The Sun.
London, England, 1868-12-15 00:00:00

THE UN= OF THE AMERICAN

CONTINEN7.

(From the Anglo-American Times.)

As Americans never approach this subject with- ;
out being accusedlof highfaluten, spread-eagleism,
and buncombe, and sneered at as holding the theory '
of the "Manifest Destiny," it is refreshing to fol-
low the steps of a clever, keenly observant young
English member of Parliament, the author of the
late book of travels, which he has well designated
the " Greater Britain." There never was a stronger
holder of the manifest destiny theory than Mr.
CHARLES WENTWORTH DILKE, member for Chel-
sea to the British House of Commons. He considers
North America to be geographically so constituted
that it can form but one nation. Where are the
boundaries in a valley penetrating the heart of the
continent, and watered by streams navigable for
28,000 miles? The configuration is such as to make
the country essentially and unchangeably one, thus
stamped by the hand of its MAKER. This territory
is possessed by a race so rapidly increasing that if
the present ratio be maintained the inhabitants in
60 years will number 250,000,000, all moulded into
the type given by.the early English colonists, which
is eventually assumed by all corners. Mr. DILKE
takes a view regarding Canada which Englishmen
may consider peculiar, though it has been advocated
by us since the establishment of this paper. 'We need-
then scarcely state that in our opinion his view is
correct, and we earnestly hope it may have a con-
siderable influence:on his countrymen, but not too
late for action—as so often happens with them.
After glancing through the chapter on Canada, we
turned to an article in the issue of this paper, March
7, 1868, among others, and the identity of the con-
clusions was manifest. In following, then, this
author we are but following in our own track. The
Canadian exclaims, " Help us for ten years to be-
come ten millions, when we can stand alone ;" but
the difficulty is in reaching the ten millions, and no
country furnishes a better instance than Canada
itself. Every species of puffery to draw immigrants,
every effort of detraction of the great Republic to
divert the emigration from it to the Dominion, has
been practised, with what result Mr. DILKE con-
temptuously tells. " The Provincial Government
thus seems confess to the world," he adds,
" that Canada can live only by running down the
United States." " For such Government there is
no pretext, except the wishes of the governed,
who gain by the connection even for their defence,
and the opportunity of gratifying their spite for
their neighbours at our expense. Those who ask
why a connection so one-sided, so opposed to the
best interests of our race, should be suffered to con-
tinue, are answered, now that the argument of
prestige' is given up, that the Canadians are loyal
and that they hate the Americans, to whom, were
it not for us, they must inevitably fall. That the
Canadians hate the Americans can be no rea-
son why we should spend blood and trea-
sure in protecting them against.the consequences
of their hate. The world should have passed
the time when loyal dislikes can be suffered to
effect our policy towards the other sections of our
race; but even were it otherwise, it is hard to see
how twelve thousand British troops or a royal
standard raised at Ottawa can protect a frontier of
two thousand milts in length from a nation of five-
and-thirty millions. Canada, perhaps, can defend
herself, but we most certainly cannot defend her ;
we provoke much more than we assist." "At
bottom, it would seem that no one gained by the
retention of our hold on Canada. Were she inde-
pendent her borders would never again be wasted
by Fenian hordes, and she would escape the terrible
danger of being the battle-field in which Euro-
pean quarrels are fought out. Canada once Re-
publican, the MoNhoE doctrine would be satisfied,
and its most violent partisans would cease to advo-
cate the adoption of other than moral means to
merge her territories in the Union." . . . "On
the other hand, there is nothing stranger than the
narrowness of mind that has led us to see in Canada
a piece of England, and in America a hostile coun-
try. There are more sons of British subjects in
America than in Canada by far, and the Americans
, look upon the old country with a pride that cannot
be shared by a man who looks to her to pay his
soldiers. The independence of Canada would put
an immediate end to much of the American jealousy
of Great Britain—a consideration which of itself
should outweighs any claim to protection which the
Canadians can have on us. The position which we
have to set before us in our external dealings is that
we are no more fellow-countrymen of the Canadians
than of the Americans of the North or West."
These are new ideas for Britishers to ponder over.
The author has travelled around the world as we
did, and like ourselves found everywhere the domi-
nance of people speaking the English tongue. Our
conclusions are identical, and that arrived at by all
thoughtful, unprejudiced men who have seen as
much when they cease to be bound by imaginary
lines marking off States and Dominions, and accept
and identify themselves in all its breadth with the
destiny of the race, rising superior to the narrow-
nesses which so hamper mankind and deter the
speedy accomplishment of the future in store. In-
deed we have cause to be thankful that vicious idiots
have now little chance of throwing back the ad-
vance, for the increasing enlightenment of England
on American affairs is producing an effect which it
will be hard for Fenians and other haters of the
race to counteract. We have at times been applied
to, as the Anglo-Saxon paper, a name we consider a
compliment, though American unity is broad enough
for us, for there the grandest future will be developed,
though other nations planted by England, may
thrive vigorously elsewhere. There is a simple and
very forcible way for Englishmen to regard this
subject. They cannot henceforth prevent it by any
efforts, even if the Civil War once gave them the
chance, which we do not believe. Allowing that
what we cannot help is disagreeable, there is
none the less necessity for meeting and making
the best of the position ; therefore, whether it
be or be not injurious to the interests of Great
Britain that the Republic should rule from Aspin-
wall to Alaska, it must be recognized as a future

which cannot be controlled. But would it be in-
jurious ? and if so, how ? Canada would be no
loss, the Hudson's Bay Territory would be sold,
and even the rumour, would enhance the value of
the shares. The possessions on the Pacific Coast
cannot even provide decently for half a dozen
younger sons, and the supposed loss would really
on investigation prove a gain, as Mr. DILKE as-
serts. But what about the future? There, in the
gloom visible to the eye of the Englishman stalks
the ghost of a gigantic Columbia treading down
the Lilliputians around upon whom she puts her
foot, crushing them almost without seeing them.
It is a positive fact that England's policy in this
matter is governed by some such vision the
nation is legislating on a distempered dream. Now
let us take the testimony of this Englishman of the
Republic's course upon a doctrine, as dear to it,
almost as life, for from the past we can better fore-
tell the future—" In all history nothing can be
more dignified than the action of America upon the
MONROE doctrine. Since the principle was first
laid down in words in 1823, the national action has
been courteous, consistent, firm ; the language used
now that America is all-powerful is the same that
her statesmen used during the rebellion in the
hour of her most instant trial ; it would be hard for
political philosophers of the future to assert, a De-
mocratic Republic can have no foreign policy."
This nightmare removed, and Britannia convinced
that she can walk hand iu hand with Columbia
without being snubbed and bullied by her cousin,
however great and wealthy she may grow, then
the policy of North American unity wall soon be
recognized, as far as the States now desire that it
should be. There is nothing more preposterous
than the action of Canada; it is like a little cur

snarling at a large good-natured Newfoundland
whose angry action, would effect its instant annihi•

lation. True, it has a friend iu another big dog,
who allows it scraps with bad grace, under the de-

lusion that in snarling at its big rival the small dog
shows its friendliness. But, unfortunately (indeed
it might be fortunate in case of a row), its big
friend is chained to its kennel, and could do but
little to save the provoking cur. Mr. DILKE re-
marks on the folly of Canadian statesmen in fos-
tering this feeling, as well as on the folly of the