ENT

410 The Last Forty Years.

Messieurs J. S. Macdonald and A. A: Dorion, assertive of the double majority principle,* divided the House much less disproportionately, the respective, votes standing 62 to 49 and 65 to 46. The majorities of 13 and 19 declared by these votes might therefore be taken as indications of the actual strength of the Government ; but it was an ominous cireumstance that among the minority were to be found the names of Messieurs Sicotte and Loranger, two of the ablest publie men in Lower Canada, both of whom had formerly been firm supporters of Mr. Cartier. Their secession, which was chiefly attributable to their disinclination to accept the official determination to accept the Imperial mandate making Ottawa the permanent Seat of Government, was a blow to the Ministry, as each of the seceders had a certain following in the House. About this time a tendency to united action began to manifest itself between them and the moderate Reformers of Upper Canada. The chief representative of the latter was J. S. Macdonald, between whom and Mr. Brown there had been steadily-widening differences ever since the formation of the two days’ Ministry in 1858. Mr. Brown's star had not been in the ascendant since the defeat of his joint authority resolutions during the session of 1860. There had been defections from his ranks in Upper Canada, and in Lower Canada he cannot be said to have had any following whatever. Messieurs Sicotte and Loranger, willing as they were to ally themselves with J, S. Macdonald, knew perfectly well that their constituents and fellow-countrymen would

#* The seeming contradiction between this statement and that on p. 369 requires a word of explanation. It is there stated that : ‘From that time forward (i.e., in 1858) the question of à double or sectional majority cannot be said to have ever presented itself hefore the Canadian Parliament as a matter for practical consideration.” The anomaly here is to be explained by the simple statement that Messieurs Macdonald and Dorion did not introduce the double majority question in 1861 with any idea of carrying it, but merely for the purpose of testing the ministerial strength. So that as matter of fact the question did not really come before Parliament ‘as a matter for practical consideration.” The subsequent adoption of the principle by the Macdonald-Sicotte Government in 1862 was merely nominal, as when the time came for acting upon it it was thrown overboard, and that without any serious attempt at explanation.—S$See post, p. 429,

ew buld

word quesefore ere is d not erely bstion

The 2 was 1, and

The Eve of Confederation. 411

not tolerate an alliance between them and Mr. Brown. Even the great ability and popularity of Mr, Dorion could not stand the pressure brought to bear upon his alliance with the Chief of the Clear Grits. He was erelong superseded in the leadership of the Lower Canadian Opposition by Mr. Sicotte, who contrived to get together a strong support in the Assembly, including Messieurs Drummond, Loranger and Lemieux. The alliance between Mr. Sicotte and Mr. J. S. Macdonald soon became a fait «ccompli, and their united strength rendered necessary the utmost vigilance and finesse on the part of the Ministry. The latter, however, though frequently embarrassed, got through the session, a great portion of which was taken up by discussions concerning the representation. A census had. been taken a few weeks before the opening, and after the Easter recess a synopsis of the returns was laid before the Assembly. It showed that whereas in 1841 the population of Lower Canada had been more than 200,000 in excess of that of the upper section of the Province, the latter now contained nearly 300,000 more people than the former. The logic of these figures was inexorable, and gave additional vigour to the agitation for representation according to population. Hence the numerous discussions on that subject. The most important of them ensued upon a Bill introduced by the member for South Simcoe, already mentioned, which contemplated a sort of modified representation by population. Every conspicuous member of the House took part in the debate, and Mr. John A. Macdonald made à most eloquent and telling speech against the proposed measure. Mr. Cartier took an uncompromising stand, declaring that under the Union Act Upper Canada had no right to a larger representation than Lower Canada, and that he would never consent to sacrifice the claims of the latter by so much as a haï”sbreadth. In so arguing the Premier proved himself to be devoid of political prescience. The next few years taught him much, but he learned nothing on this important question until knowledge was