The Fenians
There was also fear from rebels, in the case of the Fenians. The Fenians were fanatical republican Irishmen who had formed a brotherhood in 1859 in the United States. The main objective of the brotherhood was to fight for the independence of Ireland from Britain. They decided that they would capture the British North American colonies and hold them ransom in exchange for the liberation of Ireland. The words of their marching song overtly explained their goals:
We are the Fenian Brotherhood,
skilled in the art of war,
And we are going to fight for Ireland,
the land that we adore.
Many battles we have won, along with
the boys in blue,
And we’ll go and capture Canada for
we’ve nothing else to do.
The Fenians were had expected to find sympathy and support from the Irish in the British colonies, but very few supported them and some, like D’Arcy McGee, even spoke out strongly against them. At the end of the Civil war, the Union army released thousands of Irish-American soldiers. These men were highly trained, wanted to defend their native country and now found themselves with nothing to do. The Fenians made two significant attacks, the first taking place in New Brunswick on April of 1866. Small troops of Fenians moved into the coastal towns of Maine, set to attack New Brunswick. New Brunswick, anticipating the raid, mobilized troops of volunteer soldiers. The attack failed and the Fenians were only able to capture a flag before they were forced back across the border by the troops. The raid did help the forces for Confederation however. During the following election, the current New Brunswick government, led by Anti-Confederationist Albert Smith, was defeated and Samuel L. Tilley and his Pro-Confederation government were re-elected. The New Brunswick legislature passed Confederation resolutions in April of 1866, showing the connection between the fear of impeding violence and the Confederation movement.
The Charlottetown Conference
As previously noted, the Maritime colonies were working towards a union among themselves, which had also been endorsed by the British government. The three colonies had planned to meet in September of 1864 to discuss matters of such a union further. The government of the Canadas asked permission to also attend the meeting and put forward a proposal of a larger British North American federal union. They wanted to be able to bring the Maritime Provinces into the political fold since they were suffering from political deadlock in Canada East and Canada West and the new provinces would help to rectify this situation. The Canadian delegation, including John A. Macdonald and George-Etienne Cartier, came prepared to argue the benefits of a wider union as well as the terms and conditions of such a union. Samuel Tilley and other New Brunswick delegates were impressed with what a united Canada could offer them: greater security, a wider market for their goods, and a way to reach that market through the promised . After four days of talks, the Maritime delegates had forgotten their original Maritime Union in favour of a British North American federation. The conference adjourned on September 7th, with plans to meet again in Quebec City on October 10th to discuss in more detail the nature of such a federation.
The Quebec Conference
The New Brunswick delegation which attended the Quebec conference was expanded to include Peter Mitchell and Charles Fisher who were both advocates of union. The talks would focus on the financial arrangements and how government would take form. In sixteen days, thirty-three delegates from six provinces “negotiated, drafted, debated and passed seventy-two resolutions that set out the essentials of the constitution that has governed Canada ever since.” The Maritime colonies were concerned about how they would be represented in a federal legislative-assembly that is based on population. They feared that they would be under-represented in the assembly and would have no voice on political decision making. Though many agreed that the union would be beneficial; Saint John would become a year-round ice free port, a new market would be opened up for Maritime goods in Central Canada (for coal and manufactured goods) and the promise of an Intercolonial railway would be the tool to make all of this possible. In general, the New Brunswick delegates supported Confederation and the Resolutions adopted at Quebec but they returned home to find large resistance to the idea of a union.
Anti-Confederation Movement
Many of the people who were not in favour of Confederation were concerned over representation, division of power between federal and provincial governments, taxes and the burden of debt. The Anti-Confederation movement was lead by Albert Smith who argued that the resolutions passed at Quebec offered few benefits to New Brunswick. He also argued that there was no guarantee that the Intercolonial railway would ever be built, or if it was built, where it would run and what area of the province would benefit from it. Many of Smith’s supporters pointed out that trade in the past had been south to the Americans and not west to the Canadas and that an east-west trade would flood the New Brunswick market with Canadian imported goods and higher tariffs. This sentiment was reported in the Fredericton Headquarters on October 19, 1864:
“Unless Canada consents to economize and curtail its expenses to a very considerable degree, which is not likely to happen, the Lower provinces will have to raise their tariffs to that standard, as they will require a greater revenue to meet the expenses of government under the new confederation. It appears that they will have to make sacrifices and pay something handsome for the privilege of entering it…”
Up to this point, New Brunswick had been working towards stronger ties with the United States since the trade was so much easier than trade with the rest of Canada due to the geography. Many felt that, although Tilley had shown what New Brunswick would stand to gain from union, he was unable to show at what cost. The people wanted an answer on what new taxes and tariffs would be imposed and failed to convince his opposition that the government’s projects and subsidies could be carried out “without raising the imposts on dutiable articles coming into the provinces.” One of Smiths supporters was William Needham of Fredericton who questioned what New Brunswick could accomplish in a house of 194 if it only had 15 representatives. How could they stop the spending of public money on infrastructure that would not serve to benefit the people of New Brunswick? He also questioned the Intercolonial railway – what guarantee did they have that it would be built right away, if at all. Even Tilley could not answer this question for himself, so he posed the question directly to John A. Macdonald in February of 1865:
“It is said that you stated that there would be no Imperial Legislation on the subject of the Intercolonial. Now I can assure you that no delegate from this province will consent to union unless we have this granted.”
Publicly, Macdonald had stated that an agreement over the building of the railway could not be included in the constitution, however a week after Tilley’s letter he telegraphed back to him that since the railway was one of the conditions upon which the resolutions were adopted at Quebec and he would assure that it would be included into the Imperial Act. Many businessmen of New Brunswick who wanted to see closer ties with the United States would rather see an extension of the European and North American Railroad to the Maine border that would connect with the New England rail system.
The following political cartoon of the era describes one opinion of the effect of a national railway in Canada and the scepticism in the United States of it ever becoming a reality.
Miss Canada: This is what we want Cousin Jonathon. It will give us real independence and stop the foolish talk about annexation.
Johnathon: Well miss, I guess you’re about right thar, but I’ll believe it when I see it.
Another area of contention for many in New Brunswick was the high debt load they would be assuming in a union with the Canadas. “Canada has to borrow money to pay the interest on her own debts, and then wants to assume ours. It is like a bankrupt wanting to assume the debts of a rich man.” By March of 1865, the Anti-Confederation movement was so strong that the Tilley government resigned and a new Anti-Confederation government was formed by Smith.
Pressure from Britain
By 1865, interest and support for a union of the British North American Colonies had all but disappeared, other than in Canada West. Britain had been interested in seeing a union of the North American colonies as early as the 1830’s. By the 1860’s, they felt the time was right for such a union and were eager to end its part in the defence of British North America; an expense that they looked forward to being finished with. This would also remove British military presence from North America which would ease tension in its relations with the United States. In late 1865, the delegates met once again, this time in London. The British government warmly welcomed the Pro-Confederation delegation while the other delegation was not met with the same open arms. In its eagerness to aid in the process, the British replaced the Nova Scotia governor in favour of one more sympathetic to the cause and asked Governor Gordon to intervene in the politics of New Brunswick to ensure the success of Confederation. Britain also agreed to guarantee the loan interest for the proposed Intercolonial Railway as a way to boost support for Confederation. By the time the delegation returned to New Brunswick, the political climate had changed once again.
The fall of the Smith Government
Smith had only had power for about a year and had be plagued with problems. His cabinet contained people of conflicting interests and lacked unity as a result of Smith’s poor leadership. In the fall of 1865 two of his senior ministers, Wilmot and Anglin, resigned. Another major setback to Smith’s government came in November when they lost an important bi-election. This was interpreted as a victory for the Pro-Confederation forces. The final blow came when Smith was unable to convince the American government to renew the Reciprocity Treaty. As a result of these setbacks and pressure from Britain through Governor Gordon, Smith resigned in April of 1866. By this time Tilley was ready to argue for the benefits of Confederation and adequately prepared to answer questions regarding the cost of such a union; questions which he had stumbled with before. He was now able to guarantee them the Intercolonial Railway, as well as the economic progress and modernization that it would bring with it. Tilley’s cause was also aided by external factors of the time, such as the Fenian Raids, pressure from Britain and a very poorly run campaign on Smith’s part. Tilley won the election and immediately had the legislature endorse Confederation without deferring to the people of his province. There was still some reservation about the terms of Confederation; however, the delegates were to use the London Conference to secure better terms for their province.
The London Conference
In late 1866, delegations from New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the United Canadas met in London to pass the British North America Act. The seventy-two resolutions passed in Quebec were a base for this round of discussion. With only a few minor alterations, the resolutions were accepted and finalized. The union would be known as a “confederation” and not a “federation.” But what name should this new nation have? Macdonald wanted to name it the “Kingdom of Canada” but the British rejected this out of fear of upsetting the Americans. It was Tilley who suggested the title of the “Dominion of Canada” inadvertently when he read a passage from the Bible. Tilley read from Psalm 72: "He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth." The union would officially take place on July 1st 1867.
The road to a unified Canada was one that took many twists and turns and was one that was not without its difficulties. It seems that by 1866, all the puzzle pieces needed to form a British North American union came together and resulted in the Dominion of Canada. Now Canada could determine its own economic destiny and did not need to rely on British or American trade agreements. Now the colonies were united in defence from violence from groups like the Fenians or annexation from the United States. Now the nation could be physically and economically united by an Intercolonial railway. Tilley’s quote from the Bible not only gave us our name but also gave us an appropriate motto for our nation: A Mari Usque Ad Mare (From Sea to Sea) , one that is still with us today and is ingrained into our national identity.
Bibliography
Bailey, Alfred G. “The Basis and Persistence of Opposition to Confederation in New Brunswick.” In Confederation (edited by Ramsay Cook), (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), 70-93.
Creighton, Donald. The Road to Confederation. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1964.
Francis, R. Douglas, Richard Jones & Donald B. Smith. Origins: Canadian History to Confederation. Scarborough: Nelson, 2004. 457-477.
Moore, Christopher. 1867: How the Fathers Made a Deal. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1997.
National Archives of Canada, Canadian Confederation- Towards Confederation: Influence of the American Civil War (created February 19, 2002, accessed October 30, 2004),
National Archives of Canada, Canadian Confederation – Provinces and Territories: New Brunswick (created Feb. 19, 2002, accessed October 30, 2004),
Underhill, F.H. The Image of Confederation. Toronto: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 1964.
National Archives of Canada, Canadian Confederation – Provinces and Territories: New Brunswick (created Feb. 19, 2002, accessed October 30, 2004)
Creighton, Donald, The Road to Confederation (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1964), p. 3.
F.H Underhill, The Image of Confederation (Toronto: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 1964), p.4.
National Archives of Canada, Canadian Confederation- Towards Confederation: Influence of the American Civil War (created February 19, 2002, accessed October 30, 2004),
Francis, R. Douglas, Jones & Smith, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation (Scarborough: Nelson, 2004) p.457.
National Archives of Canada, Canadian Confederation – Provinces and Territories: New Brunswick (created Feb. 19, 2002, accessed October 30, 2004),
Francis, R. Douglas, Jones & Smith, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation (Scarborough: Nelson, 2004) p.469.
Moore, Christopher, 1867: How the Fathers Made a Deal, (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1997), p.100.
Bailey, Alfred, The Basis & Persistence of Opposition to Confederation in New Brunswick (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), p.71.
From Halifax to Vancouver, www.collectionscanada.ca/obj/h18/f4/nlc001849-v3.gif
Bailey, Alfred, The Basis & Persistence of Opposition to Confederation in New Brunswick (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), p.80.
Francis, R. Douglas, Jones & Smith, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation (Scarborough: Nelson, 2004) p. 469.
National Archives of Canada, Canadian Confederation – Provinces and Territories: New Brunswick (created Feb. 19, 2002, accessed October 30, 2004),