In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

REVIEWS 521 neutralin September•939, andSkeltoncouldnevermustermuchenthusiasm for thewaruntiltheFallof Francecreatedagenuine-seeming threattoCanada.He was far moreinterested in Canada's relations withtheUnitedStates, in accommodating thedominiontotheprotective hemispheric policythendominantinWashington. 'It wascertainlythe bestday'swork donefor manya year,'Skeltontold the prime ministeraftertheOgdensburg Agreement hadbeenreached inmid-August •94o.'It didnotcomebychance, butastheinevitable sequence of publicpolicies andpersonal relationships, basedupontherealization of theimperativenecessity of close understanding between theEnglish-speaking peoples.' All thiswastrue.KingandSkelton hadbeenworkingtowardthegoalof anaccommodation of interests withtheUnited States,convinced that this was in the best interests of both countries (and Britain's too),andthewarprovided theopportunity thattheDepression hadnot.Ogdensburg also ensured thephysical security ofCanada, something thatathirdof acentury later we tend to forget,but something that King and Skeltonhad to consider. To have doneanything else in August•94øwouldhavebeenanappalling lapse of policy, an abdication of responsibility. ForWinstonChurchillin London,however,Ogdensburg rankled.Here wasthe seniordominionscuttling for coverunderthewingof a neutral.Everyimperialist bonein hisbodyachedat the thought.'Here again,'he telegraphed to Mackenzie King in a message that staggered the Canadian,'there maybe two opinions... Supposing Mr. Hitler cannotinvadeusandhisAir Forcebegins toblenchunderthe strainallthese transactions willbejudgedinamooddifferenttothatprevailing while theissue stillhangs in thebalance.' PoorKingandSkelton.They hadbelieved that anything tieingtheneutralUnitedStates totheempirewasagain.Theywerecorrect, of course, and Churchill was in error, in the short- and medium-term, at least. Ogdensburg wasa gain,freeingCanadians of the necessity to thinkof defending theircoasts andleavingthemabletoconcentrate onthewaroverseas. Thesetwohugevolumes of Documents onCanadian External Relations tellthisstory andmanymore.Here thereismaterialonvariousCanadiannegotiating missions to LondonandWashington, onHydePark,onFrench gold,onrelations withVichyand deGaulle,ontheexpansion in Canadian representation abroad.It isallprimestuff, carefullyandintelligently selected from avastarchive,wellannotated,indexedand re-indexed, anddesigned skilfullyfor scholarly users. Thesevolumes arethebestof ther•½v.•t series to date,thefirst,I suspect, in whichthosefamiliarwiththematerial availablewillnotquarrelwiththeselection. There isoneerror - Arthur Roebuckwas not,asheislistedin a footnote,a Conservative M}'- but Professor Murray andthe Historical Division ofExternalAffairsareentitledtoplaudits. Now,if thepublication of theremainingvolumes canonlybespeeded up ... J.L. GRANATSTEIN YorkUniversity Duplessis. co•4vo, r• BL•CI{.Toronto, McClellandand Stewart,•977. PP. 743, illus. $•6.95. MauriceDuplessis waspremierof Quebecfrom August•936 toOctober•939, and 522 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW again forfifteenunbroken years fromAugustx944toSeptember x959.He was head ofagovernment foralongtime,butalmost any7oo-page biography isfartoolong. Thisonewouldbetoolong,evenif theauthorhada thorough knowledge of the background. Unhappily hisknowledge of thehistory of theperiodisverysketchy, andeventhefactualinformationaboutDuplessis isnotwelldigested. The resultis neither history norgood biography. In onesense, Black's Duplessis isnotabook. Because thefirstpartischronological, ithasacertain degree ofcoherence, butthe second part,whichcovers hissecond periodin office,dealssuccessively witha number oftopics, such asrelations withthefederal government andthechurch, and lacks continuity. Since there isnowhere aclear picture ofthebackground ofDuplessis 's latercareer,it isoftenhard to understandwhatmadehim reactashedid. WhileBlack hasassembled agreatdealofinteresting anduseful material about the lifeandtimes of Maurice Duplessis, thebookmightbecompared toacollection of pilesof lumber,bags of cement, bundles of shingles, kegs of nails,andtheother building materials gathered together tobuildahouse forwhich hehasnoblueprint and which is therefore never built. However, there is a wealth of new information whichisbothinteresting andimportantfrom Duplessis's ownpapersand from interviews withthosewhoknewhim andobserved hiscareer.The authorisobviously asmall-c conservative infected bythenowfashionable anti-Liberal bias, butheisnot anuncritical admirerofhissubject. He does attempt tobeobjective andclearly hasa sincere desire to getthefactsstraight, whethertheyarefavourable toDuplessis or not. Sincewehavein English no adequate history of the province of Quebec in the twentieth century andnoserious study of thecareerof itsmostcolourful leader, Black's Duplessis willprovide valuable materialfor thehistorian andpossibly for somefuture biographer. But, asa source,the bookwill haveto be usedwith discrimination, because the authorrepeatedlyfailsto understand whatthe issues were,particularly in federal-provincial relations, andbecause hehasnotchecked other factswith the carehe hasshownin ascertaining thoserelatingdirectlyto Duplessis himself. Despite thewealthofdetailaboutDuplessis, hedoes notemerge asanintegrated humanbeing.To those whohavewatched JohnDiefenbaker atclose range,Black's account suggests manysimilarities between himandDuplessis. Bothof themrated theirsupporters notbytheirabilitybut bytheirloyalty to thechief.Thosethey dislikedbecameenemiesof the state.Both avoidedmakingdecisions aslong as possible andmadethemcapriciously. Therewas thesame distrust of experts and even of facts that were inconvenient. Both were lone wolves. Politics for both consisted of thedistribution of rewards andpunishments. Eachwasexceedingly sentimental andbothbecame folkheroes eventomanywhodidnotapprove theirpolicies andattitudes. Duplessis was obviously afarmoresuccessful leader thanDiefenbaker, though his methods were noless personal. Unfortunately, Black isnotable toidentify thecharacteristics whichmadehimsosuccessful. In afewpages inhisMemoires Ren• Chaloult gives amoredistinct andmorecredible portrait ofDuplessis. Blacktries,butfails,togivea comprehensive exposition of theinherentconservatism ofDuplessis. At theclose ofthebook,page 687,hemakes Duplessis almost a REVIEWS 523 revolutionarywhenhe says 'Duplessis's greatestcontributionto Quebechad been jurisdictional.If Quebechashad ability,in the sixtiesand seventies, to achieve independenceor reassociate with Canada,that is due principallyto him. He wrenchedfrom Ottawa the fiscalandjurisdictionalpowersnecessary to the autonomyof the province.And he presidedoverthe...

pdf

Share