The British Empire had its beginning in the initiative of private business men, not in any conscious policy of state.Yet as the Empire grew the teaching of doctrinaires and the example of other colonial powers had developed a definite policy whereby the plantations overseas were to be made to serve the needs of the nation at home.The end of empire was commercial profit; the means, the political subordination of the colonies; the debit entry, the cost of the military and naval and diplomatic services borne by the mother country.But the course of events had now broken down this theory.Britain, for her own good, had abandoned protection, and with it fell the system of preference and monopoly in colonial markets.Not only preference had gone but even equality.The colonies, notably Canada, which was most influenced by the United States, were perversely using their new found freedom to protect their own manufacturers against all outsiders, Britain included.When Sheffield cutlers, hard hit by Canada's tariff, protested to the Colonial Secretary and he echoed their remonstrance, the Canadian Minister of Finance, A.
T.Galt, stoutly refused to heed."Self-government would be utterly annihilated," Galt replied in 1860, "if the views of the Imperial Government were to be preferred to those of the people of Canada.It is therefore the duty of the present government distinctly to affirm the right of the Canadian legislature to adjust the taxation of the people in the way they deem best -even if it should unfortunately happen to meet the disapproval of the Imperial Ministry." Clearly, if trade advantage were the chief purpose of empire, the Empire had lost its reason for being.
With the credit entry fading, the debit entry loomed up bigger.
Hardly had the Corn Laws been abolished when Radical critics called on the British Government to withdraw the redcoat garrisons from the colonies: no profit, no defense.Slowly but steadily this reduction was effected.To fill the gaps, the colonies began to strengthen their militia forces.In Canada only a beginning had been made in the way of defense when the Trent episode brought matters to a crisis.If war broke out between the United States and Great Britain, Canada would be the battlefield.
Every Canadian knew it; nothing could be clearer.When the danger of immediate war had passed, the Parliament of Canada turned to the provision of more adequate defense.A bill providing for a compulsory levy was defeated in 1862, more on personal and party grounds than on its own merits, and the Ministry next in office took the other course of increasing the volunteer force and of providing for officers' training.Compared with any earlier arrangements for defense, the new plans marked a great advance;but when judged in the light of the possible necessity of repelling American invasion, they were plainly inadequate.Aburst of criticism followed from England; press and politicians joined in denouncing the blind and supine colonials.Did they not know that invasion by the United States was inevitable? "If the people of the North fail," declared a noble lord, "they will attack Canada as a compensation for their losses; if they succeed, they will attack Canada in the drunkenness of victory."If such an invasion came, Britain had neither the power nor the will, the "Times" declared, to protect Canada without any aid on her part; not the power, for "our empire is too vast, our population too small, our antagonist too powerful"; not the will, for "we no longer monopolize the trade of the colonies; we no longer job their patronage." To these amazing attacks Canadians replied that they knew the United States better than Englishmen did.They were prepared to take their share in defense, but they could not forget that if war came it would not be by any act of Canada.It was soon noted that those who most loudly denounced Canada for not arming to the teeth were the Southern sympathizers."The 'Times' has done more than its share in creating bad feeling between England and the United States,"declared a Toronto newspaper, "and would have liked to see the Canadians take up the quarrel which it has raised....We have no idea of Canada being made a victim of the Jefferson Bricks on either side of the Atlantic."The question of defense fell into the background when the war ended and the armies of the Union went back to their farms and shops.But the discussion left in the minds of most Englishmen the belief that the possession of such colonies was a doubtful blessing.Manchester men like Bright, Liberals like Gladstone and Cornewall Lewis, Conservatives like Lowe and Disraeli, all came to believe that separation was only a question of time.Yet honor made them hesitate to set the defenseless colonies adrift to be seized by the first hungry neighbor.
At this juncture the plans for uniting all the colonies in one great federation seemed to open a way out; united, the colonies could stand alone.Thus Confederation found support in Britain as well as a stimulus from the United States.This, however, was not enough.Confederation would not have come when it did--and that might have meant it would never have come at all--had not party and sectional deadlock forced Canadian politicians to seek a remedy in a wider union.
