160 NINTH ANNUAL REPORT OF 



of r;ice, where it is less apparent, in that part of our political s3'Steni 

 whicli is expressed by the term "the Union, " and then to follow it 

 onward through the processes of colonization and the course of colonial 

 government. 



The question to be considered is, what element was there in the An- 

 glo-Saxon character and institutions, which, being transplanted to this 

 country, and being left to ireer and more unrestrained action, would 

 facilitate the formation of a federal government, of a Union ? Such an 

 element is to be found in the tendency to local self-government, which is 

 characteristic of the race, and is conspicuous in the history of their 

 institutions. This is a tendency the very reverse of that which is 

 described by such terms as '■^centralization'''' or ^'■consolidation.'''' Saxon 

 freedom has, no doubt, been held chiefly on the tenure of this principle, 

 that the central power of the State has always recognised a great va- 

 riety of local powers. Even with regard to metropolitan influences, 

 how obvious is it that London has never been to Ensi;land what Paris 

 has been and is to France, whether royal, imperial, or republican 

 France. It has been justly said that " centralization and active life 

 pervading the whole body are hard to reconcile ; he who should do this 

 perfectly would have established a perfect government. * * It 

 seems to be a law that life cannot long go on in a multitude of 

 minute parts without union ; nay, even without something of that very 

 centralization which yet, if not well watched, is so apt to destroy the 

 parts by absorbing their life into its own ; there must be a heart in the 

 political as in the natural body to supply the extremities continually 

 with fresh blood." — (Arnold.) 



Now, throughout the whole history of our race — the race that speaks 

 the English tongue here and in England, during the three score years 

 of our Constitution, during the brief existence of the confederation, 

 during the contentional colonial period between 17G3 and 177G, and 

 duiing the earlier colonial times, or, in the mother-country, during the 

 various eras of the history of the race there — ^it has been the combina- 

 tion of these two principles — the principle of centralization and tlie 

 principle of local independence — that has distinguished the j^race, that 

 has made its power, its safety, and its freedom. Political strength 

 and health have been in the just distribution and harmony ot" these 

 powers, having an archetype, it may be said, in the tranquil and per- 

 petual harmony of the solar system — the noiseless on-goings of the 

 stars. In the political system of the Saxon — royal or republican — the 

 danger has ever been in any excess of either the centripetal force on 

 the one hand, or the centrifugal on the other. Whatever variations 

 there may have been from time to time, this may, I beheve, safely be 

 pronounced the great Saxon characteristic — a habit of local govern- 

 ment, exercised in a certain subordination, or rather relation, to a central 

 government. And further, it would not be difficult to discover in such 

 distribution of power in local institutions much of the discipline, the 

 training for more expanded opportunities of government, which has 

 helped onward what appears to be the destiny of the race. Observe how, 

 after the Saxon occupation of Britain, the conquered territor}", small 

 comparatively in extent, was divided into several petty kingdoms — 

 those loosely compacted kingly commonwealths which were to form 



