A, ES

180 The Last Forty Years.

view of all the circumstances, it was not to be expected that all difficulties would cease. The commercial depression and the not very encouraging commercial outlook had led many dissatisfied persons to cast about for a remedy for the existing state of affairs. Among other heroic courses of treatment suggested was one involving the annexation of Canada to the United St:tes. For many months past there had been a good deal of discussion on this subject, and some of the leading merchants of Montreal had pronounced emphatically in its favour. It was noticeable that persons of the most opposite political views on domestic questions forgot their differences, and united in their advocacy of this great scheme, During the month of October a manifesto was published at Montreal, in which the wretched condition of the country was depicted in striking and somewhat exaggerated colours. Among the various remedies pointed out were the revival of protection in the markets of the United Kingdom ; the protection of home manufactures ; a Federal union of the British American Provinces ; the independence of the British North American colonies as a Federal republic, and reciprocal free trade with the United States. But the most sweeping remedy of all was the last one suggested, namely, a “friendly and peaceful separation from British connexion, and a union upon equitable terms with the great North American Confederacy of Sovereign States”— in brief, annexation. There was, however, no suggestion of rebellion, or any serious thought of anything so chimerical as separation by force. Sentiments of kindness and respect for the mother country were distinctly professed, and it was declared that separation without the consent of Great Britain was neither practicable nor desirable. The supposed advantages of annexation were enlarged upon, and it was suggested that the mother country would offer no opposition to a step which must necessarily enure s0 greatly to the benefit of the colonies. This manifesto was signed by many leading citizens of Montreal, including such well-known

Aftermath. 181

names as those of the Torrances, the Redpaths, the Molsons, the Workmans and the Dorions. Luther Hamilton Holton, Benjamin Holmes, David Lewis Macpherson, Jacob DeWitt, Edward Goff Penny, D. Lorn Macdougall and John Rose were also among the signatories to this document, which was comprehensively addressed “To the People of Canada” Its publication naturally produced much excitement and discussion. It soon became apparent that the sympathizers with the project were not confined to the 325 persons who had signed the manifesto. Among other public men who pronounced loudly in its favour was Mr. (L. J.) Papineau, who in so doing was consistent with the principles which he had professed ever since his return from exile ; but it was a surprise to many persons to find the moderate, even-minded Mr. Alexander T. Galt among the advocates of annexation. Justices of the Peace, officers of the militia, Queen's Counsel, and others holding commissions at the pleasure of the Crown, were among the signers of the manifesto, which could not therefore be treated as a mere ebullition of feeling on the part of the democratic portion of the community alone. Similar manifestoes were issued at Toronto, Quebec and elsewhere, but the signatories were by no means so numerous as at Montreal ; and indeed the feeling in favour of the movement cannot be said to have obtained much foothold anywhere else.* The agitation soon col-

* In Upper Canada some conspicuous Reformers showed, for a time, a decided leaning in favour of the movement, and would doubtless have come prominently forward in its favour had they been able to count upon support, Among these was Mr. Peter Perry, of Whitby. There can be no doubt that the personal influence of Mr. Baldwin, who regarded the idea of annexation with something like abhorrence, did much to counteract this tendency. Mr. Baldwin has sometimes been accused of being a strong party man, and such he undoubtedly was ; but he was nevertheless one to whom some things were before party. He promptly notified Mr. Perry what his own sentiments were, and what he expected from his supporters. The text of his letter was published in the Globe of October 18th, 1849, as a rider to an editorial on the subject. The following extract from a hitherto unpublisheü letter, written by Mr. Baldwin on the ôth of October, 1849, to the late Mr, Lawrence Heyden, of Toronto, gives an excellent idea of the stand taken by him. It must be borne in mind that the agitation for annexation was then at its height, s0 far as it can be said to have reached any height at ali :—-

mms Rem

182 The Last Forty Yeurs.

lapsed, for no considerable number of persons could be found to sanction the project. It would be most unjust, however, to denounce as “ rebels” and “ disloyal ” (as has often been done) all those who lent their countenance to the annexation movement of 1849. Its supporters were for the most part honourable and well-meaning men who despaired of the future of the Province, and were sincerely desirous of improving its position as well as their own. Many of them were merchants who had been ruined or impoverished by the commercial depression which prevailed. Others, while they had not as yet sustained any great pecuniary loss, looked forward with

“TI felt it right to write to Mr. Perry, expressing my decic'ed opinions in respect of the annexation question, and that I could look upon those only v'ho are in favour of the continuance of the connection with the mother country as political friends ; those who are against it as political opponents. I felt this to be the more necessary because I had heard within a few days that one of our Parliamentary friends here was said to have given in, or to be about giving in, his adhesion to the annexation movement. The tactics of our opponents are transparent. They want to get some of our supporters of standing to commit themselves, and then turn round on them and the whole party, and impute the call for annexation to the Liberal party generally. TI believe that our party are hostile to annexation. I am at all events hostile to it myself, and if I and my party differ upon it, it is necessary we should part company. It is not à question upon which a compromise is possible.”

A short time before, the Hon. John Ross had written to the same correspondent as follows :—

“My own firm belief is that there is an organization among the Orangemen from one end of Canada to the other, with the intention and object of seizing upon the Government by force, and going for annexation. After overturning the Government they will sell out to the Yankees for a consideration. MacNab, Cayley and Boulton will get the lion’s share of the spoils, and all will go on beautifully. They are so confoundedly reckless and unprincipled that they are prepared for anything. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose in the scramble, as Watts told them the other day in the House. My advice to all our friends is, Prepare ! Organize! Arm ! and put them down effectually when the struggle comes. If we are caught napping we shall repent it bitterly when too late. Besides, when they know that we are prepared, they will be the more likely to abstain from violence.”

The two letters are eminently characteristic of the writers. In the first we see the calm, quiet firmness of high and inflexible principle. In the second we see the man of extreme views and narrow intelligence, hasty in judgment, rash in expression, and imprudent in counsel. The gentleman referred to as ‘ Boulton ” in the above extract was Mr. William H. Boulton, a strong Conservative, who represented Toronto in the Assembly. Watts” was Mr. R. M. Watts, member for Drummond,

Fr RE ir

Le er PRU TEE 2

Aftermath. 183

misgiving, and scented ruin or further depression in the not distant future. Some were republicans by predilection and on principle. A few were disappointed Tories who were disgusted at the Imperial Government for upholding the Rebellion Losses Bill, and whose disgust was 80 profound that they could find no sympathy in the ranks of the British American League. The rest were discontented radicals for whom the policy of the Government was not sufficiently advanced. Lord Elgin was not disposed to treat the promoters of the movement harshly, knowing that many of them had substantial grounds for discontent ; but he deemed it necessary to cancel the commissions of such of them as held office at pleasure. Of course the Home Government sanctioned this step, and conveyed to his Excellency the Queen's command to resist to the utmost any attempt to effect a separation between Canada and the mother country, the connection between which, it was claimed, was highly advantageous to both.* By the time the despatch embodying this command reached Lord Elgin the movement was practically at an end, though its advocates did not actually relinquish their designs until some months afterwards.

In the beginning of November the removal of the departments from Montreal to Toronto took place. The respective offices were located in the long pile of buildings on Front street which had been used for Parliamentary purposes before the Union. The Governor himself, after a brief sojourn at a hotel, took up his abode at Elmsley Villa, a well-known structure of those days which stood on the site now occupied by the Central Presbyteriau Church, on the corner of Grosvenor and St. Vincent streets.

Several ministerial changes occurred during the latter months of the year. Mr. (L. M.) Viger, being unable to approve of the removal of the seat of Government to Toronto, retired from

* See the despatch, dated 9th January, 1850, It was reprinted in Canada with a beautifully illuminated heading, and widely circulated throughout the Province.

w, W SATA 4 PS7 NN 4 LC VF, 2 NX Fa £ & Ÿ \ d GS, OL.

WF Va 4 € ls D 77 Ÿ NZ IMAGE EVALUATION DS