When it was proposed in the House of Commons to
vote a monument to Mr. Pitt, an opposing Member declared :—" Mr. Pitt needs no monument. Eight hundred millions of irre- deemable debt are his everlasting monument." In much the same strain, Mr. Erastus Wiman replies to a. request for his co-operation in erecting a monument to Sir John Macdonald. In his letter, published in Thursday's Times, he asserts that "no monument is needed to perpetuate the memory of Sir -John Macdonald so long as the great barrier exists which his -national policy created between the English-speaking people of this continent, for so long will he be remembered by the
people of both countries The chief result of the policy of the departed statesman has been the creation of a wall over which the commonest necessities of life are ex- changed only by paying tribute to either Government often
beyond the cost of production That these monuments to Sir John are of an enduring character is as certain as the per- manence of the great National Debt which his policy created." "That in the creation of this debt," Mr. Wiman continues, '"public sentiment has been debauched by bribery on the broadest scale, extending even up to the Cabinet of the departed statesman, is shown by the fact that the Minister standing next him in order of succession for Premiership could not be selected because of being impeached." Finally, he notes that Sir John's policy was to represent those who -disagreed with him—i.e., one-half the Canadian people—as assuming "an attitude of disloyalty to the British connection, -of which position there is not a vestige of evidence they either desired or intended to occupy it." Mr. Wiman ends, however, by agreeing, on account of the late Premier's "personal qualities and great ability," to assist in the work of raising a monument to his memory. The letter is a terribly severe indictment of Sir John Macdonald's policy. We fear, however, that it cannot be condemned as wholly unjust.
Previous page
