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.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 421 of 492
Words from 116699 to 116989
of 136421
