Canadian Constitutional Studies by Sir Robert Laird Borden (review)

REVIEWS OF BOO KS CanadianConstitutional Studies. By the Right Hon. Sir ROBERT LAIRD BORDEN.(The MarfleetLectures, Universityof Toronto,October, 1921.) Toronto: Universityof TorontoPress. 1922. Pp. 163. THE lectures contained in this volume were delivered under the Marfleet foundationat the Universityof Toronto. The occasion wasauspicious. The lectureshiphad beensuspended for severalyearswhile Canadawas roundingoff and makingmoredefinitiveits nationalgroup-lifeunder the mostcompelling formativeforces in its history. Duringthisperiod Sir Robert Borden,as prime ministerof the Dominion,had guided Canadathroughits grim development, and there wassomething of a happy coincidence in the fact that he shouldhave beenchosento revive thelectureship by a series ofpapers onCanadian constitutional progress. The lectures--three in number--deal with the history of Canada underthree divisions: (a) from the cession to federation; (b) from federationto the World War; (c) duringthe World War and afterwards. The authoris carefulto disarmcriticism,andit is essential to keephis purpose in view. He hasaimedat givinga generalviewof "the beginningsand gradualdevelopment of our presentsystemof government," andheiscareful to pointoutthedifficulties ofcovering in anyadequate mannermorethantwocenturies ofhistory. His appealisto theaverage citizen,andthisfact mustnot beforgotten. At once let it besaidthat, within hisself-imposed limitationsandthoseimposed by the Trust, his volumeis of distinctvalue. In no otherbookis it possible to find such a conciseand, on the whole,accuratesurveyof Canadianconstitutional progress. It is a triumph of compression and of clearness, and within its limits it will hold a distinct place in historical literature. Nowhere else will the audience for whom Sir Robert writes find a more useful volume. It is,perhaps, a matter ofdebatewhetheror notpubliclectures shouldbegiventhepermanence of print. But the UniversityofToronto has decided, apparently, to publish the lectures delivered under the Marfleet foundation,and to give them the academicand public distinction belonging to similar foundations at Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin. Sir Robert Borden's book therefore must be examined as muchas possible in relationto its origins,evenwhile the ordinary standardsof historicalcriticismare appliedto it. 187 188 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW In the first two lecturesthe generalimpression left on the readeris that of a tour de force.. The distinguishedauthor is a newcomerin the field of historicalwriting, and appearsto havebeenoverwhelmed by the possibilities of his subject. As a consequence, the first two lecturesare rather overburdenedwith facts. They are informative, rather than interpretative. What we shouldhave preferredto have was the relation of facts to movements,their discussion not as past events,but as permanentand living forces. Even as a chronicler, Sir Robert is not always impeccable. For example, the demandfor an Assemblybefore the advent of the Loyalists goesalmost unnoticed, though it was perfectly logicalunder the terms of the Proclamationof 17133.The Britishmerchants in theprovince of Quebec mayhavebeen narrow-minded and arrogant--evenbigots. Much ink hasbeenspilled to pointout their offensive presumption.On the otherhand,theycame to the provincerelyingon the British promiseof representative institutions ,and the Loyalistsmerelyaccentuateda perfectlyconstitutional andjust claim. Again, the originof the QuebecAct is attributed almost exclusively to the internaldifficulties (p. 10). Even a popularaudience needswarningsand directionshere. Carleton'sdispatches alonewould provethat his eye wason Bostonrather than on Quebec,and North himselflinked the enactmentwith the comingcolonialtroubles. The ConstitutionalAct of 1701wasa perfectlylogicaloutcomeof the Revolution . At themoment when it was passed even Burtin himself was singing the praisesof the venerableBritish constitution,and Pitt's speeches duringthe progress of the bill disclose the fact that he firmly believed that British rule had failed in the colonies because there had been in themnocompleteapplicationof the Britishconstitution. His proposals were meant to aid the deliberate reproduction in the Canadas of the only systemwhich he l•new. There is nothing derogatoryin Pitt's purpose. He drove his political theory to the full length of its logic. It is alsoinconsistent to blameDurham for reservingin his proposals the controlof trade and commerce to the Mother Country, whenon the oppositepagethe author laudswithout qualificationHowe'spolitical insight. Howeusedexactlythesametermsandproposed thereservation of exactly the samesubjectsas Durham. Onceagain, it is obviousthat bothmencouldnotseebeyondthegenerallyaccepted theoryof imperial commercial controland of the Navigation Laws, and that Galt's magnificent protestonly camewhen both had disappeared. In dealingwith the ColonialOfficeSir Robert is not entirely just. The mostjudicial approachwould not be in terms of believing that the Colonial Office guarded, as a sacred treasure, responsiblegovernment, and were unwilling that Canadianswould sharein it. Men like Russell--and even REVIEWS OF BOOKS 189 Stanley--were tied down to the AustinJantheory of sovereignty and could not seebeyond it. It is the merit...