible to the people; he would make one Federal Union of all our provinces, and inst.i.tute the Supreme Court of Appeal which they have in the United States. In short, change but the word governor for president, and we should have the American const.i.tution, and a "free and enlightened people;"--that is to say, the French Canadians, who can _neither read nor write_, governing themselves.

So far from a Federal union between all our transatlantic possessions being advisable, I should think, from their contiguity with the Americans, that it would be advisable to keep them separate. I am of the same opinion respecting the Canadas. I consider that, even as two provinces, they are too vast in territory already. Whether it be a woman looking after her servants and household affairs, or a captain commanding a s.h.i.+p, or a governor ruling over a province, large or small as may be the scale of operation, one of the most important points in good legislation, is the _eye_. A governor of a vast province cannot possibly be aware of the wants of the various portions of the province.

He is obliged to take the reports of others, and consequently very often legislates unadvisedly.

That the two provinces cannot remain in their present state is acknowledged by all. The question therefore is, can we rationally expect any improvement from their union? Perhaps it may appear presumptuous in me to venture to differ from Lord Durham, who is a statesman born and bred--for this is not a party question in which a difference of politics may bias one: it is a question as to the well-governing of a most important colony, and no one will for a moment doubt that his lords.h.i.+p is as anxious as the Duke of Wellington, and every other well-wisher to his country, to decide upon that which he considers honestly and honourably to be the best. It is really, therefore, with great deference that I submit to him, whether another arrangement should not be well considered, before the union of the two provinces is finally decided upon.

His lords.h.i.+p has very truly observed, that in legislating, we are to legislate for futurity; if not, we must be prepared for change. Acting upon this sound principle, we are to legislate upon the supposition that the whole country of Upper and Lower Canada _is_ well peopled. We are not to legislate for the present population, but for the future. And how is this to be done in the present condition of the provinces? Most a.s.suredly by legislating for territory--for the amount of square acres which will eventually be filled up by emigration. I perfectly agree with his lords.h.i.+p in the remark that, "if the Canadians are to be deprived of their representative government, it would be better to do it in a straightforward way;" but I submit that it would be done in a straightforward way by the plan I am about to submit to him, and I consider it more advisable than that of convulsing the two provinces by bringing together two races so inveterate against each other. Instead of a union of the two provinces, I should think it more advisable to separate the Canadas into three: Upper, Lower, and Middle Canada,--the line of demarcation, and the capitals of each Province appearing already to be marked out. The Lower province would have Quebec, and be separated from the Middle province by the Ottawa river. The Middle province would have Montreal, and would extend to a line drawn from Lake Simcoe to Lake Ontario, throwing into it _all the towns.h.i.+ps on the American side of the St Lawrence_, which would do away with the great objection of the Upper province being dependent upon the Lower for the transport of goods up the river, and the necessity of dividing between the provinces the custom-house revenues. Under any circ.u.mstances, it would be very advantageous to have sport of entry and a custom-house, in or nearer to the Gulf of St Lawrence, as s.h.i.+ps would then be able to make an extra voyage every year. I should say that about Gaspe would be the spot. This bay being on the American side of the river St Lawrence would become the entry port for the Upper and Middle provinces, rendering them wholly independent of the Lower. The Upper province would comprehend all the rest of the territory west of the line, drawn from Lake Superior, and have Toronto for its capital. This would be a pretty fair division of territory, and each province would be more than sufficient for the eye of the most active governor. Let each province have its separate sub-governor and House of a.s.sembly; but let the Upper House, or Senate, be selected of _equal numbers_ from _each_ province, and a.s.semble at Quebec, to decide, with the _Governor-in-chief of the provinces_, upon the pa.s.sing or rejecting of the bills of the three respective Lower Houses. This, although perfectly fair, would at once give in the _Senate_ the preponderance to the English of the Upper and Middle provinces. It would still leave to the Lower Canadians their franchise; and their House of a.s.sembly would be a species of safety-valve for the demagogues to give vent to their opinions, (without their being capable of injuring the interests of the provinces,) until they gradually amalgamated with the British immigration. I merely offer this plan as a suggestion to his lords.h.i.+p, and, of course, enter into no further detail.

There are, however, one or two other points which appear to me to be worthy of consideration. If the Canadas are of that importance which I think them, there are no means which we should not use to attach them to the mother country--to make them partial to monarchical inst.i.tutions-- and to _identify_ them with the British empire. We should make sacrifices for them that we would not for other colonies; and therefore it is that I venture my opinion, that it would not only be politic, but just, to such an extensive territory--and what will eventually be, such an extensive population--to permit each of the three provinces, (provided they are ever divided into three,) to select one of their senate to represent them in the British House of Commons. I consider it but an act of justice as well as of policy. This step would, as I said before, _identify_ these valuable provinces with ourselves. They then would feel that they were not merely ruled by, but that they were part and portion of, and a.s.sisted in, the government of the British empire.

And to draw the line as strictly as possible between them and their democratic neighbours, and to attach them still closer to monarchical inst.i.tutions, it should be proposed to the Sovereign of these realms that an Order of knighthood and an Order of merit expressly Canadian should be inst.i.tuted. These last may be considered by many to be, and perhaps in themselves are, trifles; but they are no trifles when you consider that they must militate against those democratic feelings of equality which have been so industriously and so injuriously circulated in the provinces by our transatlantic descendants. I cannot better conclude these observations than by quoting the opinion of so intelligent a n.o.bleman as Lord Durham, who a.s.serts most positively that, "England, if she loses her North American colonies, must sink into a second-rate power."

VOLUME THREE, CHAPTER SEVEN.

INDIANS.

There was no subject of higher interest to me during my travels in North America, than the past and present condition of the Indian tribes. Were I to enter into the history of the past, I could easily fill three or four volumes with matter which I think would be found very well worth perusing. It is to be lamented that there has been no correct history of the Indian tribes yet published. There are many authors in America well calculated to undertake the task; and the only reason which I can give for its not having been already done, is that, probably, the American Government are not very willing to open the archives of the Indian department even to their own countrymen; and, at the same that time, an American author, who would adhere to the truth, would not become very popular by exposing the system of rapine and injustice which was commenced by the English who first landed, and has been continued up to the present day by the Federal Government of the United States.

Nevertheless, it is to be lamented, now that the race is so fast disappearing, that a good historical account of them is not published.

There is no want of material for the purpose, even if the Government refuse their aid; but at present, it is either scattered in various works, or when attempted to be collected together, the author has not been equal to the task.

There is a question which has been raised by almost every traveller in America, and that is--from whom are the American Indians descended? and I think, from the many works I have consulted, that the general opinion is, that they are descended from the lost tribes of Israel. We have never discovered any other nation of savages, if we may apply such a term to the American Indians, who have not been idolators; the American Indian is the only one who wors.h.i.+ps the one living G.o.d. In a discourse, which was delivered by Mr Noah, one of the most intelligent of the Jewish nation that I ever had the pleasure of being acquainted with, there is much deep research, and a collection of the various opinions upon this subject. To quote from it would not do it justice, and I have therefore preferred, as it is not long, giving the whole of it in the

Appendix, as it is not (though should be more) generally known. In the second volume I have given a map of North America, in which I have laid down, as correctly as I can, and sufficiently so for the purpose, the supposed locations of the various tribes, at the period that the white man first put his foot on sh.o.r.e in America. I have said "as correctly as I can," for it would be as difficult to trace the outer edges of a s.h.i.+fting sand-bank under water, as to lay down the exact portion of territory occupied by tribes who were continually at war, and who advanced or retreated according as they were victorious or vanquished.

Indeed, many tribes were totally annihilated, or their remnants incorporated into others, living far away from their original territories: the Tuscororas, for instance, were driven out of Carolina and admitted into the Mohawk confederacy, which originally came down from the upper sh.o.r.es of the river St Lawrence. The Winnebagoes, also, were driven from the south and settled on the river Wisconsin. The Sacs and Foxes fought their way from the river St Lawrence to the Fox river, in Wisconsin, and were driven from thence, by the Menomonies and Chippewas, to the territory of Rock river, on the river Mississippi, where they remained, until deprived of their territory by the Federal Government, and sent away to the west of the river. I make these observations that the map may not be cavilled at by some hyper critic, who has thought that he has discovered a mare's nest; it is as accurate as I can make it, and I profess to do no more.

Notwithstanding the vicissitudes which continually occurred, the tribes of North American Indians may be cla.s.sed as follows:--

The Algonquin stock of the North--under which are comprehended the Chippewas, Ottawas, Menomonies, Hurons, etcetera.

The Southern tribes, who are also descended from one stock, and comprise Creeks, Cherokees, Choctaws, Catawbaws, Chickasaws, etcetera.

The _Horse_ Indians of the West, as the p.a.w.nees, Osages, Sioux, Kansas, Comanches, etcetera.

The Indians of the Rocky Mountains, as Crows, Snakes, and Blackfeet.

All the above races were composed of numerous tribes, who acknowledged themselves as blood relations, but did not enter into any confederacy for mutual support; on the contrary, often warred they with each other.

There were other powerful tribes, which resided between the lakes and the Ohio, bordering on the hunting grounds of Kentucky and Tenessee, which portion appeared to be set aside, by general consent, not only for hunting but for war. There were Delawares, or Lenni-Lenape, the Shawnees, Wyandots, Illinois, Peoria, and some others.

The _confederate_ tribes, and with which the early settlers had to contend, were as follows:--

The Powhatan confederacy, comprising the Monacans, Monahoacs, and Powhatans, occupying the present state of Virginia from the sea-coast to the Alleghany mountains.

The New England confederacy, who resided in the present States of New England, composed of the Pequots, Naranga.s.sets, Pawtuckets, Pokanokets, and Ma.s.sachusetts tribes.

And lastly, the confederacy of the five nations, or Mohawks, called Mingos by the other Indians, and Iroquois by the French. This confederacy was composed of the Mohawks, Oneidas, Caguyas, Onandagas, and Senecas. The Tuscaroras were afterwards admitted as a sixth.

I will make a few brief observations upon the various tribes, in the order I have set them down.

The Algonquin stock has suffered less than any other, simply because they have been located so far north, and their lands have not been required. The Chippewas are at present the most numerous tribe of Indians. The most celebrated chief of this stock was Pontiac, an Ottawa. After the Canadas were given up to the English, he proved a most formidable enemy; he attempted and, to a certain degree, succeeded, in uniting the tribes against us, and had not his plot been discovered, would, in all probability, have wrested from us Detroit, and every other post in our possession on the lakes. But Pontiac could not keep up a standing army, which was so contrary to the habits of the Indians; one by one the tribes deserted him, and sued for peace. Pontiac would not listen to any negotiations: he retired to Illinois, and was murdered by a Peoria Indian. The Ottawas, Chippewas, and Pottawatamies, who fought under him, avenged his death by the extermination of nearly the whole tribe of Peorias. Pontiac was one of the greatest Indians in history.

Of the Southern tribes there are not any records sufficiently prominent for so short a notice.

The Horse Indians of the West and those of the Rocky Mountains are scarcely known.

The Midland tribes produced some great men. The Delawares were at one period the most celebrated. The Shawanees, or Shawnees, do not appear to have been opposed to the Whites, until Boone and his adventurers crossed the Alleghanies, and took possession of the valley of Kentucky.

But the Shawnees have to boast of Tec.u.mseh, a chief, as great in renown as Pontiac; he also attempted to confederate all the tribes and drive away the Whites; his history is highly interesting. He fell in battle fighting for the English, in the war of 1814.

The _confederate tribes_ on the eastern coast, were those with which the first settlers were embroiled. The history of Virginia is remarkable for one of the most singular romances in real life which ever occurred: I allude to Pocahontas, the daughter of the king of the Powhatans, who saved the life of the enterprising Captain Smith, at the imminent risk of her own. The romance was not, however, wound up by their marriage, Captain Smith not being a marrying man; but she afterwards married a young Englishman, of the name of Randolph, was brought to England, received at court, and paid much attention to by Queen Anne. Some of the first families in Virginia proudly and justly claim their descent from this n.o.ble girl.

The New England Confederacy was opposed to the pilgrim fathers and their descendants. The chief tribe, the Wampanoags, have to boast of the third great chief among the Indian tribes--King Philip. His history is well known; I have already referred to it in my Diary.

If the reader will consult the histories of Philip, Pontiac and Tec.u.mseh, who may fairly be said to have been "great men," he will perceive that in each case, these chiefs were the life and soul of enterprise and action, and that it was by their talents, bravery, and activity, that the tribes were confederated and led against the Whites.

As soon as they were gone, there were none who could succeed them or fill up their places, and the confederacies were immediately broken up.