Book Review of Richard Gwyn's 'Nation Maker' - by Henk Smidstra

Canada, according to Richard Gwyn, owes its existence as nation distinct from United States of America on John A. Macdonald.  Gwyn’s latest book, Nation Maker: His life, our times, Random House, 2011, documents and narrates how John A. Macdonald as Canada’s first prime minister, doggedly, stubbornly, or was it obsessively, pursued his dream of creating one nation based on a British centralist form of governance, stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific.  A defining value statement of the constitution would be: Peace Order and God Government. The threat of being annexed by the United States was real, and Macdonald rejected his form of republican governance which he labeled “mobocracy.” This compelled Macdonald to forge ahead with nation building with great urgency, against great financial and geographical odds, using his persuasive personality and pragmatic political action. The book is well researched; Gwyn has gained many nuggets of insight from Macdonald’s voluminous correspondence. Though well documented and factual, the book reads more like a narrative than a textbook. The time span covers the time from Confederation day till Macdonald’s death. The main focus of the book is on Macdonald’s politics of pursuing his dream, though many insights are revealed about his personal life with his wife Agnes and their daughter Mary.

He did write an earlier book on Macdonald, The man who made us, which I must read; I am doing the reading in a backwards fashion. I may find there what I found missing in Nation Maker, that being the mind of Macdonald, or more specifically, his personal philosophy and world view which guided his action as nation builder.  Gwyn depicts him as a pragmatic yet perceptive politician. He maintains from the outset that Macdonald was without prejudice, but that his actions were shaped by political necessity. Yet between the covers of the book we get to know a Macdonald who is sometimes flexible and creative, and at other time inflexible and insensitive. As any human being he also had a darker side (lacked emotional intelligence), revealed especially in the rush to “develop” the West, and especially in his relations with the First nations of the Great Plains and the Metis. Gwyn presents us with a balanced view, I think, holding Macdonald accountable for his failures, and describing his strengths. From this book I came away not only knowing more about Macdonald, but also about Canada and our current responsibilities to strive for Peace, Order, and God Government, ensuring that the goal for the common good of current reality being truly grounded in The Good.

Macdonald saw the need for a British style of governance for at least a number of reasons. According to Gwyn, Macdonald saw the need for a, “…centralized federalism in order to avoid a Northern version of the civil war.”  A strong central government was needed to govern with authority and respect, the differences and sectionalisms between the French and English, Catholic and “Orange,” cultural regions of Canada. He would come to also see the need for honouring the distinctive rights of each Province in the federation. This provincial- federal relationship would continue to demand ongoing dialogue with the provinces as they developed; it still is an important need today.  Macdonald facilitated a happy medium between singular sovereignty and regional sovereignty; unlike American republican democracy, and its popular sovereignty, Canada was not to be a collection of individuals, but comprised of communities; it was not to be a collection of provinces, but one nation.  During the early years of confederation, Macdonald also saw the need for particularly strong central intervention in the economy to build a national railway, and then later for a National Policy to give Canada time to grow into a unified and more self-sufficient Canada.  For this purpose he, at great financial cost, (including the Pacific Scandal) tied the nation together with a national railroad and then with his economic National Policy with high tariffs, forced Canadian industry and trade to develop within the nation itself.  There were many challenges and evils, such as the pacific scandal; patronage seemed to be normal for politics of the era. MacDonald’s abuse of alcohol was at its worst during the pacific scandal. Gwyn notes that it was his wife Agnes that provided him with structure and care and credits her for having prevented Macdonald from suffering from an early demise.  The Spector of being annexed by the US was an ever present reality and it was Macdonald’s stubborn resolve to accomplish his dream of a nation that of combining the English and French “races” in peace; a nation distinct from the United States on the North American continent. He got the job done; how he did it at times can be questionable.

Gwyn suggests that Macdonald was more regency than Victorian. He was rooted in traditional British legal, political traditions, though he did not act out of traditionalism.  Macdonald on the one hand was sensitive to the needs of the common person, but he opposed universal franchise. Only people with property would have a stake in responsible elections he maintained. Macdonald was not enamored of the new Victorian idea liberal social ideas; he rejected that eras’ belief in endless progress. Macdonald did not think that human nature was open to change, and he opposed social programs; what was needed was strong but sensible rule for social order.  Even in the face of starvation in the West suffered by the Peoples on the Prairies, Macdonald was opposed to providing government aid; charity was the business of the church. (Meanwhile absurd amounts of money were spent on building the railroad). According to popular thought of the day, helping out would create dependency, if not violate the new social doctrine of Darwinism. Social Darwinism became influential in forming racist attitudes towards aboriginals; but, Gwyn, suggests, “MacDonald was not a social Darwinist.”  In his relationships with Aboriginal people in the East, MacDonald had impressive ability to relate with them as equals. However, he had a great deal of trouble understanding and relating to the First nations and Metis of the West; nor did he take the time to nurture his understanding of and relationships with them. There was a lack of consultation with the peoples of the Red River Colony and the Western Plains as great swaths of land were taken (bought from HBC) and virtually given away to the rail road builders (or “barons.”?) The race to finish nation building took precedence over life it seems. 

One distinctively Canadian institution was wisely put in place in the West by Macdonald in late 1872; the North West Mounted Police. Modeled after the Irish Constabulary, Macdonald commissioned them to bring order first rather than fight disorder.  Gwyn points out that the American west had been developed by the American people themselves as individuals and families; in Canada by contrast, the West would be developed by the government. In the early years the force built respect and gained the trust and respect of the First Nations, but this trust deteriorated after the Northwest Rebellion. The new railroad had carried a virtual military force of NWMP to settle the discontent and disputes of the Metis and the First Nations. Macdonald had forgone, as “Old Tomorrow,” timely consultation and negotiation with the residents of the Great Plains, and used a military solution which proved to be a pyrrhic victory for Macdonald and Canada.  Macdonald’s adamant decision to execute Louis Riel was the worst mistake of his career, suggests Gwyn, by turning Riel into a martyr for the Metis and the French. Macdonald had been advised by George Munro Grant to take a different course, but Macdonald gave the order to execute Riel and eight Cree men.  Gwyn dutifully mentions each Cree man’s name lest they be forgotten. Gwyn describes this sad period in Canadian history. The judicial process dealing with the Northwest rebellion revealed a deep racial bias: Gwyn writes that the whites and Metis were treated as Canadians; the “Indians as Indians.” Adding to this was the fact that the Cree men were hanged publically when in fact public hanging had been abolished in Canada by Macdonald in 1867.  The whole aboriginal community was forced to watch this humiliating horror. Macdonald was to have said that he ordered the executions to show that the white man governs. From then on more restrictive policies such as the pass system were imposed on First nations peoples; they were expected to learn farming and become like white settler farmers according to Macdonald; yet popular public opinion of the non-aboriginal farmers pushed into place policies which allowed for First nations people to be limited to be peasant farmers only.  Gwyn notes that for close to a century after this, “…to be an Indian was to be invisible, so far as government and the majority of Canadians were concerned.”

 Riel’s defense lawyer had tried to reduce his sentence by declaring him insane; however, perhaps Riel had more insight and could see the insanity of a free enterprise type culture coming and destroying the Metis and First Nations’ cultures. Riel’s vision for the Metis was one of being a “distinct society”, a concept which did not yet exist. Gwyn depicts the rebellion as a watershed in Macdonald’s career as a nation builder; the relationships between French and English populations in Canada were never the same because Quebec had been totally opposed to Riel’s execution. Of course Life was not ever going to be the same for the First nations of the West.  One wonders what John A. Macdonald would thing of the very concept of “first Nations?” For him and his contemporaries it seemed that there were only two founding “nations”, the French and the English. Gwyn concludes his book suggesting that if Macdonald were to visit Canada today, he would see many changes, but recognizes the economic and political foundations that he helped forge. Gwyn concludes:

He would note that while relations between French and English matter less today than they did in his time, they remain critical – not only in themselves, but as a model for achieving accommodations among the nation’s multiplicity of peoples…. With some surprise and disappointment, he would realize that the degree of understanding between Aboriginals and other Canadians (the term “European Canadians” being obsolete now) has scarcely advanced from his time, if at all.

 

This is a timely book. It does celebrate the importance of the British roots that John A. Macdonald put into place intentionally to set Canada apart from the American Republic. We hardly need to be reminded as many Canadians celebrate and contemplate the significance of the New born British prince, Prince George. But more soberly, as Canada prepares for Reconciliation events and walks this September (Sept. 16-22, 2013) Gwyn’s book is a helpful source of information about what we as Canadians collectively need to seek reconciliation for.  As John Fraser in Aug. 12, 2013 MacLean’s reminds us, the Royal baby may signify for us largely a symbolic relationship, but, “The symbolism of the Crown’s relationship with First Nations is enshrined in centuries-old Crown treaties which we have belittled or dismissed to our national detriment (p.69). With expanded awareness, we can extend the desire for, and reality of, social harmony between the “races” beyond what Macdonald could dream of.

Comments

[Henk Smidstra]

Good discussion. I am sure lots of ink has been spilled on this subject. I do not sense that Gwyn demonizes or deifies either Macdonald or Riel; he perhaps tries to discus a large issue in a shortened fashion. Gwyn suggests that though Riel did flirt with the Americans, he was not an annexationist; Gwyn suggests that Riel realized that his "dream" (distinct society) would not "wash" in the republic. Riel was extreme and had a distorted sense of reality, but he did have much support, even from the Catholic Church at first (1870). Gwyn suggests that Riel's worst move was the execution of Thomas Scott. For that he fled to Montana, but according to Gwyn Macdonald supported Riel financially to remain in exile for the required term. Macdonald did face much opposition about this from the English Protestant Liberals. After the 1885 rebellion Macdonald sought execution(treason) even thought it had brought continued French/English division in the East. Gwyn suggests that Macdonald could have sought other political options; he notes for example, George Etiene Cartier had participated in the 1837 rebellion and had not been executed but became Macdonald's ally as a father of Confederation. Gwyn does contend that Macdonald in dealing with Riel and Western expansion was not at his best and had procrastinated too much and did not always get the best advice on Metis issues.

[Clarion Journal]

Multiple thanks Henck for the book review of "Nation Builder: Sir. John A. Macdonald." I have a minor quibble with what is seen as one of Macdonald's major political disasters: the execution of Louis Riel. There tends to be two approaches to Riel and Macdonald: idealize Riel and demonize Macdonald or idealize Macdonald and demonize Riel--the trendy liberal position doffs to the former interpretation, the reactionary right tends to genuflect to the latter position. The complexity of the actual historical situation of Riel's execution is much more complex. Riel did flirt with the Americans and Macdonald saw all so clearly where this could lead--similar to William Lyon MacKenzie in 1837. There is a much larger picture back of the Macdonald-Riel clash--Canadian nationalism or annexation of Canada by an emerging and aggressive American empire. It would have been helpful if "Nation Builder" had investigated this further and deeper--see Ray Huel (a former professor of mine and the leading authority of Riel in Canada) for the fuller and more complicated tale about Louis Riel and followers.