History of Confederation in Canada

Fathers of Confederation

Title given to the parliamentarians of the United Province of Canada (Quebec and Ontario), Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland that attended at least one of the three constitutional conferences held to hammer out the federal constitution of 1867. These conferences were held in Charlottetown in August-September 1864, in Quebec City in October of the same year and in London in December 1866 and early 1867.

There were 36 Fathers of Confederation. Some consider that Harry Bernard, who attended the Charlottetown Conference as the Recording Secretary, should also be counted.

It is of interest to note that some of the Fathers of Confederation were actually opposed to the plan of Union, and fought the project bitterly at the conferences and before public opinion.

© 2001 Claude Bélanger, Marianopolis College

Towards Confederation

During the years before Confederation, there was much happening in the colonies that would eventually unite to become the Dominion of Canada. In this section you will find a selection of essays on pre-Confederation themes: the evolution of Upper Canada, Lower Canada and the Atlantic Colonies; the effect of the American Civil War on Canada’s formation; and the three famous conferences – at Charlottetown, Québec and London – that led to Canadian Confederation in 1867.

Upper Canada

From the Constitutional Act (1791) to the Act of Union (1841)

Upper Canada, the precursor of modern-day Ontario, was created by the Constitutional Act of 1791, which divided the former Province of Quebec into two parts: Upper Canada and Lower Canada. These two provinces were joined once again to form the Province of Canada in 1840 and were then referred to as Canada West (Upper Canada, or Ontario) and Canada East (Lower Canada, or Quebec). The terms “Upper Canada” and “Lower Canada,” in the Canadian historical context, therefore refer to the period between 1791 and 1841. Much of the heritage of the Ontario we know today can be traced to this Upper Canada period.

The Constitutional Act of 1791 was London’s answer to the American Revolution with regard to the administration of its North American colonies. A lieutenant-governor, assisted by an executive council, a legislative council and a house of assembly, was appointed in every province. Until 1848, when London agreed to grant responsible government to the Province of Canada, the Executive Council was answerable to London rather than to the House of Assembly.
In 1791, Upper Canada had a population of about 10 000 people. Most inhabitants were United Empire Loyalists who profited substantially from London’s generosity. During the War of Independence (1776-1783), subjects who wished to remain loyal to England left what would later become the United States to settle in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and the Province of Quebec (modern-day Quebec and Ontario). At that time, Upper Canada also had significant Francophone and Aboriginal populations.

The first lieutenant-governor of Upper Canada, John Graves Simcoe, played an important role in establishing Upper Canadian society. He wanted to model the new territory on his native England and institute Anglicanism as the state religion. The American invasion of Canada during the War of 1812 was also crucial to defining the Upper Canadian identity. By taking up arms against the new republic, the former American settlers — who made up a large part of Upper Canada’s population — strengthened their existing ties to England.

The Family Compact that had governed the province since the early 19th century became a point of growing dissension in the 1820s. The contention culminated in the 1837 rebellions, led by William Lyon Mackenzie. Although they failed, the rebellions proved that the general population did not share the Family Compact’s vision of society. Influential men such as Robert Baldwin and Sir Louis-Hippolyte La Fontaine — who led a coalition government on two separate occasions (1841-43 and 1848-51) in the decade following the Act of Union of 1841 — introduced a number of important reforms. The main changes, however, would be imposed by the London authorities when they adopted many of the recommendations in the report drafted by Lord Durham after the rebellions of 1837 and 1838 in Upper and Lower Canada. One such recommendation led to the Act of Union of 1841, which marked the end of Upper Canada and the beginning of a new political era, that of United Canada.

The 1837 Rebellions

In Upper Canada (as in Lower Canada), part of the population was critical of how the political elite governed the colony. Matters of contention included political patronage, policies on education, the economy and land grants (particularly clergy reserves) and the favouritism shown to the Anglican Church.
The reformers took control of the House of Assembly in 1828 and in 1834, but were unable to effect the desired changes. The arrival of Lieutenant-Governor Francis Bond Head, meant to win over the reformers, did not achieve the expected outcome. Head adopted a confrontational attitude and helped elect Conservatives. Moderate reformers like Robert Baldwin were defeated as a result. This played in favour of William Lyon Mackenzie and his more radical approach.

Initially, W. L. Mackenzie wanted to pressure the colonial authorities and government by urging a boycott of imported goods, encouraging political unions and associating with reformers from Lower Canada. In late summer 1837, however, he abandoned non-violent tactics and turned increasingly toward armed revolt. In early December 1837, W. L. Mackenzie and nearly 1,000 men met at Montgomery’s Tavern in Toronto to attempt to overthrow the government. Between 200 and 300 volunteers and militiamen, whom the government had won over to its cause, drove back the rebels. Three days later, between 1,000 and 1,500 Loyalists marched on the tavern and forced the rebels to flee. The rebellion was almost over. A few skirmishes broke out in 1838, but none posed much threat to the government.

The Durham Report and the Act of Union

Lord Durham was sent to Canada to report on the reasons for the rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada.
His report contained three main recommendations: that responsible government be granted to the British North American colonies; that Upper and Lower Canada be amalgamated to form a united Province of Canada; and that French Canadians be assimilated. He also openly criticized the political cliques that controlled government power in both colonies.

The implications of the Durham Report were much different for Upper Canada than for Lower Canada. Lord Durham wanted to re-establish peace in the colonies, and so recommended a political union. He believed this peace could best be achieved by ensuring a loyal English majority in British North America, by anglicizing French Canadians, and by granting responsible government. By making English the only official language of the Parliament of United Canada, the Act of Union afforded protection to Upper Canadian culture. By giving Upper Canada as many parliamentary representatives as the more populous Lower Canada, the Act of Union favoured Upper Canadian political life. By recommending the assimilation of French Canadians, the Durham Report bolstered the presence of English-speaking Canadians in America. The Durham Report was therefore not a threat to Upper Canada, quite the contrary. It was thus not surprising that Upper Canada should welcome the report, while it met with an angry outcry by the French-speaking population, primarily in Lower Canada.

The people of Lower Canada protested against the Durham Report’s drastic measures so loudly that in 1848, seven years after the Act of Union came into effect, London was forced to recognize and accept the use of French. The Durham Report also created a new political class — moderate reformers who believed in co-operation between Canada’s two main groups at the time. In Canada West, there would be Robert Baldwin; in Canada East, there would be Sir Louis-Hippolyte La Fontaine.

The Baldwin-La Fontaine Governments

In the election of 1841, the first under the Union, London did what it could to favour Conservative candidates. In Canada West, 26 reformist members were elected under Robert Baldwin; in Canada East, only seven true reform members were elected under Sir Louis-Hippolyte La Fontaine. Both politicians understood that they would have to join forces to counter London’s attempts to dictate the colony’s affairs. The arrangement offered advantages to both parties. Baldwin wanted real power for the House of Assembly. La Fontaine believed he must abandon the concept of a French state in America and play British politics to ensure the survival of French Canadians in British North America.

Baldwin and La Fontaine worked together to make sure both became members of the House of Assembly and the Executive Council. Favoured by the presence of Governor Charles Bagot, who broke with former Governor General Lord Sydenham’s policy of blocking Executive Council access to Francophones, Baldwin and La Fontaine formed the country’s first coalition government. This brief period of relative independence in United Canada ended when Governor Bagot died in 1843 and was replaced by Charles Metcalfe. Governor Metcalfe firmly intended to put the reformers in their place, making co-operation between the two halves of the colony more difficult.

But Baldwin and La Fontaine were again called to form a coalition government from 1848 to 1851. The “Great Ministry,” as it was called, would contribute substantially to the legal and municipal system in United Canada. The coalition government also adopted a number of important reforms that would change the colony’s political and social landscape.

Ministerial Responsibility

The evolution of the political system introduced by the Act of Union culminated in the granting of responsible government to the North American colonies in 1848. From then on, ministers would need the confidence of the House of Assembly or would have to resign. This concession by London, a great step toward parliamentary democracy, was partly responsible for the instability that marked Canadian political history in the ten years before Confederation in 1867.

Lower Canada

Conquest and a Fledgling Regime

After the famous battle between the French and the English on the Plains of Abraham of Quebec in 1759, and the capitulation of Montreal by the French in September 1760, the French regime was replaced by an English one. This period is now called the “Conquest.”

The Conquest led to an entirely new regime. New France became a British colony, just like Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The British took control over all the land and established their way of government.

On October 7, 1763, the first constitution for the “Province of Quebec,” the new name for the colony, was introduced by Royal Proclamation. It set up political institutions modelled on British tradition. As had been the case under French law, the Governor of Quebec represented the King, but under English law he had a more significant administrative role, as he also replaced the intendant.

Almost 11 years later, the Royal Proclamation was replaced by the Quebec Act. This new constitution effectively increased the size of Quebec by adding Labrador, the Magdalen Islands, the Great Lakes Region, and the Ohio Valley.
The new act repealed the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and instituted a more realistic policy for dealing with the Canadians. It reinstituted French civil law, gave official recognition to the French language and the Catholic religion, and allowed for the participation of Canadians of French origin in the civil administration of the colony. The 1774 constitution also created a deeply felt upheaval in America. It enabled the Canadians to join the Empire, but raised the ire of the colonies to the south.

These colonies, 13 in all, had gone through considerable development, and they broke their ties with England following the Declaration of Independence of 1776. This independence was recognized seven years later, in 1783, by the Treaty of Paris, which recognized the 13 colonies as the United States of America.

The American Declaration of Independence had the effect of bringing to Canada a large number of Loyalists — Americans who chose to flee the United States to remain loyal to the King and the Empire. They came to the northern British colonies: Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Quebec.

Several of them settled along the upper St. Lawrence and along the banks of Lake Ontario and Lake Erie. With the arrival of such a large number of Loyalists, the Quebec Act quickly became difficult to enforce, as the Loyalists called for the British system of parliament and for British civil law. The British government answered the grievances of the Loyalists by proposing a compromise between their desires and those of the Canadians: the Constitutional Act of 1791.

The Constitutional Act of 1791, or the Birth of Lower Canada

Passed by the Parliament in London, the Constitutional Act did not abolish the Quebec Act but introduced some amendments. The new act divided the Canadian territory into two colonies, a mostly French-speaking Lower Canada, and a mostly English-speaking Upper Canada.

To the existing offices of governor and legislative council was added a house of assembly, which jointly held with the Legislative Council, the power to pass laws for the peace, good order and healthy administration of the colonies. The constitutional text remained silent, however, on the subject of the status of the languages. In 1792, a special order rounded out the act by establishing an executive council, whose members were appointed by the King. This executive institution was answerable not to the elected members, but to the governor, and the governor was answerable only to the imperial government.

The new constitution did not offer any solutions for resolving conflicts that could arise between the House of Assembly and the Executive Council. Therefore, the Act of 1791 brought the parliamentary system to Lower Canada, but it clearly did not bring democracy. Freedom of religion was upheld, but the Act also provided for establishing the Anglican Church.

At the time, the population of Lower Canada was 160,000, of which 20,000 were English-speaking. It was divided into four administrative districts: Gaspé, Québec, Trois-Rivières and Montréal. The territory was also divided into 25 counties.

History of Lower Canada

Read about the developments in Lower Canada Prior to the Uprisings of 1837-1838 here and the Patriot Insurrection (1837-1838).

The Québec Conference (October 10-27, 1864)

The Québec Conference was the second conference leading to creation of the Dominion of Canada in 1867. After the enthusiastic reception given to the delegates from the Province of Canada at the Charlottetown Conference in September 1864, John A. Macdonald asked Governor Monck to invite representatives from the three Maritime colonies and Newfoundland to meet with the United Canada delegates in Québec in October 1864. The Confederation project proposed in Charlottetown was on the agenda and, if the talks went well, a constitutional proposal would be drafted. In Charlottetown, the Canadian delegation had proposed the foundations for a new country: preservation of ties with Great Britain; residual jurisdiction left to a central authority; a bicameral system including a Lower House with representation by population (rep by pop) and an Upper House with representation based on regional, rather than provincial, equality; responsible government at the federal and provincial levels; and the appointment of a governor general by the British Crown.

The Québec Conference took place from October 10 to 27, 1864. Following this conference, the delegates from the colonies drafted a text known as the 72 Resolutions, or the Québec Resolutions. These resolutions were the basis for the London Conference held at Westminster Palace Hotel in December 1866.

The Years Preceding Confederation

he history of Canadian parliamentary institutions begins in Nova Scotia. In 1758, the colony was granted an elected assembly,[16] becoming the first Canadian colony to enjoy a representative political institution.[17] No limit was set for the duration of a legislature; in fact, the Assembly elected in 1770 sat until 1785. In 1792, legislation was passed limiting the duration to seven years and subsequently to four years in 1840. Following the example of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island was granted a popular assembly in 1773[18] and the newly?designated province of New Brunswick in 1784.[19] Each of the three maritime colonies continued to be administered by a British governor and an appointed executive council. Upper chambers (called legislative councils) were introduced as distinct legislative bodies in New Brunswick in 1832 and in Nova Scotia in 1838.[20]

The situation was considerably different in New France where there was no legislature and virtually no popular participation in political affairs. For a short period, residents of the settlements now known as Quebec City, Montreal and Trois?Rivières elected representatives or “syndics” to sit as members of the colonial council. The council, however, remained responsible to the King of France or the governor of New France, not to the people. The office of syndic was disbanded in 1674 by Jean?Baptiste Colbert, then Secretary of State for Colonial Affairs.[21]
In 1760, as a result of the Seven Years’ War between Britain and France, New France was ceded to England under the terms of the Treaty of Paris.[22] In 1763, King George III of England issued a proclamation establishing governments for each of Britain’s recently acquired territories in the New World, including the territory known as Quebec.[23]

A governor was commissioned and authorized to appoint a local executive council and summon a popular (elected) assembly, modelled on the one in Nova Scotia.[24] Together, they were empowered to make laws for the peace, welfare and good government of the colony.[25] However, before they could sit in the assembly, elected representatives were required to swear allegiance to the British Crown and to make a declaration against transubstantiation,[26] a fundamental tenet of the Roman Catholic faith.[27] Few of the original inhabitants were willing to make the declaration, with the result that no assembly ever met. The Royal Proclamation also imposed British civil and criminal law, which upset many of the original inhabitants who believed their traditional civil and property rights were secured under the terms of the Treaty of Paris.[28] For the next 11 years, the “Province of Quebec”, as it was then known, was ruled by the governor with the assistance of his executive council.

In 1774, the British Parliament passed the Quebec Act, which defined a new constitutional form for Quebec.[29] The Act enlarged the boundaries of the province[30] and no longer required Roman Catholics to take the oath of abjuration, should they wish to assume public office. The new Act, however, made no provision for an elected assembly; government was entrusted to a governor and a legislative council, both appointed by the Crown.[31] The council, with the assent of the governor, had the right to make laws but had no authority to impose taxes or duties except those authorized by local inhabitants for roads and other ordinary services. The costs of the civil administration were covered by revenues from duties on spirits and molasses, with any deficiencies made up out of the Imperial treasury.[32]

The passage of the Quebec Act represented the first time that the British Parliament had intervened directly in Canadian affairs; previous constitutional arrangements had been imposed by royal prerogative (i.e., the King acting unilaterally).[33]

In 1776, the United States declared its independence from Britain and over the next 20 years, thousands of British loyalists emigrated to Canada, many settling in what are now Ontario and Quebec. The dramatic rise in settlers of British descent increased the demand for political representation. However, it was not until 1791, when the Quebec Act was replaced by the Constitutional Act, that representative institutions were finally acquired.[34]

The Constitutional Act, 1791 divided the original Province of Quebec into two provinces—Lower Canada (now Quebec) and Upper Canada (now Ontario). Each was provided with both an upper house, or legislative council, and an elected assembly. Members of the legislative council were appointed by the Sovereign for life;[35] those of the assembly were to be elected. To sit either in the council or in the assembly, members had to be at least 21 years of age and subjects of the British Crown. Provision was made for the governor to appoint a Speaker for the legislative council; none was made for selecting a Speaker for the assembly. Each question coming before the legislatures would be decided by a majority of votes cast; in the event of a tie, the Speaker would have the deciding voice.[36] As well, provision was made for the Crown to appoint, in each province, an executive council to advise and assist the governor in the administration of the province.[37]

The Legislature of Upper Canada met for the first time on September 17, 1792, at Newark, now Niagara?on?the?Lake; that of Lower Canada on December 17, 1792, at Quebec. The governor was authorized to fix the time and place of meetings of the Legislature and to prorogue or dissolve it when deemed expedient, provided the Legislature met at least once in every year and that each legislative assembly continued for a period of no longer than four years.[38] The governor was empowered to give, as well as withhold, the Royal Assent[39] for bills and to “reserve”[40] bills for the further consideration and approval of the Crown.[41]

Legislation was enacted by way of bills which were first considered and passed by both houses of the legislature—the assembly and the legislative council—then assented to by the governor on behalf of the Crown. This reflected the structure of the British Parliament at Westminster, with the governor representing the Sovereign, and the assembly and legislative council assuming the roles and functions of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, respectively.

There was, however, endless conflict between the appointed governors and the elected representatives over who should control public spending (supply)[42] and who should appoint public officials (the Civil List).[43] “For years, colonial reformers had argued that the only way to ensure harmony between the executive and the legislature was for the Governor to appoint to his Executive Council those who had the confidence of, and were responsible to, the Assembly”.[44] This, in effect, suggested the implementation of responsible government.

Ultimately, discontent led to rebellions in both Upper and Lower Canada during the period 1837?38.[45] The Lower Canada Assembly formulated its grievances in the form of 92 resolutions, including a demand for an elected legislative council.[46] In 1838, Lord Durham arrived in Canada as High Commissioner and Governor General of British North America.[47] He produced an elaborate report for the British Parliament outlining the difficulties, as he saw them. Among his recommendations, Lord Durham proposed that Upper and Lower Canada be reunited under one legislature and called for the institution of responsible government.[48] Under a system of responsible government, the governor could act only on the advice of ministers who were supported by members of the elected assembly, in other words, by those who represented the interests of the local citizenry most directly.

In July 1840, An Act to re?unite the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada and for the Government of Canada, known as the Union Act, 1840,[49] was adopted by the British Parliament and came into effect on February 10, 1841. The Act provided for a single Legislative Council, composed of no less than 20 members appointed by the Crown,[50] and a single Legislative Assembly, with equal representation from each part of the newly?constituted “Province of Canada”.[51] Passage of the Act also signalled acceptance of the principle of responsible government by the colonial administration.

Lord Sydenham, the first Governor General of Canada following the Union Act, 1840, introduced two practices which were essential prerequisites for responsible government. First, he reorganized the executive, creating departments and placing each under the direction of a single political head, transforming his council into a genuine policy?making body. Secondly, he created a government party, using his powers and patronage to ensure his ministers had support in the legislature. Although his system broke down, it paved the way for the introduction of responsible or cabinet government of the type which still exists. In 1847, the new Colonial Secretary in the British Imperial Government, Lord Grey, instructed Governors Sir John Harvey (Nova Scotia) and Lord Elgin (Canada) that, in future, they should choose their councils from the leaders of the majority party in the assembly. Shortly thereafter, in 1848, the principle was tested in Nova Scotia where the ministry resigned following its defeat on a motion of confidence in the Assembly and the Governor called upon the leader of the majority party to form a new government. Within a few weeks, similar changes of government had taken place in Canada and in New Brunswick, and the principle of responsible government was firmly established in British North America.[52]

In 1854, the British Parliament passed, in response to an address (a formal request) from the Legislative Assembly of Canada, an act empowering the legislature to alter the constitution of the Legislative Council. Two years later, the legislature passed an act providing for an elected upper house,[53] and the first election of members to the upper house took place later that year. Until 1862, the Speaker of the Legislative Council continued to be appointed by the Crown, after which time the Councillors elected their own.[54]

The development of Newfoundland’s parliamentary institutions followed a different path. Until 1824, the territory was not even recognized as a colony. From 1729 until 1829, the commander of the British naval convoy served as governor during the months the convoy was stationed in Newfoundland to protect the English fishing boats. In 1824, it was recognized as a true colony administered by a governor assisted by an appointed council. An election for a legislative assembly was called by the governor in 1832.[55] As had been done previously in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, an upper chamber was created in 1855[56] and, at the same time, the province was granted responsible government.

The only other part of the country having pre?Confederation experience with British representative institutions was British Columbia,[57] which was created in 1866 out of an amalgamation of two English colonies: Vancouver Island and mainland British Columbia. While Vancouver Island had authority to elect an assembly when it was created in 1849,[58] in mainland British Columbia, only the governor was empowered to make laws for the colony when it was constituted in 1858. With the union of the two colonies in 1866, government was exercised by the governor and Legislative Council; there was no provision for an elected assembly. When British Columbia joined Confederation in 1871, the terms of union[59] provided for an elected provincial assembly although responsible government was not realized until the following year.[60]

Resources

Notes

Twenty?two members were elected and met in Halifax in October of that year to take their seats in the House of Assembly (Journals, March 1, 1883, Sessional Paper No. 70 (Provincial Charters), Appendix, pp. 8, 14).

[17] Representative government is a political system with an elected legislature (McMenemy, 4th ed., pp. 333?4).

[18] Bourinot, 2nd ed., pp. 73?4.

[19] Journals, March 1, 1883, Sessional Paper No. 70 (Provincial Charters), Appendix, pp. 46?52; Bourinot, 2nd ed., pp. 72?3. Until 1784, New Brunswick was part of Nova Scotia (Forsey, 6th ed., p. 3).

[20] Bourinot, Sir J.G., A Manual of the Constitutional History of Canada from the Earliest Period to 1901, Toronto: The Copp, Clark Company, Limited, 1901, p. 69; Fordham, A.G.H., The Nova Scotia Legislature: An Overview of Its Procedures and Practices, Nova Scotia: Nova Scotia House of Assembly, rev., July 2006, pp. 42, 45.

[21] For a short history of the “syndics”, see Office of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, A History of the Vote in Canada, 2nd ed., www.elections.ca, 2007, p. xii.

[22] The historic Battle of the Plains of Abraham took place on September 13, 1759; Quebec surrendered on September 18. Montreal fell nearly a year later and the capitulation was signed on September 8, 1760 (Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 5).

[23] The Royal Proclamation, 1763 (R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 1) defined the boundaries of Quebec.

[24] In the instructions to Governor Murray, dated December 7, 1763, there are specific references to the Nova Scotian constitutional documents (Journals, 1907, Sessional Papers, Vol. 7, Third Session of the Tenth Parliament of the Dominion of Canada, 1906?07, Vol. XLI, No. 18, p. 137). In “The Early Provincial Constitutions”, J.E. Read states that the early constitutional documents of the Province of Quebec “provide a constitutional position substantially identical to that of Nova Scotia” (Read, J.E., “The Early Provincial Constitutions”, The Canadian Bar Review, Vol. XXVI, No. 4, 1948, p. 630).

[25] Royal Proclamation, 1763, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 1.

[26] A belief that during the sacrament of Holy Communion, the consecrated bread and wine are wholly converted into the body and blood of Christ; only the appearance of the bread and wine remain.

[27] The “oath of abjuration”, along with oaths of allegiance and supremacy, were then required of every member of the British House of Commons (Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 8, note 1).

[28] Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 9.

[29] R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 2.

[30] Quebec Act, 1774, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 2, Preamble.

[31] Section XII of the Quebec Act, 1774 states that “whereas it is inexpedient to call an Assembly”, and went on to provide for an appointed “Council for the Affairs of the Province of Quebec” of 17 to 23 members. As a rule, the Council sat behind closed doors, debates were conducted in both French and English, and ordinances were drawn up in both languages (Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 13).

[32] Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 12, note 1.

[33] Colonial legislation could be enacted by the British Parliament or, in the case of conquered colonies, by the British monarch acting alone. However, once a colony had been granted a legislature, new colonial laws or changes to colonial laws could no longer be made by the Sovereign unilaterally: they now required the consent of the Imperial Parliament or the colonial assembly (Hogg, 4th ed., p. 35).

[34] Constitutional Act, 1791, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3. Like the British North America Act almost a century later, the Constitutional Act, 1791 was framed with the intention of “assimilating the constitution of Canada to that of Great Britain, as nearly as the difference arising from the manners of the people, and from the present situation of the province, will admit” (Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 20).

[35] The Constitutional Act, 1791, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3, s. VI, also provided that the Sovereign could make the right to sit in the legislative council hereditary although no titles were ever conferred under the authority of this Act. See also Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 16.

[36] Constitutional Act, 1791, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3.

[37] Constitutional Act, 1791, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3, s. XXXIV. Section L further provided that the Governor and a majority of the members of the Executive Council could make temporary laws when the legislature was prorogued and that such laws would remain in force for a period no longer than six months following the date on which the legislature subsequently assembled.

[38] Constitutional Act, 1791, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3, ss. XXVI and XXVII. See also Bourinot, 2nd ed., pp. 16?9. A dissolution ends a legislature, the period of time when a legislature is “sitting”, to make way for a general election. A legislature, in turn, may be divided into one or more sessions, each beginning with a new legislative agenda, presented as the Speech from the Throne. A session ends either with a dissolution, followed by a general election, or with a prorogation, which does not terminate the legislature but establishes that a new session will begin with a Speech from the Throne. For further information, see Chapter 8, “The Parliamentary Cycle”.

[39] To become law, bills required the consent of both houses and the Sovereign. The Royal Assent signifies the approval of the bill by the latter.

[40] The power to delay giving Royal Assent so that the legislation could be approved or disallowed by the British government (McMenemy, 4th ed., pp. 334?5).

[41] Constitutional Act, 1791, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3, ss. XXX to XXXII. See also the section in this chapter entitled “The Governor General”.

[42] For further information on supply, see Chapter 18, “Financial Procedures”.

[43] Technically, the Civil List referred to a list of the sums appropriated out of the public revenue to pay members of the civil government (Gage Canadian Dictionary, Toronto: Gage Educational Publishing Company, 2000, p. 284), i.e., those individuals occupying official positions in government administration, the precursors of the modern public service. At the time, they were patronage appointments made by the governor, often for life (O’Brien, G., “Pre?Confederation Parliamentary Procedure: The Evolution of Legislative Practice in the Lower Houses of Central Canada, 1792?1866”, Ph.D. thesis, Carleton University, 1988, pp. 48?9; Wilding and Laundy, 4th ed., pp. 131?3).

[44] Mallory, rev. ed., p. 11.

[45] For further information on the rebellions, see Francis, R.D., Jones, R. and Smith, D.B., Origins: Canadian History to Confederation, 5th ed., Scarborough, Ontario: Thomson Nelson, 2004, pp. 244?70, 286?98.

[46] Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 8.

[47] His responsibilities also included “the adjustment of certain important questions respecting the form and future government of the two provinces” (Lambton, J.G., The Report of the Earl of Durham, Her Majesty’s High Commissioner and Governor?General of British North America, London: Methuen & Co., 1902).

[48] Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 25.

[49] R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 4.

[50] Union Act, 1840, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 4, ss. III and IV.

[51] Union Act, 1840, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 4, ss. III and XII.

[52] Mallory, rev. ed., pp. 12?3.

[53] Statutes of the Province of Canada, 19?20 Victoria, c. 140. See also Bourinot, 2nd ed., pp. 38?9. An elected upper chamber had been a long?standing demand of the House of Assembly of Lower Canada (Province of Lower Canada, House of Assembly, Journals of the House of Assembly of Lower Canada, Québec: Neilson & Cowan, February 21, 1834, Resolution No. 27, pp. 310?38, in particular p. 316). A total of 48 Councillors were to be elected, one?quarter every two years, each to serve for a period of eight years. Existing members were allowed to retain their seats during their lifetimes.

[54] Bourinot, 2nd ed., pp. 38?9.

[55] Cornell, P.G., Hamelin, J., Ouellet, F. and Trudel, M., Canada: Unity in Diversity, Toronto and Montreal: Holt, Rinehart and Winston of Canada, Limited, 1967, pp. 109?17.

[56] Consolidated Statutes of Newfoundland (Third Series), 1916, Appendix, p. 47.

[57] All relevant constitutional documents relating to British Columbia may be found in the Royal Statutes of British Columbia, 1979, Vol. 7 (Appendices), Part B. See also the British Columbia Terms of Union, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 10.

[58] The first election took place in 1856. See A History of the Vote in Canada, 2nd ed., pp. 32?4.

[59] British Columbia Terms of Union, R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 10.

[60] For further information on the pre?Confederation history of British Columbia, see Bancroft, H.H., History of British Columbia 1792?1887, San Francisco: The History Company, Publishers, 1887, pp. 582?604.

Further Reading

If you’re interested in diving deeper, our reading included:
Charland, Jean-Pierre, et al. — Le Canada, un pays en evolution : manuel d’apprentissage. — Montreal : Lidec, 1994. — 555 p.
Hall, Roger. — “Upper Canada”. — The 1999 Canadian encyclopedia : world edition. — Toronto : McClelland & Stewart, 1998.
Mills, David. — “Durham Report”. — The 1999 Canadian encyclopedia : world edition. — Toronto : McClelland & Stewart, 1998.
Wilson, Bruce G. — “Loyalists”. — The 1999 Canadian encyclopedia : world edition. — Toronto : McClelland & Stewart, 1998.
Buckner, P. A. — “Quebec conference”. — The 1999 Canadian encyclopedia : world edition. — Toronto : McClelland & Stewart, 1998.
Waite, P. B. — “Fathers of Confederation”. — The 1999 Canadian encyclopedia : world edition. — Toronto : McClelland & Stewart, 1998.
Whitelaw, W. Menzies. — “Reconstructing the Quebec Conference”. — The Canadian Historical Review. — Vol. XIX, no. 2 (June 1938). — P. 123-137.
Whitelaw, W. Menzies. — La conférence de Québec. — Ottawa : Société historique du Canada, 1967. — 28 p. — (Brochure historique ; 20).

Law is our Passion

This entry about History of Confederation has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0) licence, which permits unrestricted use and reproduction, provided the author or authors of the History of Confederation entry and the Encyclopedia of Law are in each case credited as the source of the History of Confederation entry. Please note this CC BY licence applies to some textual content of History of Confederation, and that some images and other textual or non-textual elements may be covered by special copyright arrangements. For guidance on citing History of Confederation (giving attribution as required by the CC BY licence), please see below our recommendation of "Cite this Entry".

• APA
• MLA
• MLA 7
• CHICAGO
• OSCOLA

Usage Metrics

169 Views

Google Scholar: Search for History of Confederation Related Content

 

Schema Summary

This entry was last updated: July 6, 2017