Causes of Confederation

Comparative Review of: The Road to Confederation, The Emergence of Canada: 1863 - 1867; Donald Creighton

Britain and the Origins of Canadian Confederation, 1837-67; Ged Martin

Submitted By: Robert Young

Submitted To: D.N. Sprague

Date: November 26^th, 1999

In July of 1867, the British colonies of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Canada united to become the Dominion of Canada. Historians tend to believe that British pressure and circumstances of 1864 through 1867 caused Confederation. This is the general belief of Donald Creighton in his book, The Road to Confederation. Ged Martin, however, in his book, Britain and the Origins of Canadian Confederation, 1837 - 67 challenges this belief.

Creighton states that the building of the Intercolonial Railway, pressure from the United States and especially the Fenians, the quest for westward expansion, "deadlock" in the Canadian Legislature, and intervention from the imperial government, are the causes of Confederation. Martin, however, says that while some of these were true reasons that helped Confederation along, Confederation was inevitable and had been talked about and debated for many years previous to 1864.

The time frame of "The Road To Confederation" is of deep contrast between the two authors. Creighton focuses on the events of 1864 through 1867, and mentions a little from the late fifties, usually just to emphasize particular politicians' backgrounds. He starts his book off with, "It was the enthusiasm of Gordon of New Brunswick that gave the movement its real start.", referring to maritime confederation, which he says that while it was a subject of discussion, it had never received popular support until Gordon, who helped bring about the Charlottetown conference. Martin, though, shows that general British North American Union has not only been long talked about, but was even found to be debated in British Legislature in the early 19^th century. The fact was that union talks were happening throughout the 1800's in not only Canada, but also Australia and South Africa.

Creighton suggests that military pressure from the United States, who just ended their civil war, and also from the Fenians, the group looking for Irish liberation, was one of the reasons in which union occurred. He states that, "real strength lay in union"(pg 220). What was the real strength in confederation? Martin argues that the combination of the militias of the colonies brought together would never stand up to the immense US army. One of the major points of the defense theory is the building of the Intercolonial railway. However, Martin states that the planned route for the railway sometimes came within 20 miles of the Lower Canada/Maine border. "It was ridiculous to imagine that the Americans would sit by while convoys of potentially hostile troops lumbered along hundred of miles of railway line close enough to their own border to be sabotaged."(pg 61), Canada would have to continually guard the line, or expect it attacked and/or seized. As well, the Grand Trunk, which the Intercolonial would connect to, sometimes came within shooting range of the US border!

The railway in general is another topic to argue about in its importance in bringing about Confederation. Creighton goes along with the belief of the 1860's politicians that Confederation would build the Intercolonial. Martin shows that Canada completed a railway to Portland, Maine in 1851, and that did not require union of Canada and the United States. The British also had agreed to give the provinces the loan for the Intercolonial in 1862, and no Confederation was required.

The major contrast between Creighton and Martin's views is the idea of British "pressure". Creighton's view is that British intervention and pressure was one of the major causes of Confederation. He devotes a chapter entitled "Appeal to Caesar" talking about the Canadian delegation's trip to England to gain support for union. Martin argues, along with criticizing the title of "Caesar" for the Imperial government, that yes, Britain did support a general union of British North America, but the British government did no more than that. He says that "the weight of the British government" isn't what changed the minds of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, but rather it was the trouble the politicians of the mainland Maritimes provinces were having in making up their minds. The New Brunswick government elected in 1865 was "anti-confederate". However, in less than a year, they realized that they were not against Confederation in general, but just against the Quebec scheme. This is the same for the Nova Scotia government that was originally "anti-confederate". Martin says this inconsistency is what causes the change of heart in Nova Scotians and New Brunswickers. This can be seen in the New Brunswick election of 1866, where the Unionists went from a pitiful eleven seats in an assembly of forty-one, when the Anti-Confederates were in power in 1865 to a majority of thirty-three seats. This was because of problems with the Anti-Confederate government, such as the Westward Extension promise, and not because of British pressure.

Martin believes that the roots of Confederation came long before the pivotal year of 1864, however it was the ambition of Upper Canadian politicians that helped push it through to become an act of the British parliament in early 1867. He states that it was the governments and politicians of the colonies themselves, not British pressure nor any other external or internal problem, which led to Confederation. Martin also believes that Confederation was fought in not necessarily the colonies' best interests', but possibly in the interests of some of the so called "Fathers of Confederation". This is the view that I believe explains the happenings of the 1860's the most clearly.