Centralization and Expansion as trends in

Canadian Development: Post-Confederation

Marc Chartrand
HIST 3441
Dr. C.M. Davis
Chartrand 2

In the Constitution Act of 1867, four colonies and provinces of British North America

(BNA) were unified in the form of a federation to establish an independent nation: the Dominion

of Canada. The governance of these new provinces became a federal concern, with authority

centralized in the Canadian government, which operated out of Ottawa, in the new province of

Ontario. The new system of government in Canada was modeled after the British Westminster

system of parliamentary democracy, which included legislative, executive, and judicial branches

of government. By 1880, the provinces of Prince Edward Island (PEI), British Columbia (BC),

Manitoba, and the Northwest Territory became part of the Dominion. The two aforementioned

processes, the centralization of government which displaced elements of regional and local

power to a strong federal government, and the westward expansion of Canada from the Eastern

seaboard to the Pacific Coast are two of the most integral pieces of Canadian national

development. Canadian Confederation refers to the process by which the federation of the

Dominion of Canada (Canada) was formed1. The very nature of this historical term highlights the

fact that the development of Canada as a nation did not happen or at any time or place; rather, it

was the result of historical patterns, processes, and circumstance.

The story of Canadian Confederation can be paralleled with the Canadian Pacific

Railway (CPR); it is as long and meandering as the great transcontinental railroad that linked

together the once distant and remote colonies of British Columbia and PEI. The origins of

national development in Canada can be traced back to the annals European politics during the

glorious Age of Discovery. In search of wealth and prosperity, it was not long after the great

European empires of the 15th century began to sail navigators across the Atlantic Ocean that

European settlement in these foreign lands started to flourish. These early voyages quickly led to

1
Forsey, 6
Chartrand 3

colonization efforts fueled by distinctive political transformations and unprecedented economic

developments. The growth of these offshore developments in the Northern Hemisphere ushered

in an era of intercontinental carnage as the British and French empires waged war against one

another, vying for power in the vast land mass across the Atlantic. Conflict between the empires

was inevitable given the considerable amounts of wealth that were being generated from the

control of lucrative trading networks established under the new system of mercantilism. i

After decades of war between the two empires, fighting subsided at the Treaty of Paris

(1763) when the French ceded the rule and control of all their territory in North America to the

British. Any sentiments of victory or triumph on the British side, however, were very short-lived.

Britain now faced the formidable challenges involved with managing the affairs of an entire

continent. In the following decades, the formidable British Empire would suffer from a series of

colonial catastrophes. In their most severe debacle, thirteen of their own most powerful Atlantic

colonies declared independence and established a sovereign American republic after emerging

victorious from a long and bloody revolutionary war which left the British military devastated.

After the recognition of American independence, the British colonies of Nova Scotia, New

Brunswick, Newfoundland, PEI and the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada remained as

British North America. It was during this epoch of political turbulence and uncertainty that the

road towards Canadian Confederation began.

By the 1850s, British North America was highly segregated due to the demographic

diversity in the composition of different regions. “In many cases”, three distinguished Canadian

historians write in their book Destinies: Canadian History Since Confederation, “the European

communities in Canada began as pockets of settlement, independent of one another, founded at

Chartrand 4

different times, and with people of various European backgrounds”2. As a result of this divergent

developmental feature, by the 19th century, social and cultural anxiety was rampant in many of

the colonies; tension and animosity only intensified between French and English populations.

Ethnic antagonisms were particularly prevalent in Lower Canada, which stretched from the Gulf

of the St. Lawrence to the shores of Northern Labrador.

Lower Canada, or the province of Quebec, was populated by an overwhelming French-

speaking majority who resented British rule. Lower Canada had formerly been the colony of

New France under French rule, and as a result, they favored Roman Catholicism as a religion and

the French civil code as a legal system. The interests, aspirations, and values of the French-

speaking population were often at odds with their neighbors in Upper Canada. Upper Canada, to

the geographic south of Lower Canada, featured a predominantly Anglican English-speaking

population made up largely of Anglo-Saxons, as well as smaller groups of Scottish and Irish

settlers. English-French relations were a focal point in establishing a union of the colonies in the

1850s. Domestic strife within the United Canadas created political instability among the colonies

as John A. Macdonald’s Conservatives, George Brown’s Reformers, Antoine Dorion’s radical

Parti Rouge, and Cartier’s Parti Bleu were pitted against one another3. This political deadlock4

and demographic pressure would have a profound influence on Confederation and the nature and

evolution of the nation.

Canadian politician and statesman John A. Macdonald served as Prime Minister during

two for a total of 19 years, through the most formative period of early Canadian development.

MacDonald, a successful politician of Scottish descent, would sometimes show up to parliament

2
Francis, xix
3
Francis, 6-7. 11
4
Francis, 3
Chartrand 5

drunk, having a notorious acquired taste for “champagne, claret, port and brandy” 5. Macdonald

implemented a federal program aimed at centralizing power in the federal government at the

expense of regional or provincial autonomy. Macdonald’s policies towards the extension and

consolidation of the Federal legislative and executive powers6 can be seen as tools towards

national unity. After all, the new Canadian “nation” was merely a political entity and lacked

almost all the traditional components needed to constitute a nation: “a common language, a

common cultural tradition, or a common religion” 7. It is likely that MacDonald, a masterful

politician, identified the fragile and delicate nature of this new union, and used centralization as a

means to strengthen federal power. By moving away from established ways of local governance

and administration, new national policies standardized the way authority was conducted. As local

concerns became federal concerns, and local problems became federally debated political issues,

the fragility of the union was slowly strengthened. Centralization, therefore, was imperative in

the case of the Canadas, given the inter-regional and inter-ethnic tensions earlier explained.

These tensions had led to a political deadlock; each region wanting to do things their own way,

and centralization was the most feasible solution.

Let us return back to the 1850s.ii

In the Eastern Atlantic colonies of Nova Scotia, PEI, New Brunswick, and

Newfoundland, there was a strong opposition towards union. These colonies were occupied by

Protestant English Speaking majorities, many staunch loyalists to the British crown who had

settled in the Maritimes after having fled the southern colonies after the American Revolution.

Initially, the Maritime Provinces did not see any benefits in joining into a union with the more

5
Gwyn, 268
6
LaSelva, 21
7
Francis, 31
Chartrand 6

western regions. Many were economically self-sufficient, as they had developed their own

markets, industries and trade relationships. Atlantic business and industry had prospered as a

result of the Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty, a free trade policy established in 1854

which allowed Canadian goods to enter American markets free from taxation or tariff 8. Initially,

the Maritime Provinces voted against union, but in the following year, the United States ended

the reciprocity, greatly reducing demand for Maritime Provinces and severely affecting revenue

as a result of the new restrictive trade policies. This event was significant because it served as a

catalyst for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to join Confederation in 1867. Such externalities

would prove to be critical and influential factors in Canadian national formation.

National development in Canada was influenced by a number of other external elements.

Throughout the first half of the 19th century, Britain found itself unable to efficiently and

effectively deal with the difficulties of managing and governing each of the different regions. In

the years immediately preceding Confederation, the British government showed reluctance to

continue to support the status of the different regions as British colonies. Canadian Historians

Robert Francis, Richard Jones, and Donald Smith highlight the fact that “by the mid-1860s,

Britain wanted to rid itself of the expense of defending BNA, and to ease tension in its relations

with the United States”9. The British made their intentions clear that they favored a self-

governing British North America or colonial union at the London Conference in 1866 when the

“British government refused to retract its support”10 for Canadian Confederation when pressed

by Nova Scotian politician Joseph Howe to reject union. The British probably viewed British

North America as something of a liability. In order to defend their colonies, the British had to

8
Masters, 6-7, 65
9
Francis, 9
10
Francis, 10
Chartrand 7

send scores of soldiers and drop serious expenditures on railway building. A union of the

colonies would provide immediate financial relief for Britain since the colonies would become

obligated to defend themselves, also allow for new financial markets, opportunities, and a larger

fiscal foundation manage expensive projects11. Britain also found itself in a problematic situation

with the United States. They had supported the southern Confederates over the northern

Unionists in the Civil War, and after the latter emerged victorious, Britain had fallen out of their

favor. Should the American republic seek retribution against Britain, it would be their northern

neighbours in British North America who would suffer the consequences.

Threats of an American annexation of Britain’s colonies in BNA were looming and such

a takeover would threaten the livelihood of all British North Americans. When two Confederate

envoys were found on the British steamer the Trent, on their way to Britain, a war between the

two nations seemed imminent. Thought it never happened, it led to much postulation and

discussion among the remaining British colonies. From the American standpoint, the annexation

of Canada may have seemed as a natural step in the direction of Manifest Destiny, the notion that

the United States was destined to rule over the entire North American continent 12. Such rhetoric

was extremely popular, and the issue received considerable attention after a small group of

Irishmen known as the Fenian Brotherhood decided to take it upon themselves to annex Canada

in May 186613. Though the Fenians were unsuccessful, co-operation between the colonies

seemed like the only plausible way for BNA to defend itself from foreign invasion.

As a result of these features (threat of annexation, decline in British support, cancellation

of reciprocity treaty), Canadian national development took on a new direction of expansion

11
Francis, 4
12
Orchard, 185-187
13
Francis, 9-10
Chartrand 8

starting in the 1860s. The most important aspects of these expansionist policies were plans for a

national economy and the construction of a transcontinental railway. The construction of the

Canadian Pacific Railway began in May of 188114, and led to larger domestic markets, increased

military effectiveness, and better transportation and communication. The threat of American

annexation, and Britain’s reluctance to defend the colonies required that the Canadians be able to

defend themselves. The CPR provided the Dominion of Canada with just this: the ability to

rapidly and efficiently mobilize troops and transport supplies and munitions. The effectiveness of

the railroad in concerns of national security was made evident in its application during the North-

West Rebellion of 188515. The CPR was also important because it connected the Maritime

Provinces with Central Canada, and later, Western Canada, creating larger domestic markets and

providing a reliable means to transport commodities. Once again, this can be attributed to the

desire of the Maritime Provinces to account for lost revenue as a result of a key external factor:

American cancellation of the reciprocity treaty. Macdonald accompanied railroad construction

with a powerful National Policy.

Along with the completion of the transcontinental railway, the National Policy

encouraged immigration to fill the vacant West, and high tariffs on imported goods aimed at

strengthening fledgling Canadian industries by protecting them from foreign competition.

MacDonald’s plan was to strengthen the fragile political creation of Canada needed to become

grounded with strong national economy – one that would have be centered on trade eastwards

and westwards instead of trade north and south (with the United States). Western development

was a key part of building an autonomous and peaceful nation on the northern half of the

continent. If Macdonald did expand Westward, combining the colonies of Vancouver Island and

14
Francis, 64
15
Deir, 152
Chartrand 9

Vancouver into the Province of British Columbia, and connecting them through the

transcontinental railroad, it would be only a matter of time until the American sentiment of

Manifest Destiny would compel them to take over that land, encircle Canada, and ultimately

annex it 16. The impending threat of American annexation, as well as the need for a strong

national economy and domestic markets amidst internal strife and tension heavily determined

Canada’s course of expansion westwards.

“In the Confederation Era,” according to historian Dr. Mark Davis at Mount Allison

University, “it is apparent that two of the predominant tendencies were centralization and

expansion”17. The propensities of Canadian national development to take such courses in the two

decades following Confederation are a direct result of Canada’s circumstances in the two

decades immediately preceding Confederation. Internal issues such as intensifying demographic

tension, English-French relations, a political deadlock amongst the colonies of British North

America, the construction of an inter-colonial railroad, and resulted in the need of a strong

central government following Confederation in order to keep the colonies unified and strengthen

the new nation. External factors such as reluctance of the British to continue to support and

defend their North American colonies, the U.S. doctrine of Manifest Destiny, the looming threat

of American invasion and Canadian annexation, and the American civil war compelled the new

Canadian nation to expand Westwards in search of a way to consolidate national development. iii

16
Orchard, 75-79
17
Davis, 6
Chartrand 10

Bibliography

Brown, Craig. "The Nationalism of the National Policy." Readings in Canadian History: post-
confederation. By R. Douglas. Francis and Donald B. Smith. Toronto [u.a.: Nelson
Thomson Learning, 2006. 24-28.
Davis, C. M. History 3441: Post-Confederation Canada Guidebook. Sackville: Mount Allison
University, 2009.
Deir, Elspeth, Paul Deir, and Keith Hubbard. Canada : years of change: from 1814. Toronto:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston of Canada, 1982.
Forsey, Eugene Alfred. How Canadians govern themselves. 3rd ed. The University of Michigan:
Public Information Office, House of Common, 1991.
Francis, Robert D., Richard Jones, and Donald B. Smith. Destinies: Canadian history since
confederation. Scarborough: Thomson Nelson, 2006.
Gwyn, Richard J. John A.: the man who made us : the life and times of John A. Macdonald.
Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2008.
LaSelva, Samuel V. The moral foundations of Canadian federalism: paradoxes, achievements,
and tragedies of nationhood. Montréal: McGill-Queen's UP, 1996.
Masters, Donald C. The reciprocity treaty of 1854: its history, its relation to British colonial and
foreign policy and to the development of Canadian fiscal autonomy. Toronto: McClelland
and Stewart, 1963.
Orchard, David. The fight for Canada: four centuries of resistance to American expansionism.
Toronto: Stoddart, 1994.

i
This paragraph may seem unnecessary, but I thought it would be a nice preamble to the discussion on Canadian
Confederation, providing important context
ii
I realize I will lose marks for this, but it was a necessary addition - I had a lot of trouble arranging the various ideas
and paragraphs in an organized and academic manner.. I originally planned to write the essay in a somewhat
chronological order, with the introduction as the 5th or 6th paragraph, but I had to move everything around because it
seemed like I was just “re-stating the facts”, and offering little analysis. This might explain the disfluency or
fragmented nature of my essay
iii
Personally I would have done without this because I felt that most of the paragraphs were conclusive enough in
themselves, as they all drew upon one another. I added this somewhat weak conclusion only for conventional
reasons, sorry, I just really wasn’t “feeling it” –