* A Distributed Proofreaders Canada eBook *

This eBook is made available at no cost and with very few restrictions. These restrictions apply only if (1) you make a change in the eBook (other than alteration for different display devices), or (2) you are making commercial use of the eBook. If either of these conditions applies, please contact a https://www.fadedpage.com administrator before proceeding. Thousands more FREE eBooks are available at https://www.fadedpage.com.

This work is in the Canadian public domain, but may be under copyright in some countries. If you live outside Canada, check your country's copyright laws. IF THE BOOK IS UNDER COPYRIGHT IN YOUR COUNTRY, DO NOT DOWNLOAD OR REDISTRIBUTE THIS FILE.

This eBook was produced by: Hugh Dagg, John Routh & the online Distributed Proofreaders Canada team at https://www.pgdpcanada.net

Henry John Cokayne Cust, born in 1861, was the elder son of Major H. F. Cokayne Cust of Cokayne Hatley, Bedfordshire, and heir-presumptive to the Barony of Brownlow. He was educated at Eton and at Trinity College, Cambridge, of which foundation he was a Major Scholar. Called to the Bar in Paris, he was also a Bar student in London. In 1890, after a period of travel which laid the foundations of his close and continuing interest in Imperial matters, he entered politics as a Conservative, representing successively the Stamford Division of Lincolnshire (1890-5) and the London Borough of Bermondsey (1901-6). In 1892 he was invited by Mr. W. Waldorf (later Viscount) Astor to edit the Pall Mall Gazette and proved a brilliant successor to Greenwood and Morley. For his arduous and unsparing work as founder and Chairman of the Central Committee for National Patriotic Organisations during the early years of the 1914-19 war he was publicly thanked by Mr. Asquith in the House of Commons. He married Emmeline, the only daughter of Sir William Welby-Gregory of Denton Manor, Grantham. He died in London in March 1917.

One of the most arresting personalities of his time and an assiduous traveller from his youth upwards, he spoke fully and authoritatively from a personal knowledge of men, books and things and with deep practical insight into national and international politics.

H. A. Innis

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen—May I begin by expressing my gratitude for your kind words of introduction, and continue with words of thanks for the invitation to give the Cust Lecture for this year and for the opportunity of renewing my acquaintance with the University of Nottingham which began with the meetings of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1937. Canadians have reason to remember industrial cities in this part of England for their protests against the imposition of a protective tariff in Canada in 1858 and later dates, following the introduction of free trade in England in the forties. The free trade movement was accompanied by factory legislation and by protective tariffs in the colonies. Thorold Rogers wrote that “a protective tariff is to all intents and purposes an act of war,”^[1] and its introduction in Canada undoubtedly appeared to this, and other cities as an act of war on the part of the colonies against the mother country. Complaints led Canadians such as A. T. Galt to present arguments showing that the protective tariff was not an act of war but that it was adapted to the demands of a new country and that it was a fiscal device by which improvements could be made in navigation and transportation, and the cost of moving industrial goods, from Great Britain to new markets, and raw materials to Great Britain, could be lowered. In turn British investors were insured a return on capital loans. According to Galt, “The fiscal policy of Canada has invariably been governed by considerations of the amount of revenue required.” “Self government would be utterly annihilated if the views of the imperial government were to be preferred to those of the people of Canada.” But the arguments probably made little impression on England. Robert Lowe is stated to have said to Lord Dufferin following his appointment as governor-general of Canada in 1872, “now you ought to make it your business to get rid of the Dominion.”^[2]

It is perhaps fitting that I should continue in the tradition of attempting to explain the policy of Canada in this city. At this time I must give a very much larger place to the role of the United States than was evident in the remarks of Galt. It is scarcely necessary to add that I do not speak as a representative of the government of Canada but as an academic student and a Canadian citizen. It is not easy for a Canadian citizen to speak with complete frankness in his own country for reasons which I shall indicate later in this lecture, and I therefore welcome with particular pleasure the opportunity of discussing our problems in a country which I hope still maintains the traditions of freedom of speech.

I

Throughout the history of Canada, the St. Lawrence River has served as an outlet from the heart of the continent for staple products and as an entrance for manufactured products from Europe. Consistently, political and economic considerations have directed its improvement by the construction of canals and the building of railways. The constitution of Canada, as it appears on the statute books of the British Parliament, has been designed to secure capital for the improvement of navigation and transportation. Railways have been extended from the St. Lawrence to the Atlantic and to the Pacific, and canals have been deepened as a means of strengthening the commercial importance of the river. Reliance on the tariff in the Galt tradition has assumed the possession of a crude instrument in the use of which there has been some waste, particularly in duplication of railways, and constant friction over the adjustment of the burden evident in controversies over freight rates and subsidies to provinces.

To an important extent the emphasis has been on the development of an east-west system with particular reference to exports of wheat and other agricultural products to Great Britain and Europe. Since the turn of the century, the United States has had an increasing influence on this structure. Construction of the Panama Canal through the energetic efforts of Roosevelt I, has been followed by the development of Vancouver as a competitive port with Montreal and by a weakening of the importance of the St. Lawrence. Exhaustion of important industrial raw materials in the United States has been followed by the growth of the mineral industry and of the pulp and paper industry in Canada. The Precambrian Shield which has been a handicap to a system built up in relation to Europe has become a great advantage as a centre for the development of hydro-electric power, and for the growth of a pulp and paper and of a mineral industry in relation to the United States. American imperialism has replaced and exploited British imperialism. It has been accompanied by a complexity of tariffs and exchange controls and restriction of markets with the result that Canada has been compelled to concentrate on exports with the most favourable outlets. Newsprint production in Canada is encouraged with the result that advertising and in turn industry are stimulated in the United States and it becomes more difficult for Canada to compete in industries other than those in which she has a distinct advantage. Increased supplies of newsprint accentuate an emphasis on sensational news. As it has been succinctly put, world peace would be bad for the pulp and paper industry.

II

The change has been accompanied by friction and a vast realignment of the Canadian system. In the first place, American imperialism lacked the skill and experience of British imperialism and became the occasion for much bitterness. In the Alaska boundary dispute Canadians felt that they had been exploited by the United States and Great Britain with results that were shown in the emphatic rejection of the reciprocity proposals of the United States in 1911. But the tide had turned to the point where even these gestures against the United States operated to the advantage of American capital. Branch plants of American industries were built in Canada in order to take advantage of the Canadian-European system and British imperialism. As part of her east-west programme, Canada had built up a series of imperial preferential arrangements in which Great Britain had felt compelled to acquiesce and which proved enormously advantageous to American branch plants. Paradoxically, the stoutest defenders of the Canadian Tariff against the United States were the representatives of American capital investors. Canadian nationalism was systematically encouraged and exploited by American capital. Canada moved from colony to nation to colony.

The impact of American imperialism was eventually felt by Great Britain. It began with the spread of American journalism in the latter part of the nineteenth century, and continued notably in the campaign of R. D. Blumenfeld and Lord Beaverbrook in the Daily Express for British Imperial Preference. It was supported with great vigour by the late Viscount Bennett when he became prime minister of Canada with results which ended in a compromise and in which British resistance was gradually mobilized and stiffened.

Participation of the United States in the first and second World Wars has greatly increased the power of American imperialism and given it a dominant position in the western world. The shift of Canadian interests to the United States and their influence on Great Britain were brought out sharply in the work of the Hon. Arthur Meighen, Prime Minister of Canada, in persuading Great Britain to abandon the Anglo-Japanese alliance. Canada has had no alternative but to serve as an instrument of British imperialism and then of American imperialism. In relation to British imperialism, she had the advantage of understanding a foreign policy which was consistent over long periods and of guidance in relation to that policy. As she has come increasingly under the influence of the United States, she has become increasingly autonomous in relation to the British Empire. Her recently acquired autonomy, marked conspicuously in the first instance by the signing of the Halibut Treaty, has left her with little time in which to develop a mature foreign policy with the result that she has necessarily come under the vacillating and ill-informed policy of the United States. American foreign policy has been based on conditions described by Mahan, who quoted the advice of a member of Congress to a newly elected colleague, “to avoid service on a fancy committee like that of foreign affairs if he wished to retain his hold upon his constituents because they cared nothing about international questions.”

III

The dangers to Canada have been accentuated by the disturbances to the Canadian constitutional structure which have followed the rise of new industries developed in special relation to the American market, and to imperial markets notably for the products of American branch plants. The difficulties have been evident in the position of the central provinces, namely Ontario and Quebec, and in that of the provinces which continue to be largely concerned with the British market. A division has emerged between the attitude of provinces which have been particularly fortunate in the possession of natural resources suited to the American market and that of provinces more largely dependent on European markets. This division has been capitalized by the politicians of the respective provinces and by those of the federal government. American branch factories, capitalizing on nationalism and imperialism in Canada, were in part responsible for agitation in regions exploited by the central area and for regional controversies.

Strains imposed on a constitution specially designed for an economy built up in relation to Great Britain and Europe have been evident in the emergence of regionalism, particularly in western Canada where natural resources were returned to the provinces in 1931, and in regional parties such as Social Credit in Alberta and the CCF in Saskatchewan. In regions exposed to the burden of heavy fixed charges and dependent on staples which fluctuate widely in yield and price, political activity became most intense. Relief was obtained by political pressure. A less kindly critic might say that currents of hot air flowed upwards from regions with sharp fluctuations in income. Regional parties have gained from the prestige which attaches to new developments. They have arisen in part to meet the demands of regional advertising which in turn accentuates regionalism. They have capitalized on the prestige which attaches to ideas imported from Great Britain, notably in the case of Social Credit and of Socialism. The achievement of Canadian autonomy has therefore been accompanied by outbursts of regional activity. Small groups have emerged to combine, disband, and recombine in relation to protests against the central provinces, notably in the problem of railway rates. Large parties have found it extremely difficult to maintain an effective footing and have tended to break up into provincial parties or into small back-scratching, log-rolling groups within the party.

Provincial parties in western Canada have been in part also a reflection of the influence of new techniques in communication. The radio station and the phonograph record enormously increase the power of the regional politician. In Alberta with its vast potential resources, during the period of severe depression and drought, the late William Aberhart built up a large audience throughout the province with the radio. His success warrants more detailed consideration since it illustrates the elements responsible for the break-up of large political parties. As a teacher he had acquired an extensive vocabulary. Graduates from his school were scattered throughout the province and his influence as a teacher persisted as a factor facilitating effective appeal. His Bible Institute and appeals to the Bible and to religion were used with great effect. The radio proved a great advantage to skilful preachers in the political field in both Alberta and Saskatchewan. Bible texts and hymns and semi-Biblical language were designed to attack usury, interest and debts. The conversations and parables of the founder of Christianity were repeated with great skill, notably in attack on the money changers. Audiences throughout the province were held together by correspondence. Large numbers wrote in and subscribed in small amounts. Their names were read over the radio and comments made on their letters. Attacks were made on older types of communication such as the chain newspapers dominated by Eastern control. The Albertan was purchased as a means of carrying the attacks into the newspaper field.

In the east, Nova Scotia had regarded Confederation as a device for opening American markets, whereas the St. Lawrence region thought of it as a basis of protection against American goods. The Maritimes felt the full impact of capitalism in the destruction of wooden shipbuilding and in the costs of expensive transportation to Central Canada. Their iron and steel and coal industries, developed in relation to the demand for rails and the industrial expansion of Canada, were among the first to feel the effects of a decline in rate of expansion. With strong political traditions, born of a Maritime background, it might be expected that the Maritimes would be among the first to voice complaint against injustice.

The problem of regionalism in the east can perhaps best be described by extracts from a statement presented by the late William Rand, to the Jones Commission, appointed by the Province of Nova Scotia in 1934. “We use the word Canada in its original and proper sense, comprising the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. It is a common error to regard these two provinces as Upper Canada, and the Maritimes as Lower Canada. That is incorrect. Ontario was Upper Canada, Quebec, Lower Canada. Nova Scotia was never Canada.

It should be noted that Newfoundland has planned to enter Confederation with a great instrument for political intrigue in the federal system, namely admission without responsible government.

The appearance of a large number of small parties suggests an obvious incapacity of a party or of two parties to represent effectively the increasing number of diverging interests. Provincial boundaries have become important considerations in determining party growth to mention Social Credit in Alberta, CCF in Saskatchewan, coalitions in British Columbia and Manitoba, Liberals in the Maritime Provinces, Mr. Drew in Ontario and Mr. Duplessis in Quebec. The consequent complexity suggests a new type of politics or the disappearance of an old type of politics.

IV

The results of this complexity have been evident in the federal field. My friends tell me that government has been determined by the longevity of the Walpole administration. An administration of about two centuries ago in England has been accepted as the basis of government in Canada. Walpole surely cast a long shadow. It might be fruitful to institute other comparisons with Walpole’s administration and I suggest this to my Tory friends. As evidence of the futility of political discussion in Canada, I may report the conversations of my Liberal friends who deplore the activities of the federal administration in no uncertain terms but always conclude with what is to them an unanswerable argument—“What is the alternative?” In one’s weaker moments the answer does appear conclusive, but what a comment on political life, as though no one would vote against the administration for fear of worse evils to come. One forgets that it probably matters little how one votes so long as one votes against the government. Surely political life has not completely disappeared even though it may be near death. The explanation is in part in the exhaustion which accompanies a long period in office and particularly in a trying war period. A distinguished federal civil servant once told me that no administration should be in office more than five years. At the end of that time members have ceased to have new ideas or have come under the control of civil servants who have no ideas or at least are not expected to have any ideas. The exhaustion becomes evident not only among members of the administration but also in the body politic generally.

A further evidence of political lethargy has appeared in the infinite capacity for self congratulation. Invariably we remark on the superiority of Canadian institutions, Canadian character and Canadians generally over Americans. This, of course, is our common North American heritage but in Canada it appears to lead to little more than a congenital tendency toward long arms with which we can slap our own backs. It is a commonplace, of course, that we are encouraged in this by our polite friends from the United States and Great Britain. Moreover it enables us to forget the ever prevailing problem, competition between French and English and our inability to deal precisely and directly with domestic and foreign problems.

In attempting to explain the background of this impasse one can point to two or three considerations. In the first place attention should be given to our constitution which has proved so well adapted to political impotence. The Senate is a unique institution which lends itself to political manipulation. As a guarantee of Maritime rights the Maritime provinces were given a substantial number of senators and this has facilitated the growth of a strong party organisation. Politicians have before them as their reward for reasonable activity an appointment to the Senate for life. By postponing the reward until a reasonable age the active part of a politician’s life is guaranteed to the party. It may be that the Liberal party will fear an eventual revival of political life and appoint senators who are younger in age so that in case of a political reverse the senate will continue to be filled for a reasonable length of time with senators loyal to the cause. I presume a careful medical check could be made of senatorial possibilities but I gather that only a general convention that an appointee must be under seventy has been followed.

The Senate not only provides a useful anchorage for the Liberal party in the Maritimes but also a support to party organizations throughout Canada. A federal party organizer can be appointed to the Senate and the cost of secretarial expenses charged to services to the country. It is true that the procedure has disadvantages in that once senators are appointed they may lose interest in party work since they cannot easily be dislodged. In this case another senator must be appointed and this may be an advantage in bringing in new blood. A senatorship is again a reward for journalists who have been active in the party’s interest and who will presumably continue active after their appointment. A senator stands as an active guard over the party’s interests and is expected to be continually alert to the improvement of the party’s position in the region from which he is appointed. The relation of the senate to party organization has been inadequately studied. The entrenched position of the party in the senate contributes to inflexible government and makes political instruments less sensitive to economic demands. In turn it probably contributes to the rise of new provincial parties and ultimately, perhaps, weakens the large centralized party.

Parties are held together to an important extent by patronage and the judicious (not a pun) use of patronage. In the legal profession the senate plays perhaps a less important role, but there remains control over appointments to the bench. The legal profession and to some extent the medical and other professions are handicapped by professional ethics which prohibit advertising. The political field is admirably designed to offset this handicap. Since lawyers presumably are expected to be concerned with law it seems eminently fitting that lawyers should be selected by the party to run as members or perhaps that the lawyers should be very active in securing nominations. The most coveted of all political positions, that of a defeated candidate, in the legal profession follows the substantial advertising developed during the course of the campaign. He will not be forgotten by the party when it becomes necessary for the government to select individuals to handle the enormous amount of its legal business. The position of the legal profession in and out of Parliament provides great opportunities for the distribution of patronage. Lawyers must of course exercise discretion since a fanatical party loyalty may weaken their position in possible appointments to the bench. They will do well to support the party discreetly and strongly. Ample salaries and the very great difficulty of dislodging appointees to the bench tend to make the judiciary an alternative to the Senate with longevity as an outstanding characteristic. The higher salary makes the judiciary preferable to the Senate.

The importance of the legal profession to party strength necessitates discussion of the calibre of men attracted to it or of legal education, which is hampered in Canada by the broad division of common law and code law, and more seriously by divisions between the universities and educational institutions controlled by the profession, particularly the bench. It is difficult to build up great law schools such as are to be found in the United States, Great Britain or even Australia. Great legal philosophers have been conspicuously absent. Appointments to important positions such as deans of law faculties have been determined by political prejudices. Consequently the legal profession has lacked prestige and it has been difficult to take final measures abolishing appeals to the Privy Council.

As a result of lack of prestige parties have been able to exploit the legal profession in a fashion which has been the subject of much discussion in legal literature. Legal patronage has been described as “injurious to the independence of both bench and bar.” Members of the Supreme Court have been selected to act on Royal Commissions on subjects in which the government finds itself in an embarrassing position. A long list of such commissions might be named but the Hong Kong investigation, the Halifax investigation and the Communist trials may be cited as cases in point. The Supreme Court has been used to shield the government, fortunately not always with success, to cite only Mr. Drew’s attacks on the Hong Kong investigation and the failures of conviction in the spy trials. The embarrassment to the rights of Canadian citizens has been obvious. A Canadian citizen whose rights may be imperilled by the report of a Royal Commission, including members of the Supreme Court, will not feel happy about the prospect of appearing before the Supreme Court in a possible appeal from lower courts. The use of the legal profession to whitewash political activities of the government is only possible in a country in which the profession has suffered in prestige. The citizen’s rights against police interference have been seriously weakened. The Supreme Court ought not to be in a position in which the government can use it as a doormat on which to wipe its muddy feet.

The use of the legal profession has perhaps facilitated the exploitation of the academic profession and in particular of the social sciences. In the words of Heinrich Bruening, former Chancellor of Germany, “I think that the greatest hindrance to constructive political action in the last thirty years has been the influence on final decisions of experts, especially of experts obsessed with the belief that their own generation has gained a vantage point unprecedented in history. No quality is more important in a political leader than awareness of the accumulated wisdom and experience handed down not only in written documents but also by word of mouth from generation to generation in practical diplomatic, administrative and legislative work. . . . The more we work with mass statistics and large schemes the more we are in danger of neglecting the dignity and value of the human individual and losing sight of life as a whole.”^[3] Royal commissions have become a device for exploiting the finality characteristic of academic pronouncements as well as of legal statements. The lowering of the prestige of the legal profession has implied leaning on the prestige of the academic profession with unhappy results for both. The tradition begins perhaps with the Prime Minister who came into his position armed with that great academic weapon, a doctoral degree from Harvard. It would be tedious to trace the steps by which various parties have enlisted the prestige of the academic profession but we can note that they were taken on a large scale during the depression, conspicuously with the appointment of the late Norman Rogers as Minister of Labour, and reached a great climax in the report of the Sirois Royal Commission and in the great trek of the academic profession to the Ottawa salient during the war. The Sirois Report with its length and the number of its appendices was calculated to bring to a focus all the light and leading of the legal and the academic professions to produce the great solution to the Canadian problem, and to guarantee the life of the Liberal administration in Ottawa for an indefinite period. It has been used with devastating effect to divide what are called the have-nots and the haves among the provinces and to strengthen the Liberal party in English-speaking regions. The use of the class struggle as an instrument of politics has been developed to a high point and I suspect that we could show the Russians a few details in the higher dialectics. The other parties have been paralyzed by a situation in which large numbers of voters support Liberals in the federal government, notably in Ontario and Quebec, and at the same time another party in the provincial government in order that the dominance of any one group may be checked and that a strong opposition may be maintained against the bureaucracy. The conscription issue destroyed the Liberal party in Ontario since Mr. Hepburn, the leader of the provincial Liberals, was compelled to oppose Mr. King in the hope of securing Conservative votes. In Quebec the Liberal party was damaged in the provincial field by opposition to conscription.

V

During the war period large numbers of the academic profession joined the civil service. Government became extremely complex and the academic profession thrives on complexity. Complexity was suited to patronage, particularly after the war. It is not necessary to emphasize again the extent to which the new civil servants were apparently encouraged to abandon anonymity during the war and to draw fire from the government. But we may well be concerned with the change in the attitude toward government in Ottawa, because now general appeals are made for the solution of every conceivable problem, reflecting a belief that governments are omnipotent. We are again thrown back on the limitations of the legal profession in that legislation itself has been used to an enormous extent to strengthen the position of the party. This has given rise to an extensive form of the one-party system in the federal administration.

The emergence of the civil service to authoritarian control or to use the German expression, the appointments of “gruppenfuhren” and “ubergruppenfuhren” has had an important influence on politics. The press inevitably is compelled to change its attitude in the news since the facts of governmental intervention are inconceivably dull. Nor is the dullness alleviated by the unrelieved monotony of photographs. Complexity compels the press to emphasize nonsensical subjects or to retreat to issues of the utmost simplicity. The hypothesis may be suggested that the tendency has made for mediocrity in political leadership. It would be interesting to learn why calculated stupidity has become a great political asset, but a careful study of the political leaders of Canadian parties leaves little doubt of the fact. Perhaps political talent is inadequate to the demands of a large number of parties. In any case it would be difficult to find greater political ineptitude than exists in Canadian parties. I must ask to be excused from giving specific examples. Cabinet making becomes “a thoroughly unpleasant and discreditable business in which merit is disregarded, loyal service is without value, influence is the most important factor, and geography and religion are important secondary considerations.” “Comprehensive representation . . . has deprived and will continue to deprive the Dominion of the possible maximum of efficiency in its growing bodies.”^[4]

Provincial parties have been hampered in the federal field and have been compelled to undertake measures in their respective provinces which are unacceptable to the federal government. Disallowance of provincial legislation has been a measure of the political necessity of intensifying friction between the provinces and the federal government but at the same time reflects the difficulties of the British North American Act. These have been met over a long period by appeals to the judicial committee of the Privy Council. Interpretations of its decisions have been subjected to intensive study and complaints have been made as to their inconsistency. But their very inconsistencies have implied flexibility and have offset the danger of all written constitutions, namely, that of becoming rigid. The British North American Act has produced its own group of idolaters and much has been done to interpret the views and sayings of the fathers of Confederation in a substantial body of patristic literature.

In Canada political capacity has been exhausted by the demands of the present century and political parties have become bankrupt in regionalism. A strong Supreme Court is essential to the effective operation of written constitutions and this has proved difficult to obtain as a result of the necessity of appealing to the Privy Council and of the handicaps imposed by the British North American Act on systems of legal education through placing education under the provinces.

VI

Political difficulties have been accompanied by increasing centralization and control by federal civil servants. Such centralization facilitates co-operation or collaboration with the United States. It explains the violation of British traditions of the civil service by which civil servants make pronouncements which are perhaps taken more seriously than those by members of the cabinet. These pronouncements have been particularly in evidence in the field of foreign policy and reflect the increasing influence of the conventions of the United States.

I might suggest further evidence of increasing American domination and of the general conclusion that autonomy following the Statute of Westminster has been a device by which we can co-operate with the United States as we formerly did with Great Britain. Indeed the change has been most striking. We complained bitterly of dominance by the United States and Great Britain in the Minto affair, the Alaska boundary dispute, the Naval Bill and the like but no questions are asked as to the implications of joint defence schemes with the United States or as to the truth of rumours that Americans are establishing bases in northern Canada, carrying out naval operations in Canadian waters, arranging for joint establishment of weather stations, and contributing to research from funds allocated to the armed forces of the United States under the direction of joint co-operative organizations.

The ease with which such co-operation is carried out follows in part the opposition to socialistic trends in Great Britain. Central and eastern Canada in contrast with western Canada have had essentially counter-revolutionary traditions, represented by the United Empire Loyalists and by the power of the church in French Canada, which escaped the influences of the French revolution. A counter-revolutionary tradition is not sympathetic to socialistic tendencies and is favourable to the emphasis on private enterprise which characterizes the United States. Opposition to socialistic devices has been particularly important because of large sectors of Canadian economic life which have come under the control of government ownership, notably the Hydro-Electric Power Company of Ontario and the Canadian National Railways. Indeed the large-scale continental type of business organization in Canada reflects the influence of governmental administration in its emphasis on seniority rules and the general sterility of bureaucratic development. Large administrative bodies are compelled to recognize the importance of morale as a basis of efficiency in making appointments. A large number of private enterprises and organizations assume constant attention to the capacities of individuals whereas in large organizations mobility can be achieved only with an enormous outlay of energy devoted to the appraisal of capacity.

American imperialism has been described as “latent and fundamentally political.” It has been made plausible and attractive in part by the insistence of Americans that they are not imperialistic. This new type of imperialism which is not imperialistic has been particularly effective in Canada, with its absence of a foreign policy incidental to its political difficulties and to its language problem and division into French and English. The history of Canada to an important extent has been that of a struggle between French and English. British governors took over French bureaucratic administration after the conquest of New France and installed members of the English aristocracy in the civil service. The struggle for responsible government was essentially a struggle for jobs for the native born, a struggle which still continues in Ottawa in the interest of positions for French Canadians in the civil service.

Canada is exposed in a direct fashion to the limitations of American foreign policy which are largely a result of its lack of tradition and continuity and its consequent emphasis on displays of military strength. A commercialistic society in a newspaper civilization is profoundly influenced by the type of news which makes for wider circulation of newspapers. “For God, for country and for circulation.” The demands of advertising, particularly of department store advertising, are primarily for circulation. Lack of continuity in news is the inevitable result of dependence on advertisements for the sale of goods. Effective journalists are those most sensitive to emotional instability. Circulation becomes largely dependent on instability of news and instability becomes dangerous. The influence of advertising in the United States spread to Europe, notably to Germany, before the first Great War. Bertrand Russell has said with much truth, “the whole modern technique of government in all its worst aspects is derived from advertising.”^[5] The intellectual level of propaganda is that of the lowest common denominator among the public. Appeal to reason and you appeal to about four per cent. of the human race.^[6] The radio has tended to dominate the news presented in the newspaper as it selects spot news and compels the newspapers to write it up at greater length because of the feeling that people will wish to know more about the items even though they are not news.

VII

A consistent, dependable foreign policy is exceedingly difficult to achieve. American foreign policy has been to a large extent determined by domestic politics. Publishers of newspapers were rewarded in the patronage system with appointments to ambassadorial posts. The Secretary of State has invariably played an active role in party politics. An attempt to establish a bi-partisan basis for foreign policy under Roosevelt II has given greater stability but foreign issues are apt to be dominated by the immediate exigencies of party politics. Under these circumstances a consistent foreign policy becomes impossible and military domination of foreign policy inevitable. The United States has shown considerable partiality for generals as presidents throughout its history partly because of the instability of its political system. Numerous complaints have been made even in the United States of the pervasive influence of the armed forces but no signs of abatement are in evidence.

More recently, conscription implies a strengthening of their influence. George Ticknor, an American writing in the latter part of the nineteenth century, stated, “nothing tends to make war more savage than this cruel, forced service, which the soldier who survives it yet claims at last as his great glory because he cannot afford to suffer so much and get no honour for it. It is a splendid sort of barbarism that is thus promoted, but it is barbarism after all; for it tends more and more to make the military character predominate over the civil.”^[7] De Tocqueville described military glory as a scourge more formidable to republics than all other evils combined. An American friend of mine has described Washington as becoming the centre for those interested in power rather than the profit motive. Bureaucracy assumes a hierarchy and the power problem.

The United States has been described by John Gunther as “the greatest, craziest, most dangerous, least stable, most spectacular, least grown up and most powerful and magnificent nation ever known.” Her attitude reminds one of the stories of the fanatic fear of mice shown by elephants. American “candour, good temper, immediate and fearless experimentation, sense for fact, etc., is the positive role of their incapacity for discussions and ideas.” “Any fact illustrates them and no idea except as it can be shown to be in direct relation to fact.” (Lowes Dickinson). Formerly it required some time to influence public opinion favourably toward war. We have now reached the position in which opinion is systematically aroused and kept near boiling point. Strong vested interests in disagreement overwhelm a concern in agreement. With control by military men and the difficulties of the constitution which place power in the hands of the public it may become exceedingly difficult to check the swings of public opinion.

Canada has become very largely a reflection of American opinion. It is unnecessary to describe the consistent influence of the American press or the American radio. Our cultural resistance is largely limited to French Canada since language serves as a screen to American influence but French Canadian cultural resources are even weaker than those of English-speaking Canada. Book publishing is dominated by the branch houses of English and American firms. A librarian in one of our large cities refused to allow Marx’s Capital to circulate and discontinued a subscription to Life magazine because of its criticism of the Empire but such devices are scarcely effective. Publishers have systematically exploited Canadian nationalism. Series of volumes are sold by subscription and used as prominent articles of furniture. Relatively cheap supplies of paper have produced pulp and paper schools of literature. The dominance of criticism in the United States and England determines the character of writing. In the United States the higher costs of commercial printing in Chicago have favoured the growth of New York for the publication of books and periodicals. Critics of New York newspapers have assumed a position of authoritative finality which checks the possibility of leftist literature and the drama. English criticism is apt to have a snobbish appeal. The remarks of E. L. Godkin, a native of the north of Ireland, who reached a distinguished position in American journalism, are still to the point. “To a certain class of Canadians, who enjoy more frequent opportunities than the inhabitants of the other great colonies of renewing or fortifying their love of the competition of English social life, and of the marks of success in it, the court, as the fountain of honour, apart from all political significance, is an object of almost fierce interest. In England itself the signs of social distinction are not so much prized. This kind of Canadian is, in fact, apt to be rather more of an Englishman than the Englishman himself in all these things. He imitates and cultivates English usages with a passion which takes no account of the restrictions of time or place. It is ‘the thing’ too in Canadian society, as in the American colony in Paris, to be much disgusted by the ‘low Americans’ who invade the Dominion in summer, and to feel that even the swells of New York and Boston could achieve much improvement in their manners by faithful observance of the doings in the Toronto and Ottawa drawing rooms.”^[8] “There is nothing in the universe lower than the colonial snob who apes the English gentleman.” “These fellows are the veriest flunkies on earth; they are always spouting loyalty and scrambling for small titles and all the crumbs that fall to them from the tables of the aristocracy.” (Goldwin Smith).

Art has provided a means of escape but it has been checked by nationalism, parochialism and the bigotry of the church. Few have escaped into artistic freedom and the most conspicuous have been those such as Stephen Leacock, who have appealed to language and who as humorists have met with universal approval.

In the field of labour the older type of trade unionism avoided politics and facilitated an international labour movement whereas in the newer types of industrial unionism, direct intervention in politics in the United States is paralleled by direct intervention in Canada. We may dislike American influence, we may develop a Canadian underground movement, but we are compelled to yield to American policy. We may say that democracy has become something which Americans wish to impose upon us because they say that they have it in the United States; we may dislike the assumption of Americans that they have found the one and only way of life but they have American dollars. It may seem preposterous that North America should attempt to dictate to the cultural centres of Europe, France, Italy, Germany and Great Britain as to how they should vote and as to what education means but they have American dollars. Even in the United States a slight appreciation of the definition of gratitude, as a keen sense of favours to come, exists. The technique of modern imperialism is not revealed in any peculiar fashion in the relations of the United States to Canada. In our time we have seen the overrunning of Czechoslovakia by Germany with the concurrence of the Allies and on a larger scale the overrunning of Europe in spite of their opposition. But culture and language have proved more powerful than force. In the Anglo-Saxon world we have a new type of imperialism in the United States, and in spite of its perils, it may be doubted whether the English-speaking peoples can resist it.

It is necessary to say frankly, in closing, that the future of the west depends in the cultural tenacity of Europe and the extent to which it will refuse to accept dictation from a foreign policy developed in relation to the demands of individuals concerned with re-election in North America. American foreign policy has been a disgraceful illustration of the irresponsibility of a powerful nation which promises little for the future stability of the western world. In the words of Professor Robert Peers, Canada must call in the Old World to redress the balance of the new, and hope that Great Britain will escape American imperialism as successfully as she has escaped British imperialism.

TRANSCRIBER NOTES

Misspelled words and printer errors have been corrected. Where multiple spellings occur, majority use has been employed.

Punctuation has been maintained except where obvious printer errors occur.

The footnotes have been renumbered sequentially throughout the entire book.

A cover which is placed in the public domain was created for this ebook.

[The end of Great Britain, the United States and Canada by Harold Adams Innis]