Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:01:03.666Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of “Nationalism” and “Imperialism” in British Settlement Colonies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2014

Douglas Cole
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Nation-making, said Canadian journalist Sir John Willison, was one of Canada's infant industries. Canada had first become a nation in 1867, and, according to party literature, with every subsequent change of government “we have been made a nation over again.” Sir John was not exaggerating the number of times that writers have made Canada a nation, and, since historians have often been employed in the same nation-making industry, this paper will concern itself with the problem of the historian in dealing with the conceptions of “nationalism” and “imperialism” in Canada and other colonies of British settlement.

The study of nationalism in British settlement colonies is hampered by difficulties of terminology, conceptualization, and ideological inflection. Looseness of word-usage, such as using “nation” for both state or country and as a word to describe a group of people with some common features, constitutes a major difficulty, especially when historians accept the looseness uncritically and without analysis. Sometimes “national” is used as a euphemism for the policy of protection – Sir John A. Macdonald's Canadian National Policy was originally little more than that. The same term was used by Queensland's Premier McIllwraith in 1882, and there “national” could only have meant the economic development of the Queensland “nation.” “National” sometimes simply means a geographic whole or a common, central institution – that is, a “national” government can merely mean one government governing four provinces, or six states. The word can even, as in “national schools,” mean non-denominational.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , May 1971 , pp. 160 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. SirWillison, John, Partners in Peace: the Dominion, the Empire and the Republic (Toronto 1923), p. 16Google Scholar.

2. “Imperialism,” as used in the settlement colonies, did not mean expansion, but the attempt to consolidate the unity of the Empire. The essay concentrates on Australia and Canada, the only two settlement countries where the writer has had an opportunity to do personal research. Occasional reference will be made to New Zealand. English-speaking South Africa is omitted from consideration, though not because the conceptions, with variation, may not apply. The author is obliged to the President's Research Fund, Simon Fraser University, and the J. S. Ewart Memorial Fund, University of Manitoba, for research aid.

3. The usage of “national” for a school system is of Irish origin, though it tended to assume various shades of meaning in the colonies and has even been considered as a nationalistic system, e.g., Mackenzie, T. Findlay, Nationalism and Education in Australia (London, 1935)Google Scholar.

4. Ward, Russel, The Australian Legend (2d ed.; Melbourne, 1965), pp. 193, 223Google Scholar.

5. Minogue, K. R., Nationalism (London, 1967), p. 45Google Scholar; for examples of the “mangle” of nationalist ideology on historical writing and a rare vindication of its usefulness, see Saunders, Richard M., “The Historian and the Nation,” Historical Papers (Canadian Historical Association, 1967), pp. 1–19Google Scholar. David M. Potter has written of the historian's need to be ever alert to distinguish between a genuine culture generating a genuine nationalism and the trumped-up nationalism generating the pretence or illusion of a culture. Potter, David M., “The Historian's Use of Nationalism and Vice Versa,” American Historical Review, LXVII (1962), 935Google Scholar.

6. MacLean, G. R., “The Imperial Federationist Movement in Canada, 1884–1902” (Ph.D. dissertation, Duke University, 1958), p. 313Google Scholar; Penlington, Norman, Canada and Imperialism, 1896–1899 (Toronto, 1965), pp. 11, 66Google Scholar; Berger, Carl C., “The Vision of Grandeur: Studies in the Ideas of Canadian Imperialism, 1867–1914” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto, 1966), pp. 1, 11Google Scholar. A revised version has recently been published as Berger, Carl C., The Sense of Power: Studies in The Ideas of Canadian Imperialism, 1867–1914 (Toronto, 1970)Google Scholar. The most comprehensive attack on the various strands of nationalist historiography — centralist, anti-imperial, economic and anti-American — has been made by Cook, Ramsay, “Nationalism in Canada or Portnoy's Complaint Revisited,” South Atlantic Quarterly, LIX (1970), 1–19Google Scholar.

7. The same quick change of character seems obvious in literature, though its extent may be exaggerated. See Phillips, A. A., The Australian Tradition: Studies in Colonial Culture (Melbourne, 1958), pp. 70–71Google Scholar.

8. Gollan, Robin, Radical and Working Class Politics: A Study of Eastern Australia, 1850–1910 (Melbourne, 1960), pp. 196, 201Google Scholar; Ward, , Legend, p. 163Google Scholar; Grimshaw, Charles, “Australian Nationalism and the Imperial Connection, 1900–1914,” Australian Journal of Politics and History, III (May 1958), 161Google Scholar; Melhuish, Kathleen J., “Australia and British Imperial Policy: Colonial Autonomy and the Imperial Idea, 1885–1902,” (Ph.D. dissertation, Sydney University, 1965), p. 525Google Scholar; see also Palmer, Vance, The Legend of the Nineties (Melbourne, 1954), especially chap. VIIIGoogle Scholar.

9. The best attempts at explaining the reasons for the change are Blackton, Charles S., “Australian Nationality and Nativism: The Australian Natives' Association, 1882–1901,” Journal of Modern History, XXX (1958), 46Google Scholar; Blackton, Charles S., “Australian Nationality and Nationalism, 1850–1900,” Historical Studies, IX (1961), 364–65Google Scholar; and Hancock, W. K., Australia (2nd ed.; Brisbane, 1961), pp. 48–51Google Scholar.

10. Sinclair, Keith, Imperial Federation: A Study of New Zealand Policy and Opinion, 1880–1914 (“Commonwealth Papers,” II; London, 1955), p. 47Google Scholar.

11. Akzin, Benjamin, State and Nation (London, 1964), p. 30Google Scholar.

12. Ibid., pp. 8, 11.

13. Ibid., p. 12. See also Chadwick, H. Munro, The Nationalities of Europe and the Growth of National Ideologies (Cambridge, 1945), p. 3Google Scholar; and Struzo, Don Luigi, Nationalism and Internationalism (New York, 1946), pp. 5–33Google Scholar.

14. Deutsch, K. W., Nationalism and Social Communication (2nd ed.; Cambridge, Mass., 1966), pp. 40, 288Google Scholar; for similar, though not always identical usages of the conceptions, see also Hayes, Carlton J. H., Essays on Nationalism (New York, 1926)Google Scholar, chap. I; Kedourie, Elie, Nationalism (3rd ed.; London, 1966), especially pp. 73–74Google Scholar; and Heiman, George, “The 19th Century Legacy: Nationalism or Patriotism?,” in Nationalism in Canada, ed. Russell, Peter (Toronto, 1966), pp. 323–40Google Scholar. The use of the same term, “patriotism,” for both loyalty to political institutions and an affection for the land, for both the state and the territory, is doubtless too broad. Tht two sentiments are probably analytically distinct, though in practice they frequently blend.

15. Ewart, J. S., The Kingdom of Canada … and Other Essays (Toronto, 1908), pp. 5, 82, 78, 114Google Scholar; Ewart, J. S., The Kingdom Papers (Ottawa, 1911–1917), II, 226Google Scholar: for a fuller treatment of Ewart's “nationalism,” see Cole, Douglas L., “John S. Ewart and Canadian Nationalism,” Historical Papers (Canadian Historical Association, 1969), pp. 62–73Google Scholar. Richard Jebb was also concerned to make clear that there were “two distinct and conflicting senses” to the words “nation,” “national,” and “nationalism,” and that he used them in their “modern and political rather than the racial sense.” Jebb, Richard, “Twelve Months of Imperial Evolution,” Royal Colonial Institute Proceedings, XXXIX (1907–1908), 6Google Scholar; Jebb, Richard, “Notes on Imperial Organization,” Royal Colonial Institute Proceeding, XXXVIII (1906–1907), 5Google Scholar.

16. Akzin, , State and Nation, p. 74Google Scholar; for an emphatic demarcation of nationalist-inspired independence movements from “mere political separatism,” see Zaniecki, Florian, Modern Nationalities: A Sociological Study (Urbana, 1952), pp. 44–45Google Scholar.

17. See Mansfield, Bruce, “Australian Nationalism in the Growth of the Labour Movement in the Eighteen-Eighties in New South Wales, with Reference to Queensland,” (M.A. thesis, University of Sydney, 1951)Google Scholar, and Mansfield, Bruce, “The Background to Radical Republicanism in the Eighteen-Eighties,” Historical Studies, V (1953), 346–48Google Scholar; Allin, C. D., “Proposals for the Neutrality of the British Colonies,” Political Science Quarterly, XXXVIII (1922), 415–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McKirdy, K. A., “Canadian and Australian Self-Interest, the American Fact, and the Development of the Commonwealth Idea,” in Empire and Nations: Essays in Honour of Frederic H. Soward, ed. Dyck, Harvey L. and Krosby, H. Peter, (Toronto, 1969), pp. 116–32Google Scholar; for a very balanced appreciation of the non-coincidence of self-government and nationalism, see Beaglehole, J. C., “The Development of New Zealand Nationality,” Cahiers d'histoire mondiale, II (1955), 106–23Google Scholar.

18. Wake's, P. B.The Life and Times of Confederation, 1864–1867 (Toronto, 1962)Google Scholar contains the best description of the popularity and unpopularity of the movement; see also Scott, F. R., “Political Nationalism and Confederation.” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, VIII (1942), 386–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stacey, C. P., “Fenianism and the Rise of National Feeling in Canada,” Canadian Historical Review, XII (1931), 238–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. See the discussion of the debate in Forsey, Eugene, “Canada: Two nations or one?,” C.J.E.P.S., XXVIII (1962), 489–90Google Scholar, and a current discussion in Donald V, Smiley, The Canadian Political Nationality (Toronto, 1967), pp. 128–35Google Scholar. Cook's attack on the identification of centralism with nationalism in Cook, , “Nationalism,” South Atlantic Quarterly, LIX, 5–7, 19Google Scholar, is an interesting comment.

20. Cook, Ramsay, Canada and the French-Canadian Question (Toronto, 1966), pp. 171, 173–74Google Scholar.

21. Thomson, Robert, Australian Nationalism (Burwood, N. S. W., 1888), pp. 35, 50Google Scholar.

22. Official Report of the Federation Conference Held in the Court-House, Corowa, 31st July and 1st August, 1893 (Corowa, N.S.W., 1893), p. iiGoogle Scholar; The Bulletin (Sydney), 11 Feb. 1905Google Scholar.

23. Quoted in Garran, Robert Randolph, The Coming Commonwealth (Sydney, 1897), p. 7Google Scholar.

24. Akzin, , State and Nation, p. 103Google Scholar.

25. The phrase, perhaps the most famous in Australian history, is that of SirParkes, Henry. Lyne, Charles E., Life of Sir Henry Parkes (London, 1897), p. 495Google Scholar.

26. Miller, E. Morris, The Principles of Alliance and Federation Contrasted (Melbourne, 1908), p. 8Google Scholar; Deakin, Alfred, Imperial Federation (Melbourne, 1905), p. 6Google Scholar. See National Library of Australia, J. N. H. Hume Cook Papers, Series XII; Cook, Hume reported in The Charters Towers Mining Standard, 18 June 1896Google Scholar.

27. The contemporary literature on this idea is voluminous. A useful sample is found in Turner, Ian, (ed.), The Australian Dream: A Collection of Anticipations about Australia from Captain Cook to the Present Day (Melbourne, 1968), Pt. VIGoogle Scholar.

28. Hancock, , Australia, p. 49Google Scholar.

29. Horne, Donald, “The New Nationalism?,” The Bulletin. 5 Oct. 1968, p. 36Google Scholar.

30. Coleman, Peter, “Introduction: The New Australian,” in Australian Civilization, ed. Coleman, Peter (Melbourne, 1962), pp. 1–11Google Scholar; reply by Fitzpatrick, Brian, “Counter Revolution in Australian Historiography ?,” Meanjin Quarterly, XXII (1963), 197–213Google Scholar; Connell, R. M., “Images of Australia,” Quadrant, XII (1968), 9–19Google Scholar, follows up the attack on the identification of Australian nationalism with equalitarian democracy. Some Australian literary critics have shown a similar discount with the “nationalist” view of literature. See, for example, Dutton, Geoffrey, “Gentlemen Vs. Liars,” Quadrant, IX (1965), 14–20Google Scholar, and Morgan, Patrick, “The Misuse of Australian Literature,” Quadrant, XI (1967), 23–33Google Scholar.

31. See Berger's, Carl excellent essay, “The True North Strong and Free,” in Nationalism in Canada, ed. Russell, P. (Toronto, 1966), pp. 3–26Google Scholar. Berger notes the intimate connection between imperialistic ideas and the northern mystique.

32. These ideas of racial differentiation are all the more fascinating when it is realized that at this time similar expressions of superior geographic-climatic evolution were being made in New Zealand. New Zealanders, formed by a rigorous climate, a cold wind, and island insularity, would develop a superior national type. See Wood, F. W. L., “Why Did New Zealand Not Join the Australian Commonwealth in 1900–1901?,” New Zealand Journal of History, II (1968), 115–29Google Scholar and the reply by Chan, Adrian, “New Zealand, the Australian Commonwealth and ‘Plain Nonsense,’” New Zealand Journal of History, III (1969), 190–95Google Scholar.

33. Berger, A Sense of Power, makes the strongest case for a Canadian nationalistic consciousness within these terms.

34. Parkin, G. R., Imperial Federation: The Problem of National Unity (London, 1892)Google Scholar.

35. Public Archives of Canada [hereafter PAC], Grant Papers, Vol. 15, Memoranda, draft “The British Empire Today and Tomorrow No. II”; PAC, Grant Papers, Vol. 24, Windsor lecture, n.d.; Grant, G. M., “Imperial Federation,” A Lecture (Winnipeg, 1890), p. 1Google Scholar.

36. Denison, G. T., The Struggle for Imperial Unity: Recollections and Experiences (Toronto, 1909), p. 85Google Scholar.

37. PAC, Denison Papers, Vol. 3, Charles Mair to G. T. Denison, 29 October 1884.

38. Shortt, Adam, “Some Aspects of the Imperial Problem,” The Canadian Magazine, XVIII (1902), 331Google Scholar.

39. Berger, , “Vision of Grandeur,” p. 390Google Scholar.

40. Rev.Tucker, Canon L. Norman, “Canada and the Empire,” Empire Club Speeches, 1910–1911, ed. Hopkins, J. Castell, (Toronto, 1911), p. 149Google Scholar.

41. Grant, G. M., Canada and the Canadian Question: A Review (Toronto, n.d.), p. 29Google Scholar; PAC, Grant Papers, Vol. 24, Windsor lecture, n.d.

42. PAC, Denison Papers, Vol. 3, Mair to Denison, 29 October 1884.

43. Leacock, Stephen, “Education and Empire Unity,” Empire Club Speeches, 1906–1907, ed. Hopkins, J. Castell (Toronto, 1907), p. 290Google Scholar.

44. Macphail, Andrew, Essays in Politics (London, 1909), p. 244Google Scholar.

45. See Foster, George E., “The Trend of Empire,” Empire Club Speeches, 1909–1910, ed. Hopkins, J. Castell, (Toronto, 1910), p. 101Google Scholar; see also LordMilner, , The Nation and the Empire (London, 1913), p. xxxiiGoogle Scholar.

46. See Semmel, Bernard, Imperialism and Social Reform: English Social Imperial Thought, 1895–1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1960)Google Scholar; Faber, Richard, The Vision and the Need: Late Victorian Imperialist Aims (London, 1966)Google Scholar; Curtis, L. P. Jr., Anglo-Saxons and Celts: A Study of Anti-Irish Prejudice in Victorian Britain (Bridgeport, 1968)Google Scholar; Campbell, A. E., Great Britain and the United States, 1895–1903 (London, 1960)Google Scholar, Chap. VII.

47. Campbell, Wilfred, “The Children,” Sagas of Vaster Britain: Poems of the Race, the Empire and the Divinity of Man (Toronto, 1914), p. 74Google Scholar.

48. Willison, J. S., Sir George Parkin (London, 1929), p. 261Google Scholar.

49. PAC, Grant Papers, Vol. 25, Clippings, , “The British Empire To-Day and To-Morrow,” The Westminster (Toronto), 4 December 1897, p. 551Google Scholar; The Week (Toronto), 8 November 1895, p. 1189Google Scholar; The Mail (Toronto), 18 July 1891Google Scholar.

50. Willison, J. S., Anglo-Saxon Amity (Toronto, 1906), pp. 7, 14Google Scholar; Willison, J. S., “The Taft Banquet,” Addresses Delivered before the Canadian Club of Toronto, 1913–1914 (Toronto, 1914), p. 186Google Scholar.

51. PAC, Denison Papers, Vol. 9, Mair to Denison, 29 November 1899.

52. D'Alton McCarthy, Staynor speech, 12 July 1889, quoted in Willison, J. S., Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal Party (Toronto, 1903), II, 53Google Scholar.

53. Cudmore, S. A., review of Ewart, J. S., The Kingdom Papers in Review of Historical Publications Relating to Canada, 1911, ed. Wrong, George M. and Wallace, W. Stewart (Toronto, 1912), XVI, 6–7Google Scholar.

54. Leacock, Stephen, “Greater Canada: An Appeal,” University Magazine, VI (1907), 135, 137Google Scholar.

55. Evening Journal (Ottawa), early 1886Google Scholar, quoted in Donnelly, Murray, Dafoe of the Free Press (Toronto, 1968), p. 20Google Scholar; Winnipeg Free Press, 9 March 1923, quoted in Donnelly, M. S., “The Political Ideas of J. W. Dafoe,” in The Political Process in Canada: Essays in Honour of R. MacGregor Dawson, ed. Aitchison, J. H. (Toronto, 1963), p. 109Google Scholar; Dafoe, J. W., “Canada and the British Empire,” in Great Britain and the Dominions, ed. SirHurst, Cecil J. B., et al., (Chicago, 1928), p. 209Google Scholar.

56. Serle, Geoffrey, The Golden Age: A History of the Colony of Victoria, 1851–1861 (Melbourne, 1963), pp. 194–95Google Scholar.

57. Taylor, A. J., Imperial Federation versus Australian Independence (Hobart, 1889), p. 10Google Scholar.

58. Smith, G., Canada and the Canadian Question (Toronto, 1891), p. 265Google Scholar.

59. Brunet, Michel, “L'anti-impérialisme des Canadiens et le fidélité britannique des Canadians,” in Canadians et Canadiens: études sur l'histoire et la pensée des deux Canadas, ed. Brunet, M. (Montreal, 1954), pp. 127–28, 146Google Scholar; see also Angus, H. F., Canada and the Far East, pp. 9–10Google Scholar: “It [Canadian imperialism] was rather itself a form of nationalism, a Pan-British nationalism.” John T. Saywell has also written of “imperial Pan Anglo-Saxonism,” though without elaboration. See Saywell, J. T. (ed.), The Canadian Journal of Lady Aberdeen, 1893–1898 (Toronto, 1960), p. xxivGoogle Scholar.

60. Deakin, Imperial Federation.

61. The Bulletin, 4 May 1905, 10 January 1903, 18 May 1905.

62. Commonwealth of Australia, Parliamentary Debates (House of Representatives), 1901–1902, IV, 4802Google Scholar.

63. Wise, B. R., The Commonwealth of Australia (London, 1909), p. 275Google Scholar.

64. For a nice summary of some of these points, see McKirdy, , in Empire and Nations, ed. Dyck, and Krosby, , pp. 116–32Google Scholar.

65. “Lux [M. A. J. Macdonald], “Notes,” Advance Australia, II (1898)Google Scholar.

66. The depth, even to some extent, the sincerity, of The Bulletin's separatist convictions were questioned by Wise, B. R., The Making of the Australian Commonwealth, 1889–1900 (London, 1913), p. 42Google Scholar, and, more recently, by Hancock, W. K., in his review of Greenwood, Gordon (ed.), Australia: A Social and Political History, in Australian Journal of Politics and History, I (1955), 125Google Scholar.

67. Hancock, , Australia, pp. 49–50Google Scholar. Barbara R. Penny has documented the strong consciousness of kinship and race that lay behind Australian support of the Boer War. See Penny, B.R., “Australia's Reaction to the Boer War — A Study in Colonial Imperialism,” Journal of British Studies, VII (1962), 97–130Google Scholar. Page's, Robert J. D. “Canada and the Imperial Idea in the Boer War Years,” Journal of Canadian Studies, V (1970), 33–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar, has touched upon some similar points.

68. Dewey, A. Gordon, The Dominions and Diplomacy: The Canadian Contributor (London, 1929), I, 13, 35, 68Google Scholar, 19.

69. PAC, Willison Papers, Vol. 108, speech to Larkin dinner, n.d. Canon Cody expressed very well die patriotic element in imperialism when he analysed the religious ties of Methodists, Catholics, Congregationalists, and Anglicans to places and memories in the United Kingdom. See Cody, Canon, “Religious Contributions toward Imperial Unity,” Empire Club Speeches, 1908–1909, ed. Hopkins, J. Castell (Toronto, 1909), pp. 23–24Google Scholar. A further element in the complex relationship can probably be singled out: the ancient personal loyalty which a subject owed to his monarch. The Crown, often cited as the most important link of Empire, was a pre-nationalist personal loyalty, with close affinities to the concept of patriotism since the Crown had become so closely identified with the state (either as the United Kingdom or the Empire). Such a liege loyalty could be shared among the non-British ethnic groups, especially among French Canadians where it seems to have had considerable effect.

70. Since Britain was relatively isolated from the influences of nineteenth century continental movements, it escaped a good deal of the nationalist ideology. It seems quite possible that some, especially those further isolated in the colonies, missed almost completely this nationalist impulse. For a useful corrective to the exaggerated nationalism-is-everywhere idea, see Kedourie, Nationalism.

71. Hanly, C., “A Psychoanalysis of Nationalist Sentiment,” in Nationalism in Canada, ed. Russell, P. (Toronto, 1966), p. 312Google Scholar.

72. Porter, J., “Canadian Character in the Twentieth Century,” Annals of the American Academy of Political Science and Social Science, CCCLXX (1967), 49Google Scholar. See also Angus, Canada and the Far East, Chap. I; Cook, , Canada and the French-Canadian Question, pp. 171–74Google Scholar; Glazebrook , G. P. de T., “Some Thoughts on Canadian Nationalism,” in Empire and Nations, ed. Dyck, and Krosby, , p. 18Google Scholar.

73. Serle, G., “Godzone: 6) Austerica Unlimited?,” Meanjin Quarterly, XXVI (1967), 245, 249Google Scholar.

74. Connell, , “Images,” Quadrant, XII, 17Google Scholar. See also McInnis , Neil, “Australia — The Lucky Province,” Quadrant, IX (1963), 9–17Google Scholar.

75. This problem is much discussed in studies of colonial literature. See such works as Matthews, John Pengwerne, Tradition in Exile: A Comparative Study of Social Influences on the Development of Australian and Canadian Poetry in the Nineteenth Century (Melbourne, 1962)Google Scholar; Wright, Judith, Preoccupations in Australian Poetry (Melbourne, 1965)Google Scholar; and the extremely thoughtful Smithyman, Kendrick, A Way of Saying: A Study of New Zealand Poetry (Auckland, 1965)Google Scholar.

76. Cook, , Canada and the French-Canadian Question, pp. 4, 25Google Scholar. Carlton J. H. Hayes recognized the distinction in the Canadian, South African, and Swiss situations; in Canada, he wrote, “side by side with the French nationalism of Quebec and the British nationalism of, say, Ontario, exists a common Canadian patriotism.” Hayes, , Essays in Nationalism, p. 270Google Scholar.

77. Prang, Margaret E., “Nationalism in Canada's First Century,” Historical Papers (Canadian Historical Association, 1968), p. 114Google Scholar. “As a coin can become valueless,” writes one student of the meaning of “nation,” “so a word can become senseless, insignificant.” Zernatto, Guido, “Nation: The History of a Word,” Review of Politics, VI (1944), 351CrossRefGoogle Scholar.