FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36  
37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   >>   >|  
set us a better example. Canada has a far more difficult religious problem than Great Britain. She has two provinces side by side--Quebec and Ontario--both with the same religious problem as Ireland. In both there are strong religious minorities. Quebec is predominantly Catholic, and Ontario is predominantly Protestant. Thus:-- _Quebec_-- Catholics 1,429,000 Protestants 189,000 _Ontario_-- Protestants 1,626,000 Catholics 390,000 How is this problem solved? Why, by Home Rule. For a long time--from 1840 to 1887--Canada made the experiment of governing these two provinces under one Parliament and from one centre. That experiment never succeeded. As long as they were under one government, the minority in each of these provinces insisted on appealing for help to the majority in the other. There arose the evil of "Ascendancy "--the government of a majority by a minority. At last the Canadians faced the problem. In 1867 they divided the provinces, and gave them each a Home Rule government of their own, subject to the Dominion Parliament. Since then there has been no more trouble about Ascendancy. Quebec and Ontario now settle their own affairs, including Education and all other local matters, and no one ever hears anything about the ill-treatment of minorities. So much, then, for the permanent factors--Sea, Race, and Religion. There is no insuperable obstacle there. Rather it is here--in these great dominating facts--that the strongest argument for Home Rule must ever be found. For it is those things that constitute nationality. The real difficulties in the way of Home Rule were found, both in 1886 and 1893, not in these permanent things, but in the changing facets of human laws. It was the Land Question that in all the speeches of 1886 provided the strongest argument. It was the absence of local government, and the presumed incapacity for local government, that filled so many Unionist speeches. It was the quarrel over University Education that provided the best evidence of incompatibility of temper between Irish Catholic and Irish Protestant. I shall show that in all these respects the problem has completely and radically changed since 1893. * * * * * FOOTNOTES: [1] By a majority of 34 on the third reading--301 to 267--September 1st, 1893. [2] Fri
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36  
37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

problem

 

government

 
Ontario
 

provinces

 

Quebec

 
majority
 

religious

 

Education

 

minority

 

Parliament


experiment
 

provided

 
speeches
 

things

 

strongest

 

permanent

 

Ascendancy

 
argument
 

Catholic

 

Protestant


Catholics

 
Protestants
 

predominantly

 

minorities

 

Canada

 
facets
 

Britain

 
absence
 
Question
 

changing


nationality
 

difficult

 

constitute

 

difficulties

 

presumed

 

FOOTNOTES

 
changed
 

completely

 

radically

 

reading


September

 

respects

 

quarrel

 
University
 
Unionist
 

filled

 

evidence

 

incompatibility

 

temper

 

incapacity