Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-11-15
Canada and the Feuiaus.

Lorne's article in the London ContelnpO-
rGry ReUieU on "Home Rule III Canada"
He says.
Canada and the Fenians.
Having been asked for some notes on
the Canadian union as suggestive OF the
steps which might be taken to meet the
demand for some kind of home rule in
Ireland or as bearing on future Australian
confederation, | submit the following re-
marks: 1t will be remembered that two
years ago both houses of the Canadian Leg
islature passed resolutions recommending
that ireland should enjoy some system of
self-government, analogous to that existing
in the Canadian Dominion Canada had
n perfect right to express her
opinion, as she had repeatedly been put
to great expense by Fenian alarms
along her frontier, alarms which occasion
her trouble only because she forms an in
tegral part of the British empire. 1t is
well known that it entirely depends on
the good will of the government of the
United States whether such troubles shall
not again arise whenever there is political
excitement in Ireland. Several of the
Dominion's former statesmen and orators
have been Irishmen. Men of Irish name
and blood are found in every city, town,
village and rural community throughout
the country. These men are heartily
loyal to the empire, and seeing large
amount OF autonomy exhibiting in each
province, they jump with characteristic
suddenness to the conclusion could Ire
land initiate Canada her community would
be equally happss&bey have many votes,
put before the Canadian Parliament, as
Likely TO BENEFIT THEIR BRETHREN
in the old country, would find support, es-
pecially If the proposal were introduced
before a general election. 1t is notorious
ly uncertain whether what suits one cOun-
try will suit another, although inhabited
with men of the same race, if the country
present different feature in size, climate
and resources. This is specially the case
as between Canada and the old countries.
The first possess a vast eXpanse of lands
whose geographical interests may be alike,
but which was originally represented by
completely separate colonies, having diff
ferent trade arrangements. Even now these
several populations are very scanty as
compared with the extent of territory they
inhabit; so scanty, indeed, that there are
wide stretches over which they do not
reach hands to each other. The united
kingdoms have, on the other hand, a very
small area OF country, whose geographical
| interests must, of necessity, be identical,
and they have population which al
ready swarm upon almost every tract
| where man can live with comfort. 1t is
| these facts which disclose the vast
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES.
1t is of the greatest Importance to re-
| member that the central government of both
| the United States and the Dominion were
created by the several separate colonies
| that agreed to regulate certain powers only
to the Federal chambers. The central
government of Great Britain and Ireland,
on the contrary, is the outcome of CEN
turies of successful effort to unite in Lon
don the Imperial Legislature. 1t was but
the other day that the United States
fought for stronger Federal powers. 1t
was after the successful issue of that war,
and tAe Strengthening of the Federal gov
ernment at Washington that Canada
framed her constitution expressly guard
ing it against disintegration, by making
the central power supreme in all but local
legislation. Thus we see these English
speaking people aim at strengthening the
power Of the central algoverment, and there
is no instance in which the Legislative
privilege, once given to the government OF
the Union, has been taken from il
and given again to individual States
II may be a question in Amer
lea how far State rights or home
rule led to the great civil war, but
in any case the geographical and climatic
differences between the North and South
led in the Soutk to the institution OF
slavery, which was the proximate reason
of STRIFE State rights, or home rule in
property and domestic matters, may be
natural, and held to bring no national dis
integration where great geographical anG
climatic differences make it impossible tC
have an all-powerful central government
/ J. ,,s.Io EnJg
ment by the result Of the war, it is notable
4 even now that the militia of America takt
their orders from the individual States
and not from Washington. This, which
is opposed to united national interests, i!
likely soon to disappear, and the govern
ment OF Washington will probably seel
to be masters of a stronger military organi
zation. The whole history of the Unite,
States shows tendency to
INCREASE THE POWERS OF THE FEDERAL GOV
EMINENT.
The history of Canada does the same
The confederation act of 1867 gave tn
largest powers then obtainable. Payment
made to the provinces to the new confed
'eration-that is, given to the provincial
government persuaded some of them al
most as much rs did any sentiment in ia
vor of forming new nation to join tn
|
has been a success and a national feelin
is rapidly rising, the young generation be
] ing proud of their country and not OF thei
province. Now if it be granted that tn
| tendency to strengthen the central powe
! exists it will be seen that it becomes
consequence of this. That no one mem
: Der of confederation should be mad
! strong enough to oppose with effect tn
central government which represents
majority. If a provincial feeling out {
|. loyalty to the general government
the civil war of lS60-64 may be RI
> peated on Canadian soil. The balanc
of power represented by the equality i
: strength of the members of the confeder:
!, ton is the best guarantee against this.
would be difficult for a Canadian PROVING
to propose any law, which vetoed by tn
a general government at Ottawa, would rails
II in the province much strong feeling again.
: the central government. The matters o
|. which any interference can arise al
II small. If, for instance, local option legi
u lation on drink be prohibited at Ottaw
and resisted in any province, it would |
2 difficult to get up war for whisky. n
u one province has anyone domestic institl
II ton which is likely TO be touched /
: Ottawa legislators in manner whic
u would raise a rebellion, and there is bl
= little temptation for local governments
{ enact laws provocative of disallowance |
the Governor-Cieneral in council. Lift
= or no margin is left for dispute by eaC
{ each side. The local, as well as the D.
II minion, government,
q KNOWS THE LIMITS OF ITS POWERS,
: and respects them. Then there is alwa
r at hand the important friend of each, Il
is Imperial Privy Council, not to menti(
II the Supreme Court of Canada, and both
c these may be used to fall back on as
l. dBicNs curiG whose decision can sett
any dispute. The common sense
most can be severely tried. Our col
munities in this greater Britain ha
filed down TO a minimum their deman
;" for home rule in their separate provinc,
and practically retain only those questio
., for local decision of which the central Pa
n Lament is glad to be rid OF, and of viii,
a it may be profitably relieved. No que
~ tions can be raised which shall unite
y race, section or geographical part of Il
o country as a unit against the central 60
m ernment. Canadian provincial rigE
of means only the right TO make laws
&c purely domestic matters. Such, namely,
a ars mainly comprised in educational al
n civil rights legislation, and any. q
10 nnands arising from differences, ha
~ proved capable OF treatment because q
N case has been treated provincially. I
~ trouble has not affected the country
n large, but a province only. Experien
h. ON the American continent shows tn
~ while local matters may be left to pro
:, inical assemblies, it is all important tn
!. no section Of country shall be organic
i in such strength as 70 be able to for
4 a policy leading to conflict. Ii ths
- are differences the troubles arising
=. tween them should be dealt with by I
Is central government, whose policy is, ait
10 clearing the ground, to divide it und
Al several local authorities and give to the
ar a definite and un limited power.
le
hi THREATENED SECESSION