peaceful compact had endured for fifty years, and had alike saved the expense and obviated the dangers attending rival navies on the great internal waters of America. It was self-evident that we must either fortify efficiently or let it alone. The United States could not fail to see that if they laid out large sums on permanent works of defence, we must do the same; while if we voted money, they must follow us. And thus while both countries made themselves poorer in the process, neither became much stronger, because a sort of equilibrium of forces would after all be maintained. The Government at Washington surely had no present desire to enter upon a race of expenditure for military works on both sides of the frontier. If they had, the sooner we knew it the better, for then the House would only have one course, however they might deplore it, to pursue. But here was a case where the common sense of the American people could, he thought, be appealed to not in vain. Instead of fortifying, let us neutralize the frontier—let us agree to do away with the expenditure. [Mr. BRIGHT: On both sides the frontier?] Yes, on both sides. If the American people were appealed to as the hon. member for Rochdale appealed to the Emperor of the French in favour of the French treaty, he believed that similar earnestness and tact could bring about an arrangement. The Government at Washington would thereby set an example to all countries having long frontier lines, and a precedent would be established of inestimable value to the world. What could be more deplorable than to substitute for neutrality and the operation of the Reciprocity Treaty an armed frontier and practical non-intercourse? He had before stated, from much personal observation on the spot, that border feeling and jealousy had hardly an existence as between the people of our possessions, and of the United States; but so soon as rival fortresses, frowned at each other on both sides of the line, and an armed truce were, so to speak, established, all the feelings and prejudices of separate nationality would grow up in abundance. The free exchanges of industry would, perhaps, be at the same time arrested, and war itself might not be impossible. The Reciprocity Treaty practically made the people of the United States and of the British North American possessions, each living under a totally different form of government, one for all purposes of trade and intercourse. Why should they be separated? But unfortunately our Government did not appreciate the value of, or they did not appear disposed to undertake, negociations. Instead of endeavouring to come to some friendly understanding first, they came down to the House and asked for a vote of money, enough to change the aspect of discussion with the United States, but not enough to effectually protect from danger. They would spend money first, he supposed, and then negotiate; they would allow some great evil to happen, and remonstrate afterwards. The difficulties in Canada might have been avoided by previous precaution. The threatened notice to put an end to the treaty, which grew out of those difficulties, might have been avoided by a renewal of the engagement two years ago. But the Government had done nothing. They had been—how many months?—without a Minister at Washington at the most critical period of our relations with the United States. Now it was proposed to send out a gentleman of many attainments, but who certainly was not of the first order of diplomatists. Was he gone? [Mr. BRIGHT: They say he goes to-morrow.] His hon. friend the member for Birmingham said he was to leave to-morrow. Hitherto all the interests of this country had been left in the hands of Mr. Burnley, who, if only from his position, was not able to meet on equal terms the able men of whom Mr. Lincoln's Cabinet was composed. Ever since the 17th December a vexatious system of passports and consular regulations as to merchandize had been in force. These regulations were probably in force now. They had seriously impeded trade, produced uncertainty and alarm, and great losses to individuals. They had also created great exasperation; yet during all this time we had no ambassador at Washington. Since he entered the House, a letter, by the mail just in, had been placed in his hands, and he would, with the permission of the House, read an extract from it. The writer, under date Portland, March 11th, says:—'Some eighteen passengers, per "Belgian," arrived here without passports for Canada. The United States Government, by order of General Dix, has detained them, and sent a squad of soldiers to guard them on board the "Belgian." At this time of writing they are still in custody, one of them being a clergyman. Only fancy, United States soldiers taking charge of an English ship and English subjects! This is carrying the matter with a high hand.' Now, he did not believe that the Government of the United States had purposely and of malice aforethought committed this outrage, nor did he speak of it to increase irritation; but did it not show how wrong the Government had been in leaving the interests of this country so long without representation? What, in fact, was the use of an embassy at all if our ambassador was not at his post? The Embassy at Washington was now the most important of our diplomatic establishments abroad. We ought to place there the ablest man we could find, regardless of all party or personal considerations. The people of the United States knew our own estimate of our own officials well, and they took it as a slight if we did not send to Washington a man of the first rank as a diplomatist. He would appeal to the noble lord at the head of the Government to consider the suggestion he had ventured to make, and not to allow the country to embark, without any attempt at negociation, in an expenditure of which this was but the first beginning if the policy of it should be forced upon the House. Our fellow-subjects in Canada ought to be assured that, if an unjust war broke out, this country would stand by them at all hazards; but that assurance was quite consistent with the attempt which, he hoped, would be made after all, to neutralize the frontier and the lakes and to re-establish the Reciprocity Treaty. The House would, he felt assured, do nothing to raise up bitter feelings between the British Provinces and the United States, nor to alienate still further two peoples of common origin, who, for the sake of civilization itself, ought, as far as possible, to be one and united in the interests of commerce and of peace."

"Lord PALMERSTON: Sir, this is not a Canadian question, it is not a local question, it is an Imperial question. It is a question which affects the position and character, the honour, the interests, and the duties of this great country; and I hold it to be of the utmost importance to the character of the nation in a case like this, and when the great majority of the House seem to be of the same opinion, that it should not go forth to the world that there has been a difference of opinion on this motion; but that it should be seen to have been accepted by a unanimous House of Commons. Sir, there are one or two points with regard to which I think it right to express my dissent from some doctrines which have been laid down. Many gentlemen have argued this question as if there was a general impression and belief that war with the United States was imminent, and that this proposal of ours was for the purpose of meeting a sudden danger which we apprehended to be hanging over us. Now, I think there is no danger of war with America. Nothing that has recently passed indicates any hostile disposition on the part of the United States towards us; and, therefore, I do not base this motion on the ground that we expect war to take place between this country and America. But is it necessary that when you propose to put a country in a state of defence you should show that war with some powerful neighbour is imminent and likely soon to take place? Why, the whole practice of mankind is founded on an entirely different assumption. Every country which is able to do so fortifies its frontier if its neighbour is a powerful state, which might, if it thought fit, attack it. But it is said that you cannot defend Canada. Now, I utterly deny that proposition. I think that is assuming a conclusion which no man is entitled to assume. Does the example even of the war now going on tend to justify that conclusion? The territory of the Confederates is vast and extensive; have they attempted to defend every portion of that territory? They have fortified certain important points, and those important points, although the rest of the country may have been overrun, have resisted attack—some of them even to this day and others for three or four years of the contest. Look at Richmond; is Richmond taken? Has not Richmond been attacked for a great length of time? And what are its defences? Why, chiefly earthworks, with a force behind them; and, though that force is inferior in numbers to the force which threatens it, it has hitherto remained in Confederate hands. The mere occupation of territory by an army that traverses through it without reducing its fortresses is no conquest. The conquest is limited to the ground that the invading army occupies, and when that army passes to another part of the country its conquest passes away with it. But all countries fortify particular points, and when those points are secure they trust that the general bulk of the territory is safe from any permanent occupation or conquest by any enemy who may attack it. It is urged that Canada has an extended frontier; but are no other States similarly placed in that respect? What country has the largest frontier? What is the extent of our own frontier? Why, the whole coast of the United Kingdom; and we might as well say that it would be necessary for the security of this country that we should line our whole coast with defensive works because we may be attacked at any point of that great and extensive frontier. I maintain, therefore, that there is nothing that has passed—nothing that is now passing—between the Government of the United States and our Government which justifies any man in saying that the relations between the two countries are likely, as far as present circumstances go, to assume a character of hostility leading to war. But, then, the hon. member for Birmingham says that any danger which might threaten Canada and our North American Provinces must arise from political disputes between England and the United States. And, therefore, the hon. gentleman says the Canadians will find that their best security is, not in fortifications or in British support, but in separating themselves from Great Britain. Now, in the first place, that happens not to be the wish or inclination of the Canadians. The Canadians are most anxious to maintain the connection with this country. They are proud of that connection; they think it for their interest; they are willing to make every exertion that their population and resources enable them to achieve, and, in conjunction with the efforts of this country, to preserve that connection, and prevent themselves from being absorbed by a neighbouring power. Is it not, therefore, alike the duty and interest of this country, for the sake of that reputation which is the power and strength of a nation, when we find the Canadas and our other Provinces desirous of maintaining the connection, to do that which we may have the means of doing in assisting them to maintain that connection and remain united with Great Britain? But, sir, is it true that the only danger which a smaller colonial state runs from a more powerful and larger neighbour arises from quarrels that may exist between the Mother Country and the foreign state? I say that is a total fallacy. Suppose these provinces separated from this country—suppose them erected into a monarchy, a republic, or any other form, of Government, are there not motives that might lead a stronger neighbour to pick a quarrel with that smaller state with a view to its annexation? Is there nothing like territorial ambition pervading the policy of great military states? The example of the world should teach us that as far as the danger of invasion and annexation is concerned, that danger would be increased to Canada by a separation from Great Britain, and when she is deprived of the protection that the military power and resources of this country may afford. If these American Provinces should desire to separate, we should not adopt the maxim that fell unconsciously from the hon. member for Birmingham, who maintained that the North was right in suppressing the rebellion of the South; we will not adopt his maxim, and think that we have a right to suppress the rebellion of the North American Provinces. We should take a different line, no doubt, and if these Provinces felt themselves strong enough to stand upon their own ground, and if they should desire no longer to maintain their connection with us, we should say, 'God speed you and give you the means to maintain yourselves as a nation!' That has not happened; but, on the contrary, they much dislike the notion of annexation to their neighbours and cling to their connection with this country. And I say that it will be disgraceful to this country—it would lower us in the eyes of the world—it would weaken our power and leave consequences injurious to our position in the world if, while they desire to maintain their connection with us, we did not do what we could to assist them in maintaining their position. I think that the Government are perfectly right in proposing this vote to the House. We are of opinion that all those examples which my right hon. friend behind me (Mr. Lowe) has adduced are not applicable. We all know that in winter the snow is so deep in Canada that if an army should march it could only be in one beaten track, and that it would be impossible to carry on siege operations in winter. We know that warlike operations must be limited to the summer months, and we think that we can, by the fortifications now proposed—some to be made by the Canadians and some by this country—put Canada into such a state of defence that, with the exertions of her own population, and assisted by the military force of this country, she will be able to defend herself from attack. My right hon. friend the member for Calne argued in a manner somewhat inconsistent with himself, for what did he say? He says that you cannot defend Canada because the United States can bring a military force into the field much superior to that which you can oppose to them. Yet the right hon. gentleman says we ought to defend Canada. You ought not to relinquish the connection, he says, but you should defend Canada elsewhere. Where? Why, as you are not able to cope with the United States in Canada, where you have a large army, and where you can join your forces to those of the Canadians, you should send an expedition and attack the people of the United States in their own homes and in the centre of their own resources, where they can bring a larger force to repel our invasion. If we are unable to defend Canada, we shall not have much better prospects of success if we land an army to attack New York or any other important city."



CHAPTER XX.

Intended Route for a Pacific Railway in 1863.

The result of mature consideration, reasoning carefully upon all the facts I had collected, was, that, at that time, 1863, the best route for a Railway to the Pacific was, to commence at Halifax, to strike across to the Grand Trunk Railway at Riviere du Loup, 106 miles east of Quebec, then to follow the Grand Trunk system to Sarnia; to extend that system to Chicago; to use, under a treaty of neutralization, the United States lines from Chicago to St. Paul; to build a line from St. Paul to Fort Garry (Winnipeg) by English and American capital, and then to extend the line to the Tete Jaune Pass, there to meet a Railway through British Columbia starting from the Pacific. A large part of this route has been completed. For instance, an "Intercolonial" Railway— constructed so as to serve many local, but no grand through, purposes; constructed to satisfy local interests, or, probably, local political needs—has been built. The Grand Trunk extension from Detroit to Chicago, an excellent Railway, has been completed, thanks to the indomitable efforts of Mr. Hickson, the Managing Director of the Grand Trunk. A line from St. Paul to Winnipeg has also been opened; but the route of the line from Winnipeg to the Pacific has been deviated from, and, to save distance, the Kicking Horse and Beaver River Passes have been chosen. I think needless cost has been incurred, and that future maintenance will be greater than it need have been.

The British Columbian Railway has been constructed from Fort Moody to Kamloops, and is now part of the Canadian Pacific.

It seemed to me, at that time, that the route of the Ottawa Valley, Lake Nipissing, and round by the head of Lake Superior, was a great project of the future; and that to accomplish so great a work, in such a country, the policy was to utilize existing outlays of capital, filling in vacant spaces rather than duplicating what we had got.

It seemed to me, also, that the use of existing railways in the United States was not only economical, but politic: and I knew that, at that time, the Government of the North would have made every reasonable advance to meet England in affairs of mutual interest. There was every desire, at that juncture, to work cordially with our Queen and her people. For example, the passing of the Slave Trade Bill, modelled on English legislation, in, I think, 1863, through both Houses of Congress at Washington, with hardly a hostile expression. Apropos of this Bill, Mr. Charles Sumner told me, in 1865, at his house at Boston, the following story. "The Bill for putting down the slave trade in association with England and the other anti-slave trade countries passed so quickly as to astonish its friends. Charles Sumner, on the final question being put, 'that the Bill do pass'—as we should put it at home—immediately ran across to Mr. Seward, opened the door of Mr. Seward's private office, without knocking, and found Mr. Seward asleep. He awoke him by calling out, 'Seward, Seward, the Bill is passed: the Bill is passed.' Seward gradually opened his eyes, stared under his bushy eyebrows, and said, 'Then what in —— has become of the "great democratic party?"'"

Again, it was the fault of our own Government at home that the Reciprocity Treaty, nearly expiring, was not renewed. Our Government did nothing. It was the "masterly inactivity" of Lord Granville, and other Whigs, which has done so much harm to the prestige and power of our Empire. Opportunities are everything—they are the statesman's chances. In this case the chance was lost. However, I had every reason to believe that Mr. Seward would have been willing to agree to the use of United States lines up to St. Paul (which he once predicted would become the centre, or "hub," of the United States) and through Minnesota to the boundary of the Hudson's Bay territory,—under a treaty of international neutralization. There were, it is true, difficulties at home. The authorities, at home, did not know what was to be the end of the Civil War. They did not know the country to be passed through. They doubted if there was any precedent. I quoted the treaty, of years before, between England, the United States, and other countries, for the neutralization of a railway, if made, across Honduras, and other analogous cases. But I failed to bring about any official action at that time. I think, in looking back for twenty-three years, I have nothing to modify as respects this. Had my proposals been carried out millions sterling would have been saved; throughout railway communication to the Pacific might have been secured fifteen years sooner; and a friendly agreement with the United States for a great common object would, no doubt, have led to many more equally friendly agreements.

As respects neutralization, I, unconsciously, put a spoke into my own wheel, and I was not aware of it until I had a conversation with Mr. Bright a good while afterwards. Had I known of the grievance at the time I would have gone right off to Washington and explained all about it. The facts were these:—

I was at Quebec in July, 1863. At that time, and previously, and after, there was a tall, long-legged, short-bodied, sallow-faced, sunken-eyed man, whose name, if he had reported it correctly, was Ogden. He was called "consul" for the United States at Quebec. He reported, I was told, direct to Mr. Seward at Washington. He was, in fact, the sort of diplomatist whose duties, as he apprehended them, were those of a spy. He was a person disagreeable to look at, as in his odd-coloured trousers, short waistcoat, and dark green dress-coat, with brass buttons, he went elbowing about amongst the ladies and gentlemen promenading the public walk, which commands so beautiful a view over the St. Lawrence, called the "Platform." Phrenology would have condemned him. Phrenology and Physiognomy combined, would have hung him, on the certain verdict of any intelligent jury.

One day, as I was preparing to go West, a deputation from the "Stadacona" Club of Quebec, of which I was a member, asked me to take the chair at a private dinner proposed to be given at the club to Mr. Vallandigham, the democratic leader of Ohio, who had come across country from Halifax, on his way homeward—through, free, Canada—after his seizure in bed, in Ohio, and deportation across the Northern frontier into the land of secession. It appeared that Mr. Vallandigham, not being a secessionist, merely desiring an honourable peace between North and South, which he had ably advocated, had gone on to Nassau, thence to Halifax, thence to Quebec: where he was.

I at first declined the honour. But I was much pressed. I was told that leading citizens of Quebec and members of the late Canadian Government would attend. That the dinner was merely hospitality to a refugee landed upon our shores in distress; and that my presidency would take away any suspicion that there was the slightest arriere-pensee in the matter. I concurred. The dinner took place. Not a word was said of the great pending contest, unless some words of Mr. Vallandigham, apologizing for the poverty of his dress, might be so construed. He said: "Mr. Chairman, I must apologize for my costume. I can only explain that I am standing in the clothes I was allowed to put on, after being taken out of my own bed, in my own house, without warning and without warrant, and I have not had the means to re-clothe myself."

The dinner was certainly about as non-political and as innocent as any such assembly could be. Mr. Vallandigham left for Niagara the same night. I saw him into the train. He declined a friendly loan; but he accepted a free passage to Niagara, where, later on, I spent two or three pleasant and interesting days in his society; our little party being Governor Dallas, of the Hudson's Bay Company, D'Arcy McGee, Dr. Mackay, who had acted as correspondent of the "Times," Professor Hind, my son, Mr. Watkin, and myself. The "consul" had, no doubt, misrepresented our proceedings.

Now this is the whole story. I never after this got any answers to letters to Mr. Seward; and, as stated above, I never knew of the grievance till spoken to by Mr. Bright, who had received a letter of complaint of me from somebody at Washington.



CHAPTER XXI.

Letters from Sir George E. Cartier—Question of Honors.

The "Act for the Union of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, and the government thereof, and for purposes connected therewith," received the Royal Assent on the 29th of March, 1867.

The following letters may be of some interest to the friends of the late Sir George Etienne Cartier, and to mine:

"W. P. HOTEL, LONDON, "30 April, 1867.

"My DEAR MR. WATKIN,

"I leave to-morrow for Liverpool on my way to Canada. Allow me, before my departure, to convey to you personally and for 'Canada' the most sincere and grateful thanks for all the kindnesses you have bestowed, on me since my sojourn in London, and for all the political services you have rendered to 'Canada' in having so efficiently helped the carrying of the great confederation measure. I hope that before long we will see you again in Canada, and rest assured that we will be delighted to demonstrate to you our gratefulness.

"Be kind enough to present my best respects to Mrs. Watkin, and to ask her to accept from me the within-enclosed photograph taken at 'Naples,' which I think is very good.

"Good bye, my dear Mr. Watkin, and believe me, "Yours very truly, "GEO. ET. CARTIER. "E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P."



MISTAKE ABOUT HONORS.

When the Act for Confederation had been passed, and while some of the delegates were still in England, a notification was made of honors intended to be conferred by Her Majesty on some of those who had devoted anxious hours of labour to the great cause of Union. In my case, my name was mentioned for knighthood, while the names of Mr. Cartier and Mr. Galt were named for the honor of "C. B.," and Mr. Langevin's name appeared to be entirely omitted. When, how, or by whom, the leader of the great French-speaking section of the Canadian people was placed, thus, in a position inferior to that of the leader of Upper Canada, who was made "K. C. B.," I do not care, now, to inquire. But I felt at the time, and I feel now, that it would have been unjust— unselfish and earnest as my services had been—to give to a man like Mr. Cartier, an honor inferior to that which common report had attributed to me. I felt, also, that the proposal would be treated as a slight to the Catholic and French-speaking people. I did all in my, limited, power to represent the mistake and the danger to the leaders of the Government, at home; and, as will be shown in the next Chapter, I wrote to Mr. Disraeli on this serious question on the 3rd August, 1867.

"MONTREAL, "23rd August, 1867.

"MY DEAR MR. WATKIN,

"I thank you very much for your kind letters. Really you are too good to espouse, as it were, my cause respecting the honors conferred in Canada. There is no doubt that——is the cause of all the evil in the matter of the honors conferred. Some other parties are also not exempt from blame. I have not as yet received a reply to my letter declining the C. B. ship. I presume I shall have it very soon. I have to tell you that I will make throughout all Lower Canada the best electoral campaign I have ever made. The Rouges will not elect 10 members out of the 65 allotted to Lower Canada. Holton and Dorion, the leaders of the Rouge Party, will very likely be defeated. I went to Chateaugay on Monday last to attend a meeting against Holton. I gave it to him as he deserved. I will tell you in confidence that Gait and myself through the large majority I will have in Lower Canada, will be stronger than ever. Mrs. Cartier and my girls are at Rimouska. I will deliver them your kind messages as soon as I see them. My kindest regards to Mrs. Watkin, and believe me,

"My dear Mr. Watkin, "Yours very truly, "GEO. ET. CARTIER.

"E. W. WATKIN, Esq, M.P., "London."



"MONTREAL, "22nd September, 1867.

"MY DEAR MR. WATKIN,

"Accept my most sincere thanks for your such unappreciable kindness in having made common cause with me in reference to the late distribution of honors in Canada. I do really think, and I am convinced, that you have allowed your good heart to go too far in having declined the honor and distinction offered to you, and which you so well deserved in every respect. I hope that my matter will not stand in the way of you having your public and political services in England, as well as in Canada, sooner or later fully recognized, and well rewarded by a proper and suitable distinction. I hope so, for your own sake as well as for that of Mrs. Watkin and your son and amiable daughter. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has written you a very nice letter, indeed. With regard to my matter, would you imagine that the Duke of Buckingham has written a confidential note to Lord Monck, telling to this latter that there being no precedent for a resignation of the C. B., the only way to have my wishes carried out would be by the Queen directing by order in the Gazette my name to be struck out from the Order, which proceeding, the Duke adds, would be construed by outsiders and uninitiated that it was for misconduct. Lord Monck having communicated to me the substance of the Duke's communication, I have asked Lord Monck to obtain from the Duke leave to communicate to me the substance of his note in no confidential manner, in order that I may reply to it. I do really think that the intention is to frighten me, in order to induce me to withdraw my letter asking leave to resign the C. B. That I will not do, and when the Duke's communication is under my eyes in no confidential manner, I will send such a reply that will make people understand the injury done to me, and the slight so absurdly offered to a million of good and loyal French Canadians. As a matter of course, all that I say to you in this letter is strictly in confidence to you.

"Mrs. Cartier and myself have had the pleasure, yesterday, to have the company at dinner of your friends Mr. and Mrs. Sidebottom. They are really a very nice couple, and we thank you for having given us the opportunity of making their acquaintance. Be kind enough to present on my behalf, and on that of Mrs. Cartier and my daughters, our best respects and regards to Mrs. Watkin, and to believe me, my dear Mr. Watkin,

"Your devoted friend, "GEO. ET. CARTIER.

"E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P., London."



"OTTAWA, "24th November, 1867.

"MY DEAR MR. WATKIN,

"I am so much thankful to you for your kind wish of the 10th of October last. I do appreciate with gratefulness your so kind expression of feelings towards me. I enclose you an extract of the 'Montreal Gazette,' giving the report of a debate which took place in our House some few days ago respecting the 'C.B.' matter, and also an 'extract' of the same paper, containing some editorial remarks on the same subject. I like to keep you au courant of that matter, since you are so good as to take interest in it. I took great care not to take any part in the debate. I have not as yet got a copy of the Duke of Buckingham's letter. I will follow your advice with regard to any answer to it on my part. I will never forget your disinterestedness in this question of 'honor' and nothing will be more agreeable to me than to act in such a way, whenever the opportunity will offer itself, as to show by reciprocal action my thanks and my feelings.

"'The Grand Trunk Act' will be read a second time to-morrow (Monday). Mrs. Cartier and my girls are here for a few days. We were all sorry to hear that your son had an attack of fever. We all hope that he got over it, and that he is well again. Be kind enough to present to Mrs. Watkin and your dear son our best regards and kindest remembrance. I regret very much the retirement of 'Galt' from our government. You will have heard that I have replaced him by Rose. I could not do better under any circumstances.

"Believe me, my dear Mr. Watkin, "Yours very truly, "GEO. ET. CARTIER.

"E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P., "London, England."



"QUEBEC, "15th February, 1868.

"MY DEAR MR. WATKIN,

"I am very grateful to you for your three kind letters of the 2nd, 13th, and 15th January last. Be good enough to excuse me if I have not sooner acknowledged their receipt.

"I am in Quebec since a couple of weeks, attending the 'Local Parliament,' of which I am a member. Things are going on very well. I got elected to the 'Local Parliament' in order to help my friends, the 'Local Ministers' to carry on the 'Local Government' and I must say they are doing it very well. The 'Quebec Legislature' carries this 'business' better than does the 'Ontario Legislature.' I will leave for Ottawa on the 17th instant, to be there on the 20th to attend the Council Meeting for deciding on the route of the Intercolonial Railway.

"I felt so sorry to hear that your dear son was so long unwell. I hope that by this time he is himself again.

"I gave to Mrs. Cartier and my daughters your kind message of good wishes for them and myself during this present year. We are all thankful to you. Have the goodness to accept in return from them and myself for you, Mrs. Watkin, and your dear son and daughter, our best wishes for the prosperity and happiness of you all.

"I must say, my dear Mr. Watkin, that with regard to the C. B. matter, you do really take too much trouble and interest for me. I am very thankful to you for it, and also to Mr. Baring and Lord Wharncliffe. If you have occasion to intimate to them my thankfulness, if any opportunity for so doing should offer itself to you, you would oblige me very much.

"Really it was too kind of Lord Wharncliffe to have brought that delicate matter before Lord Derby, and to have written you about it. I thank you for the enclosures you have made to me of what Lord Wharncliffe had written to you about the C. B.

"I have now to tell you something which happened about that subject since my last to you.

"You very likely must have seen or heard of the 'notification,' published in the 'London Gazette' at the end of the month of December last, about the honors distributed in Canada in connection with the 'Confederation.' In that 'notification' you must have seen that the names of 'myself and Galt' are omitted, and it was stated in that notification that it must be 'substituted' for the 'one' published on the 9th of July last, in which Galt's name and mine were inserted as C. B. Now, you must recollect that some months ago I wrote you about a 'confidential communication' of the Duke of Buckingham to Lord Monck, in order that it should be intimated to me and Gait, that there was no precedent of a resignation of the Order of the Bath, and that the only way left for the carrying out of Galt's wishes and mine would be by 'an order of Her Majesty ordering our names to be struck off the roll.' The communication of the Duke having been made to me in a confidential manner, I had no opportunity to answer it. I had written to Lord Monck to ask the Duke's leave for communicating to me in no confidential manner the despatch of the Duke, in order to give me an opportunity to answer it. I never had any answer from Lord Monck to that request. To my great surprise, at the end of December last, I received from Lord Monck a note, accompanied by the copy of a despatch from the Duke, informing me that a mode had been found to meet my wishes and those of Galt, which consisted in the publication in the 'London Gazette' of a 'notification' omitting our names, and such notification to be substituted for the former one of July last.

"The reading of this last despatch more than astonished me, and my astonishment was greater when I saw by the 'London Gazette' that it was carried into effect by the notification above alluded to. I have had no more opportunity to answer the second despatch of the Duke than the first one, which was marked 'confidential.' Allow me to add, that the 'Duke' expressed in his 'first communication' that he did not like to suggest that my name should be struck off the roll, because an ungenerous construction now and hereafter might be made against me by those not acquainted with the facts. Now, by the course followed, as explained in his second despatch, I feel as badly treated as if the first course had been adopted. In one case my name would have been ordered to be struck off the roll, and by the second course followed up, my name was ordered to be omitted in the second notification. There is not much difference between these two courses. I have written a letter to Lord Monck to complain of the second course followed up, inasmuch as there being no reason assigned for the omission of my name in the second notification, a construction ungenerous to myself and my children after me could now and hereafter be made. Excuse me for troubling you so long about that C.B. matter. Now, with regard to the Hudson Bay matter, not the least doubt that the speech of 'John A.' was very uncalled for and injudicious. He had no business to make such a speech, and I told him so at the time— that he ought not to have made it. However, you must not attach too much importance to that speech. I myself and several of my colleagues, and John A. himself, have no intention to commit any spoliation; and, for myself in particular, I can say to you that I will never consent to be a party to a measure or anything intended to be an act of spoliation of the Hudson Bay's rights and privileges. I must bring this long epistle to a close.

"My kindest regards and respects to Mrs. Watkin.

"Remember me to your dear son, and believe me, my dear Mr. Watkin,

"Yours very truly, "GEO. E. CARTIER.

"E. W. WATKIN, Esq."



UNFORTUNATE DISCUSSIONS.

These discussions were both unfortunate and embarrassing; in the course of them, I had suggested that the way out of the difficulty was generously to offer a baronetcy to Mr. Cartier. During the discussion Dr. Tupper arrived in England. He cordially agreed with me. He deplored the mistake made, and, acting from his official position, and with the great judgment which he has always shown, he was able to assist in the desired happy solution.

On the 22nd of April I received the following letter:—

"WESTMINSTER PALACE HOTEL, "April 22nd, 1868.

"MY DEAR SIR,

"The Duke (of Buckingham) showed me (in strict confidence until after the official announcement here) the copy of his telegram to Lord Monck, announcing the fact that the Queen had conferred a baronetcy upon Mr. Cartier, and a C.B. upon Langevin, and was pleased to say that he was very much indebted to me for having suggested it. I told him that I was satisfied that his Grace had conferred a signal service to our country, which would be productive of much good. Knowing how much pleasure this will give you I cannot forbear mentioning it, of course in confidence.

"I enclose a letter received to-day from our late lamented friend. Be good enough to return it to me. Ought I to communicate his wishes to Messrs. Hurst &

Blackwell? I had a long interview with Mr. Cardwell to-day. He will do anything in his power to aid in putting matters right in Nova Scotia, and is anxious that I should see Mr. Bright. Mr. C. takes your view as to the Union question having been an issue before the people in 1863, in the strongest manner.

"Yours faithfully, "C. TUPPER.

"E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P."



I feel assured that Mr. Cartier was moved, solely, by a regard for the honor of his compatriots.

"OTTAWA, "28th May, 1868.

"MY DEAR MR. WATKIN,

"On Friday last, the 21st instant, our Parliament was prorogued. We have had a very hard and laborious session. For my part, I had charge of the two most difficult measures, the Militia and the Fortifications measures, which I carried through successfully, and which were sanctioned on the 21st instant. Without being considered guilty of boasting, I can say, and every man in Parliament will say, that I was the only one who could carry through these measures. My Lower Canada Parliamentary strength supported me nobly. I consider that in carrying these two measures to successful issue, I have rendered a good service to Canada, to England, and to British transactions. I wanted to write you last week, before the closing of our session, but really I could not find a moment for so doing. During ten days we sat three times a day, and we had to attend our executive sittings during the very short intervals allowed us. I have not as yet answered your so kind letter of the 24th April last, nor your also kind former one of March last, and I hope you will have the goodness to excuse my delay. My dear Mr. Watkin, I do really not know how to thank you for all that you have done for me with regard to the injustice done me in the matter of the distribution of honors to the Confederation delegates, and with regard to the baronetcy which the Queen intends to confer on me. As you remark in your last note, I became aware of Her Majesty's intentions by a cable telegram to Lord Monck, and the last mail has brought a despatch to Lord Monck from the Duke of Buckingham to apprise me officially of Her Majesty's intentions, and to request me to send to the Colonial Office my pedigree and my coat of arms, for the preparation of the letters patent to be issued. I am now procuring all the information and things required by the Heralds' College. The first telegram to Lord Monck was to offer me the baronetcy, and to ascertain if I would accept of it. I took a few days to consider the matter, as I would not do anything which might not have been approved by Galt and Langevin. Both of them urged me to accept; and consequently I made Lord Monck aware of my acceptance. A few days afterwards came another cable telegram, informing Lord Monck that the Queen had conferred on me the baronetcy dignity, and the C.B. on Langevin. When the Queen's pleasure was announced in the House, there were cheers and approbation from both sides of the House. I have not the least doubt that I am under obligation to Lord Derby and to Lord Wharncliffe for their interference in my favour; and I must add, that I feel under stronger obligation to you for the honor conferred on me, first, for your having moved so kindly and so urgently Lord Wharncliffe, and, secondly, for your so chivalrous disinterestedness in having yourself declined the royal mark of favour offered to you by Mr. Disraeli, on the ground of the injustice at first done to me. My dear Mr. Watkin, I cannot forget such friendly and disinterested conduct on your part. I hope it will be in my power, in return, to be useful to you. Very likely I will have to go to England on the question of defence before the next Session of our Parliament, and I will not fail to say the proper words to the proper quarters; and if it were possible for me to do something by correspondence, I would gladly do it; but I don't know how to proceed, and whom to move. Besides, I would not like to do or write anything which might not meet your wishes. I would like very much to know your views on that delicate question. I thank you for your suggestion to write a few lines to Lord Wharncliffe. I enclose you a letter for him, which I leave open, in order that you should see it. If the letter meets your views, be kind enough to seal it and to mail it to Lord Wharncliffe. I was so pleased the other day to hear from our friend Brydges, that your dear son had arrived in Montreal, and that his health is improving. I have not failed to let Langevin know your kind congratulations to him. He feels very thankful for the interest you take in him. I showed him your last note to me. I have duly transmitted to Mrs. Cartier and my daughters your kind message,—and they all feel grateful to you. I enclose you the Militia and Fortification measures as they finally passed. I enclose you also the return to an address for the correspondence and despatches on the defence-fortification question. You may, perhaps, like to have all these papers. I enclose you also the return to an address for the correspondence on the C.B. matter, and the report of the Select Committee upon it; you will find the report of the Committee in the Notes and Proceedings of the 15th of May. It seemed to me, that you might like to have these documents, as you took such a degree of interest in Galt and myself. Do me the kindness to present my best regards to Mrs. Watkin, and to remember me kindly to your daughter when you write her.

"We are threatened with a Fenian invasion in the course of June next. We are preparing to meet it. It is too bad that the Imperial Government should allow such an hostile organization to be formed in the United States without a word of remonstrance. In the hope of hearing from you at your earliest convenience,

"Believe me, my dear Mr. Watkin, "Your sincere and grateful friend, "GEO. ET. CARTIER.

"E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P. London."



PERMITTED INVASION.

Sir George Cartier's allusion to the neglect by our Government in permitting, without remonstrance, the repeated invasion of Canada, makes one shiver with shame. As President Johnson said to me in 1865, "Why don't your people remonstrate?"

My countrymen may feel assured that if remonstrances, firm and dignified, had anticipated each known intended outrage—English and Irish-American conspiracies would have not been as now.

"ROSE HILL, NORTHENDEN, near MANCHESTER, "12th August, 1868.

"MY DEAR SIR,

"I, gladly, enclose a copy of the Gazette notice of your Baronetcy.

"I have had the fees at the Heralds' College, and also the stamps and expenses, through the Home Office, duly paid, and I will send you the papers and receipts as soon as I receive them.

"The completion of this matter will close the somewhat intimate connection which now for some years has given me, if trouble and anxiety, still deep pleasure and satisfaction,—in reference to your now united Provinces.

"With best wishes allow me to remain, "Yours very faithfully, "EDW. W. WATKIN.

"To the Hon. Sir G. E. CARTIER, Bart., "Montreal, Canada."



"OTTAWA, "18th September, 1868.

"MY DEAR SIR EDWARD,

"The last English mail has brought us the happy news that the honor of knighthood has been conferred on you by the Queen.

"Allow me to offer you, Lady Watkin, and your dear son and daughter, my sincere and heartfelt congratulations on the bestowal on you of so well deserved a distinction. You must bear in mind that I do not forget that the honor so recently bestowed on you would have been conferred on you a long time ago, had not your generous feelings towards me prompted you at one time to decline the same distinction. Lady Cartier and my daughters gladly unite with me in this expression of congratulation, which I now offer you, Lady Watkin, and your son and daughter. I hope that your future election will not give you much trouble, and that Canada and the British people will have again the benefit of your presence in Parliament.

"I may see you before long in England. Be kind enough to accept for you and Lady Watkin the assurance of the kindest regards of myself, Lady Cartier, and my daughters, "And, believe me, my dear Sir Edward, "Yours very truly,

"GEO. ET. CARTIER.

"Sir EDWARD W. WATKIN, M.P., Kt., London."



"London, "Westminster Palace Hotel, "20th November, 1868.

"My dear Sir Edward,

"You cannot conceive how sorrowful I feel that the result of the election in Stockport was adverse to you. I was watching the incidents and proceedings connected with that election with such an interest and with such sure hope that you would be successful. You have no idea of my grief and disappointment when I became aware of your defeat. Our friend Brydges has mentioned to me some of the causes which have militated against you amongst your constituents, viz. your having attended at the laying of the corner stone of a Roman Catholic School, and your drinking the health of the 'Pope' at the lunch which ensued, and also the displeasure which you have incurred from Mr. Bright and some of his friends for not having supported him in his motion for Nova Scotia against the Confederation. I have already written to some of my colleagues in Canada to let them know there the 'liberality' of these pretended 'Liberals' here. I hope you will not remain a long time out of Parliament, and that very soon some vacancy will occur which will give you an opportunity to be re-elected, and to serve and advocate again in the Imperial Parliament, not only the interests of the three British Isles, but also the Colonial interests, and particularly those of the Dominion of Canada, to which you have always attended with such ability, zeal, and ardour, that you have now the everlasting gratitude of every Canadian. I hope your electoral contretems will not deter you from your political pursuits. I would have had such a pleasure in congratulating Lady Watkin on your electoral success.

"I hope Lady Watkin, Miss Watkin, and your son are enjoying good health. Have the goodness to present my best regards to Lady Watkin, and to remember me kindly to your dear daughter and son; and, my dear Sir Edward, reiterating to you my sincere thanks for all you have done for me, and expecting the pleasure of seeing you very soon in London, believe me, as always,

"Your very sincere, "And devoted friend, "GEO. ET. CARTIER.

"Sir EDWARD W. WATKIN, 21, Old Broad Street, London.



"On my leaving Canada Lady Cartier and my daughters have asked me not to forget to present to you and Lady Watkin their best wishes and kindest regards, to remember them kindly to your son, and to offer their compliments to Miss Watkin, in the hope of making her acquaintance hereafter."



CHAPTER XXII.

Disraeli—Beaconsfield.

No one aided the cause of Canada more readily than Mr. Disraeli, and I ought to explain how I first gained his confidence and kindness. But Mr. Philip Rose, who was his solicitor, his friend, his executor; who had stuck by him "per angusta ad augusta," was of priceless service in placing before him, from time to time, the facts, affecting Confederation, as I collected them.

My first acquaintance with Mr. Disraeli was the consequence of my connection, as an honorary secretary, with the "Manchester Athenaeum," a literary institute, originated in 1835 by Richard Cobden, on his return from a visit to his brother in the United States, a country at that time on the rage for social clubs with classic names. The "Manchester Athenaeum," owing partly to defective management and architectural costliness, partly to some years of bad trade and deficient employment, and partly to an unfortunate sectarian conflict, had fallen into debt and difficulty; and a few of the younger members, who had profited by the existence of the institution, came to the rescue, and by various methods got rid of its debts, and set it fairly on the way again. One method was, the holding of a great literary soiree in the Manchester Free Trade Hall. The audience was more than 4,000. The President was Charles Dickens.

On the morning of the day before the soiree, which took place on Thursday, the 5th of October, 1843, I received a note, in these terms, from Mr. Cobden:—

"MOSLEY St, "Wednesday.

"Dear Sir,

"Mr. Benj'n Disraeli, the author of 'Vivian Grey,' is at the Mosely Arms Hotel, with Mrs. Disraeli.

"I wish you would call and invite them to the soiree.

"Yours truly, "R. COBDEN.

"Mr. E. Watkin, "High St."



I print the note exactly as it was written.

It has appeared to me, since, that Mr. Cobden at that time considered it necessary to identify Mr. Disraeli as Mr. "Benj'n" Disraeli, "the author of Vivian Grey."

I called accordingly, without delay. Mr. Disraeli was out, but I found Mrs. Disraeli at home. She was a little, plain, vivacious woman; one who, like an india-rubber toy, you have only to touch, and it issues sound. But she was obviously no common-place woman. Her comments upon what she had seen already in Manchester were acute, and, at times, decidedly humorous. They were those of a shrewd observer. We became good friends. She promised, both for herself and her husband, to attend the soiree; and, in answer to my further request that Mr. Disraeli would speak, she said, she "could almost promise that he would." The soiree of the next evening was brilliant. Dickens was at his very best; and it must have been difficult indeed to follow so admirable a speaker. But Mr. Disraeli certainly shared the honours and the applause of this great meeting. His speech, in fact, created so decided a sensation that I was asked to invite him to preside at the soiree of the coming year of 1844,—which he did. Few, who heard it, will forget the eloquent oration he delivered. I cannot forbear, out of place as it may seem to some, here to quote the concluding portions of this remarkable address; an address which I have never yet seen amongst the published speeches of Lord Beaconsfield:—

"If my description of what this institution offers to us, if my view of what it in some degree supplies, be just, what, I must inquire, is the reason that an institution, the prosperity of which now cannot be doubted, but so brief a time ago could have been apparently in the last stage of its fortunes? It is not an agreeable task—I fear it may be considered by some an invidious one—if I, who am a stranger among you, shall attempt to play the critic upon your conduct; but I feel confidence in your indulgence. I remember the kindness which has placed me in this honourable position, and therefore I shall venture to express to you the two reasons to which I think the dangerous state of our position must fairly be ascribed. I would say, in the first place, without imputing the slightest fault to the originators of this institution, wishing to be most distinctly understood as not only not imputing any fault to them, but most decidedly being of opinion that the fault does not lie at their door; still I cannot shut my eyes to the fact that, in the origin of this institution, by circumstances not foreseen, and which, certainly, were not intended, a party, a limited, and a sectarian feeling, in some degree pervaded its management. I confess, myself, that it appears to me that it would have been a marvel had it been otherwise. When we remember the great changes that had then but very recently occurred in this country—when we recall to our mind not only the great changes that had occurred, but the still greater that were menaced and discussed—when we remember what an influence is created when local jealousy blends with political passion—it is not difficult to imagine, because there are none of us present but in their sphere must have felt its influence—it is not wonderful that men of different political opinions should look with extreme jealousy upon each other. A combination of peculiar circumstances that created a balanced state of parties in those places where the struggle for dominion and power takes place, very much assisted this feeling; and that such a feeling existed throughout all England in a degree more intense and more virulent than has ever been equalled in the history of this country, I think no man will deny, and all must deplore. For my own part, I really believe that, had that party and sectarian feeling proceeded in the same ratio of virulence it has done for the last twelve or fourteen years, it must have exercised a barbarising influence upon public sentiments and public manners. There are some amongst us now, I know, who believe that the period has arrived when a great effort must be made to emancipate this country from the degrading thraldom of faction—to terminate, if possible, that extreme, that sectarian, and limited view, in which all human conduct is examined, observed, and criticized—to put an end to that exclusiveness, which, in its peculiar sphere, is equally deleterious as that aristocratical exclusiveness of manners which has produced so much evil; and, as far as I can form an opinion, these views have met with sympathy from every part of the country. I look upon it that to-night—I hope I am not mistaken—we are met to consummate and to celebrate the emancipation of this city, at least so far as the Athenaeum extends, from the influence of these feelings. I hope that our minds and our hearts are alike open to the true character of this institution, to the necessities which have created it, to the benefits to which it leads; and happy I shall be, and all, I am sure, who are assisting me this evening, if it prove that our efforts, however humble, may have assisted in so delightful and so desirable a consummation.

"Now that is one of the reasons, and one of the principal reasons, why I believe a blight seemed to have fallen over our fortunes. I think at the same time that there is another cause that has exercised an injurious effect upon the position, until recently, of this institution. I think that a limited view of its real character has been taken even by those who were inclined to view it in a spirit of extreme friendliness. It has been looked upon in the light of a luxury, and not of a necessity—as a means of enjoyment in the hour of prosperity, from which we ought to be debarred when the adverse moment has arrived; so that, when trade was prospering, when all was sunshiny, a man might condescend to occupy his spare hours in something else than in a melancholy brooding over the state of the country—that, when returns were rapid, and profits ready, one might deign to cultivate one's faculties, and become acquainted with what the mind of Europe was conceiving or executing; but these were delights to be reserved only for those chosen hours. Now that, I am bound frankly to say, is not the view which I take of this question—not the idea which I have formed of the real character of the Manchester Athenaeum. I look upon it as part of that great educational movement which is the noble and ennobling characteristic of the age in which we live. Viewing it in that light, I cannot consent myself that it should be supported by fits and starts. The impulse which has given us that movement in modern times, is one that may be traced to an age that may now be considered comparatively remote, though the swell of the waters has but recently approached our own shore. Heretofore society was established necessarily on a very different principle to that which is now its basis. As civilization has gradually progressed, it has equalized the physical qualities of man. Instead of the strong arm, it is the strong head that is now the moving principle of society. You have disenthroned Force, and placed on her high seat Intelligence; and the necessary consequence of this great revolution is, that it has become the duty and the delight equally of every citizen to cultivate his faculties. The prince of all philosophy has told you in an immortal apophthegm, so familiar to you all, that it is now written in your halls and chambers,—'Knowledge is power.' If that memorable passage had been pursued by the student who first announced this discovery of that great man to society, he would have found an oracle not less striking, and, in my mind, certainly not less true; for Lord Bacon has not only said that 'Knowledge is power,' but living one century after the discovery of the printing press, he has also announced to the world that 'Knowledge is pleasure.' Why, when the great body of mankind had become familiar with this great discovery— when they learned that a new source was opened to them of influence and enjoyment—is it wonderful that from that hour the heart of nations has palpitated with the desire of becoming acquainted with all that has happened, and with speculating on what may occur? It has indeed produced upon the popular intellect an influence almost as great as—I might say analogous to—the great change which was produced upon the old commercial world by the discovery of the Americas. A new standard of value was introduced, and, after this, to be distinguished—man must be intellectual. Nor, indeed, am I surprised that this feeling has so powerfully influenced our race; for the idea that human happiness is dependent on the cultivation of the mind, and on the discovery of truth, is, next to the conviction of our immortality, the idea the most full of consolation to man; for the cultivation of the mind has no limits, and truth is the only thing that is eternal. Indeed, when you consider what a man is who knows only what is passing under his own eyes, and what the condition of the same man must be who belongs to an institution like the one which has assembled us together to-night, is it—ought it to be—a matter of surprise that, from that moment to the present, you have had a general feeling throughout the civilized world in favour of the diffusion of knowledge? A man who knows nothing but the history of the passing hour—who knows nothing of the history of the past but that a certain person, whose brain was as vacant as his own, occupied the same house as himself, who in a moment of despondency or of gloom has no hope in the morrow because he has read nothing that has taught him that to-morrow has any changes—that man, compared with him who has read the most ordinary abridgment of history, or the most common philosophical speculation, is as distinct and different an animal as if he had fallen from some other planet, was influenced by a different organization, working for a different end, and hoping for a different result. It is knowledge that equalizes the social condition of man—that gives to all, however different their political position, passions which are in common and enjoyments which are universal. Knowledge is like the mystic ladder in the patriarch's dream. Its base rests on the primaeval earth—its crest is lost in the shadowy splendour of the empyrean; while the great authors, who for traditionary ages have held the chain of science and philosophy, of poesy and erudition, are the angels ascending and descending the sacred scale, and maintaining, as it were, the communication between man and heaven. This feeling is so universal that there is no combination of society in any age in which it has not developed itself. It may, indeed, be partly restrained under despotic governments, under peculiar systems of retarded civilization; but it is a consequence as incidental to the spirit and the genius of the Christian civilization of Europe as that the day should follow night, and the stars should shine according to their laws and order. Why, the very name of the institution that brings us together illustrates the fact—I can recall, and I think I see more than one gentleman around me who equally can recall, the hours in which we wandered amid

"Fields that cool Ilyssus laves.

At least, there is my honorable friend the member for Stockport (Mr. Cobden), who has a lively recollection of that classic stream, for I remember one of the most effective allusions he made to it in one of the most admirable speeches I ever listened to. But, notwithstanding that allusion, I would still appeal to the poetry of his constitution, and I know it abounds in that quality. I am sure that he could not have looked without emotion on that immortal scene. I still can remember that olive-covered plain, that sunset crag, that citadel fane of ineffable beauty! That was a brilliant civilization, developed by a gifted race more than two thousand years ago, at a time when the ancestors of the manufacturers of Manchester, who now clothe the world, were themselves covered with skins, and tattooed like the red men of the wilderness. But influences more powerful even than the awful lapse of time separate and distinguish you from that race. They were the children of the sun; you live in a distant, a rugged, and northern clime. They bowed before different altars; they followed different customs; they were modified by different manners. Votaries of the Beautiful, they sought in Art the means of embodying their passionate conceptions: you have devoted your energies to Utility; and by the means of a power almost unknown to antiquity, by its miraculous agencies, you have applied its creative force to every combination of human circumstances that could produce your objects. Yet, amid the toil and triumphs of your scientific industry, upon you there comes the undefinable, the irresistible yearning for intellectual refinement—you build an edifice consecrated to those beautiful emotions and to those civilizing studies in which they excelled, and you impress upon its front a name taken from—

"Where on AEgean shores a city rose, Built nobly, dear the air, and light the soil, Athens, the eye of Greece, mother of arts And eloquence."

Beautiful triumph of immortal genius! Sublime incentive to eternal fame! Then, when the feeling is so universal, when it is one which modern civilization is nurturing and developing, who does not feel that it is not only the most benevolent, but the most politic thing you can do to avail yourselves of its influence, and to direct in every way the formation of that character upon which intellect must necessarily now exercise an irresistible influence? We cannot shut our eyes any longer to the immense revolution. Knowledge is no longer a lonely eremite, affording a chance and captivating hospitality to some wandering pilgrim; knowledge is now found in the market-place, a citizen, and a leader of citizens. The spirit has touched the multitude; it has impregnated the mass—

"——Totamque infusa per artus, Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet.

"I would yet say one word to those for whom this institution is not entirely but principally formed. I would address myself to that youth on whom the hopes of all societies repose and depend. I doubt not that they feel conscious of the position which they occupy—a position which, under all circumstances, at all periods, in every clime and country, is one replete with duty. The youth of a nation are the trustees of posterity; but the youth I address have duties peculiar to the position which they occupy. They are the rising generation of a society unprecedented in the history of the world; that is at once powerful and new. In other parts of the kingdom the remains of an ancient civilization are prepared ever to guide, to cultivate, to influence, the rising mind; but they are born in a miraculous creation of novel powers, and it is rather a providential instinct that has developed the necessary means of maintaining the order of your new civilization than the matured foresight of man. This is their inheritance. They will be called on to perform duties—great duties. I, for one, wish, for their sakes and for the sake of my country, that they may be performed greatly. I give to them that counsel which I have ever given to youth, and which I believe to be the wisest and the best —I tell them to aspire. I believe that the man who does not look up will look down; and that the spirit that does not dare to soar is destined perhaps to grovel. Every individual is entitled to aspire to that position which he believes his faculties qualify him to occupy. I know there are some who look with what I believe is short-sighted timidity and false prudence upon such views. They are apt to tell us— 'Beware of filling the youthful mind with an impetuous tumult of turbulent fancies; teach youth, rather, to be content with his position—do not induce him to fancy that he is that which he is not, or to aspire to that which he cannot achieve.' In my mind these are superficial delusions. He who enters the world finds his level. It is the solitary being, the isolated individual, alone in his solitude, who may be apt to miscalculate his powers, and misunderstand his character. But action teaches him the truth, even if it be a stern one. Association affords him the best criticism in the world, and I will venture to say, that if he belong to the Athenaeum, though when he enters it he may think himself a genius, if nature has not given him a passionate and creative soul, before a week has elapsed he will become a very sober-minded individual. I wish to damp no youthful ardour. I can conceive what such an institution would have afforded to the suggestive mind of a youthful Arkwright. I can conceive what a nursing- mother such an institution must have been to the brooding genius of your illustrious and venerated Dalton. It is the asylum of the self- formed; it is the counsellor of those who want counsel; but it is not a guide that will mislead, and it is the last place that will fill the mind of man with false ideas and false conceptions. He reads a newspaper, and his conceit oozes out after reading a leading article. He refers to the library, and the calm wisdom of centuries and sages moderates the rash impulse of juvenescence. He finds new truths in the lecture-room, and he goes home with a conviction that he is not so learned as he imagined. In the discussion of a great question with his equals in station, perhaps he finds he has his superiors in intellect. These are the means by which the mind of man is brought to a healthy state, by which that self-knowledge that always has been lauded by sages may be most securely attained. It is a rule of universal virtue, and from the senate to the counting-house will be found of universal application. Then, to the youth of Manchester, representing now the civic youth of this great county and this great district, I now appeal. Let it never be said again that the fortunes of this institution were in danger. Let them take advantage of this hour of prosperity calmly to examine and deeply to comprehend the character of that institution in which their best interests are involved, and which for them may afford a relaxation which brings no pang, and yields information which may bear them to fortune. It is to them I appeal with confidence, because I feel I am pleading their cause—with confidence, because in them I repose my hopes. When nations fall, it is because a degenerate race intervenes between the class that created and the class that is doomed. Let them then remember what has been done for them. The leaders of their community have not been remiss in regard to their interests. Let them remember, that when the inheritance devolves upon them, they are not only to enjoy but to improve. They will one day succeed to the high places of this great community; let them recollect those who lighted the way for them; and when they have wealth, when they have authority, when they have power, let it not be said that they were deficient in public virtue and public spirit. When the torch is delivered to them, let them also light the path of human progress to educated man."

As time went on, I had many interviews and conversations with Mr. and Mrs. Disraeli. I learned to appreciate, more and more, that the oddities attributed to the latter were mainly of society manufacture; while her fine qualities had been kept in the background by the over- shadowing ability, and prominence, of her husband. She was a devoted wife, and the soul of kindness to every one she liked or respected. Peace and honor to her memory.

In the sad years which followed my misfortune of 1846, previously alluded to, it was enough for me, wearily, to get through the work of the day, and then to return to a home where there has always been sympathy, kindness, and cheerfulness in the darkest and most anxious hours of laborious and self-denying lives. In those years I rarely saw any of my old friends of prominence and station. My wife and I lived the lives of recluses until clouds ceased to lower. Health became restored, a moderate and augmenting fortune, laid in the foundations of carefulness, came to us; and we at last emerged into daylight, again.

When in Parliament, in 1857, I made a speech in the House of Commons, which some thought timely, upon the then pressing question of Indian railways. Mr. Disraeli did me the honor to listen to what I had to say. After his lamented death, one of his executors handed back to me, in an envelope, endorsed in his own hand, the letters which I had written to him in the years of the Manchester Athenaeum.

I may add, that Mr. Disraeli's ear was always open to me during the struggles for the Intercolonial Railway as a means, and the Confederation of the British Provinces in America as the great end, of our efforts. He was strongly in favour of Confederation; and, just as we owe the establishment of a Crown Colony in British Columbia to the sagacity of Bulwer Lytton, so we owe the final realization of Confederation, through the passing of an Act by the Queen, Lords, and Commons of Great Britain and Ireland, to the Government, no less sagacious on this question, of Lord Beaconsfield.

I think the following letters reflect no discredit upon my motives,— neither self-seeking nor selfish. At the same time they are further evidence of Mr. Disraeli's thorough kindness and feeling of justice towards all who had, in his judgment, "deserved well of their country."

"LONDON, "3rd August, 1867.

"DEAR SIR,

"On my return from Scotland yesterday I learnt, confidentially, that you had been good enough to propose to present my name to the Queen for the honour of knighthood, in consideration of my services in connection with the union of the British North American Provinces under the Crown, and with their Intercolonial Railway. And I see that a semi-official statement to that effect is in some of the papers. Will you permit me to thank you very sincerely for such a recognition of the services of a political opponent whose known opinions will protect him from the suspicion of receiving, and you from that of giving, an unworthy reward.

"But the mail brings me tidings from Canada which convince me that the French Canadian population at large look upon the course pursued towards Messrs. Cartier and Langevin in the recent distribution of honors as an act of indifference towards themselves. It might be possible, therefore—but you will be the best judge—that the honor now proposed for me might lead to an aggravation of this feeling of dissatisfaction, which arises at the very inopportune moment of the birth of the 'new Dominion.'

"I think, therefore, that I should be as deficient in public duty as in generosity, if I did not evince my gratitude for your unsolicited remembrance by saying that, should the difficulty I allude to be found really to exist, I shall not feel myself slighted or aggrieved should your kindness proceed no further, pending such an unfortunate state of feeling.

"I ought to add, that my late most kind and indulgent friend, the Duke of Newcastle, suggested some little time before his death an even higher reward for the services, which he alone knew the real extent of; but at my request it was postponed until—all the manifold difficulties being one by one cleared away—the great question of policy which he had so much at heart should be finally realized in legislation.

"Having thus been led almost, to rely upon some adequate recognition of several years' gratuitous and arduous exertion on both sides of the Atlantic, I feel the sacrifice I propose to make. But a desire to avoid aggravating this unfortunate misunderstanding induces me to trouble you now.

"I have the honour to be, dear Sir, "Yours very faithfully and obliged, "E. W. WATKIN.

"THE RT. HON. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER."



"DOWNING STREET, S.W. "August 8, 1867.

"DEAR SIR,

"I have had the honor of receiving your letter of the 3rd instant, in which you refer to the rumoured intention of Her Majesty's Government to recommend your name to the Queen for the honor of knighthood, in consideration of services connected with the International Colonial Railway, and the influence of that undertaking on the union of the British North American Provinces; and in which you state your apprehension, that such an intention, in consequence of the recent intelligence from Canada with respect to the distribution of honors, might prove embarrassing to the Government.

"Under that impression you have, in a manner highly creditable to yourself, and most considerate to the Government, stated that you should not feel yourself slighted or aggrieved, if the views of Her Majesty's Government towards yourself were not proceeded with pending such an unfortunate feeling in Canada.

"It is quite true that it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to recommend to Her Majesty to confer the honor of knighthood on you, in consideration of your services in question, thereby, as they believe, fulfilling the purpose of the late Duke of Newcastle, when his Grace was Secretary of State for the Colonies; but Her Majesty's Government, appreciating your motives in the suggestion which you have made, are of opinion that it may be expedient to suspend, for a time, conferring a distinction on you which, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, might occasion a painful, though an unfounded, feeling of jealousy.

"I have the honor to remain, "Dear Sir, yours faithfully, "B. DISRAELI. "E. W. WATKIN, Esq., M.P."



Time went on, and, one morning in the summer of 1868, I received this letter:—

"10, DOWNING STREET, WHITEHALL, "August 11, 1868.

"MY DEAR MR. ROSE,

"The Queen has been graciously pleased to order, that letters patent should be prepared, to confer the honor of knighthood on Mr. Watkin, the Member for Stockport.

"As I know you take a great interest in the welfare of that gentleman, I have sent you this line, that you may be the first to know the distinction that awaits him.

"Sincerely yours, "B. DISRAELI. "PHILIP ROSE, Esqre."



I may also add a curious bit of history of a personal character.

Mr. Disraeli was returned to Parliament, in 1837, for Maidstone, mainly, by the exertions and influence of his agent, Mr. Richard Hart, the eminent solicitor. Mr. Hart was my friend and agent on my return for the borough of Hythe, in 1874, and in 1880.

Mr. Hart had many interesting reminiscences of Mr. Disraeli to recount, and some day, in a more appropriate place, I hope to be able to recount them.



CHAPTER XXIII.

Visits to Quebec and Portland, and Letters Home, 1861.

Leaving Montreal by the night boat, I arrived at the wharf at Quebec; and, after a visit to the hotel and a walk round the city, called on Mr. Cartier, the Chief Minister of Canada, at the small house he then inhabited.

My first relation with Quebec was in acting as Honorary Secretary to a Committee in Manchester, which raised 7,500l. by subscription, and sent it out in money and goods to relieve the people, houseless and ruined by the great Quebec fires of May and July, 1845, when 3,015 houses were burnt down, and thousands of people were made homeless, and were starving. I also visited the city in 1851. Later on, in the year 1866, I was Chairman of the City of London Committee, which raised 23,800l. to alleviate the suffering caused by the great Quebec fire of that year.

In my walk round the city (in 1861) I was struck with the absence of precautions against fire, and the persistence in building wooden houses, when the cost of brick or stone could not be greatly more than of wood.

I may say, however, in my right as an old helper in these fire disasters, that on inspecting the city last September (1886), I was much impressed by the new building regulations in rigid force, and especially by the admirable system adopted for the effective repression of fires. There are central and subordinary fire stations, all connected together by telegraph and telephone. A constant watch is kept, engines are always ready to start off, and a sufficient number of men available for duty night and day.

But to come back to Mr. Cartier. After I had waited in his salon for a few minutes, he entered: A man under middle height, hair turning a little grey, eyes grey blue, sparkling and kindly; face almost Grecian; figure spare but muscular; well proportioned; manner full of almost southern fire, and restlessness. We discussed our Grand Trunk affairs. I explained the objects of our draft Bill, which were few and simple— (A) To raise 500,000l. as an "equipment" mortgage, to provide the railway with, much needed, plant and material; (B) to set aside all revenue derived from postal and military services; and upon the security of this revenue to issue "Postal and Military" Bonds, wherewith to pay the debts due by the Company in Canada and England. These debts were pressing, and were large. (C) To alter the administration of the Company in such wise that while the executive work would be done in Canada, with Montreal as headquarters, the seat of government would be in London, the stock and bonds being mainly held in England. I think, at that time, there were not more than 20,000l. of the original issue of Ordinary Stock of the Grand Trunk held in Canada.

Mr. Cartier knew, of course, all the ins and outs of the Grand Trunk. His Government had in previous years placed the loan of 3,100,000l. from Canada, expended in construction, behind other securities, to enable an issue of second bonds with which to complete the Trunk lines. But, unfortunately, as a condition of this concession, profitless branches were undertaken, branches, no doubt, locally useful, perhaps politically needful, but profitless nevertheless.

Mr. Cartier's sole query was, "Have you arranged with the Government at home as to the Military Revenue?"—to which I replied, that there was no occasion: the Government made no objection, and regularly paid the moderate charges made for the conveyance of men and material over the Railway: and we could, of course, if the Canadian Parliament passed our draft Bill into an Act, appropriate these receipts in any way the Act directed. With the Canadian Government it was different. The Canadian Government had, so far, delayed any settlement of our accounts for the costly conveyance of mail matter, by special trains, over long distances, so timed as to suit the Province but not to suit the Grand Trunk passengers; and one of my objects in coming out was to endeavour to induce Mr. Cartier and his colleagues to close up this pending matter for the past and to accord a just and adequate amount for the service of the future, such amount to be effective over a period of years. We then went into general conversation. I told Mr. Cartier I had been in Canada in 1851: and had at that time seen Papinean, Mackenzie, and others, whose resistance had led to peace and union, and greater liberty for all. This remark fired his eye; and he said, "Ah! it is eight years that I am Prime Minister of Canada; when I was a rebel the country was different, very different."

Mr. Cartier often preceded his observations, I believe, by the words "When I was a rebel;" and old George Crawford, of the Upper Province, a magnificent specimen of a Scotch Upper Canadian, once said, "Cartier, my frind, ye'll be awa to England and see the Queen, and when ye come bock aw that aboot ye're being a robbell, as no doobt ye were, will never be hard again. Ye'll begin, mon, 'When I was at Windsor Castle talking to the Queen.'" Years before, on Cartier being presented to the Queen by Sir E. Bulwer Lytton, he told Her Majesty that a Lower Canadian was "an Englishman who speaks French."

But Mr. Cartier had been a rebel; and a gallant and brave one. One of the incidents was, that when Sir John Colborne's troops invested the Chateau of St. Eustache, Cartier, a young man of nineteen, was lowered from a window at night, crawled along to the Cache, then under range of fire, and brought back a bag of cartridges strapped round his waist, to replenish the exhausted ammunition of the defenders of the Chateau. And I believe that he was hauled up again amidst a rain of bullets, having been discovered,—which bullets, fortunately for Canada, missed the "rebel."

I may here mention that in the autumn of 1865 I had a long interview with President Andrew Johnson, at the White House at Washington, having been introduced by Mr. Rice, of St. Paul's, Minnesota, a man to whom the United States and Canada are each deeply indebted, for the completion of railways from St. Paul's to the Hudson's Bay post of Fort Garry, now the thriving town of Winnipeg. The President told me he had that morning received a letter from the wife of the ex-President of the just defeated Southern Confederacy, which he said was "the reverse of complimentary." He read a sentence or two; and smiled quietly at a reference to his, as assumed by the lady, early occupation of journeyman tailor. President Davis was at the moment in prison in the case-mates of Fort Hatteras. "It is, of course, difficult to know what to do with him." Well, I said, "Mr. President, I remember when you were a Senator you said to those who talked secession, that if they carried out their threats, and you had your way, you would 'hang them as high as Haman.'"

The President paused, and then lifted his head and replied, "So I did, Sir. But we must look at things all round; consider faults on both sides, and that we have to be fellow-citizens in future." I added, "Mr. President, I have just left Canada, and taken leave of Mr. Cartier, the Prime Minister of that country. The Queen has not a more loyal subject. Yet, in 1839, he was a rebel in arms against the Crown. He was a secessionist. For a while he was a refugee in the woods at Rouse's Point, on Lake Champlain. A reward of 500l. was offered for his apprehension. But our country removed grievances, recognized the equality of French and English Canadians, united the Provinces, and forgave the rebels. All that sad contest is now forgotten."

The President seemed much struck, and, after a pause, he said, "Sir, will you say that again?" I repeated the words, and he scribbled, as I spoke, some notes on the blotter of the portfolio before him. He then said, "A countryman of mine has been over to your side of the Atlantic to teach you to tame horses. This gentleman, Mr. Rarey, uses what he calls 'mild force.' Mild force will probably be useful with us." The Fenian demonstrations in the United States against England were named as a breach of comity. The President said, sharply, "Why don't your people remonstrate? We hear no complaint."

To return to my narrative, Mr. Cartier arranged an interview for me with the Governor-General, Sir Edmund Head, and I presented my letters from Mr. Baring, and was assured of all the help he could give me. "Your demands are very clear, and appear to me equally just. First you ask the Government of Canada to aid you in passing a Bill through Parliament, which clearly is for the benefit of Canada, because it proposes to increase the efficiency of the railway service by a further outlay of capital, and also to pay off debt, a considerable part of which is incurred in Canada; and secondly, you ask for an immediate and just settlement of the charge for the conveyance by you of the mails."

The Governor-General then sent for Mr. John A.

Macdonald, who came immediately, and the conversation which had taken place was repeated.

This was the first time I had seen either Cartier, Sir Edmund Head, or Macdonald.

Sir Edmund Head was a tall stately man, with thoughtful brow, and complexion a little purpled by cardiac derangement. As the don of a college he would have been great, and in his sphere: as the Governor of a Province with a self-asserting people, I doubt if he had found the true groove.

His despatches were scholastic essays. His simplest replies were grave and learned, sometimes too complex for ordinary comprehension. When he, subsequently, became Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, he tried to manage a profit-and-loss undertaking as if he were governing a province: just as when he governed a province he administered all things as if he were dealing with Russia in Europe. He was, however, a man of the kindest heart, and the strictest honor. But, after all, he was one of the round men put into the square holes of Provincial Government by the "authorities" at home. Still, on the whole, a noble character, and in very truth a gentleman. His chronic ailment led to some irritability of temper; and when, during the visit of the Prince of Wales, one of the Governor's aides-de-camp was pushed over from the steamer at Detroit by the press of the crowd, and fell into the water, Colonel Irving said:—"Ah! there was no danger whatever to ——'s life. The Governor-General has blown him up so much that he could never sink." I was present at a farewell dinner to Sir Edmund Head at Mr. Cartier's, at Quebec, in the winter of 1861-2. In response to the toast of his health, he alluded to his infirmity of temper, admitted his suffering—before concealed from outside people—and expressed his apologies in a manner so feeling and so gentle that the tears came into everybody's eyes. I heard more than one sob from men whose rough exterior disguised the real tenderness of their hearts.