64 THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



the rough forces working in society. It is not uncommon to find 

 brilHant men proving to a demonstration that a democracy cannot 

 be wise. Wise in formulating theories and debating principles, it 

 cannot be, but wise in experience a democracy can be and is for it 

 is under the harrow of the existing system and has to pay in its own 

 body for mistakes that are made. Thus a roomful of men of genius 

 may be less wise than the people as to their needs, for the people 

 know from the joys and sorrows of their own daily life. 



There is no magic, however, which will make a democracy wise. 

 The voice of the people is only the voice of the people, not the voice 

 of God. In 1867, Canada had a democracy, with full power in Cana- 

 dian affairs, but badly educated for its duties. Each of the federating 

 provinces had had a narrow outlook and this was reflected in the 

 spirit of the people. Sir Richard Cartwright has said that, in 1867, 

 he found the electors more aroused by the supposed extravagance 

 of a salary of fifty thousand dollars a year to the Governor-General 

 than by the really great questions created by federation. A young 

 people had a realm which was soon to stretch from the Atlantic to the 

 Pacific, but its imagination was little stirred by the new outlook 

 opening up in the great west. What this meant a few leaders in 

 some measure understood, but the people had been trained ta think 

 about petty local issues and with these they were chiefly occupied. 

 They could create a great system for they could feel the need of 

 unity among the British peoples, but as yet they did not know how 

 to work it. 



To learn to work efficiently the mechanism of a great state has 

 been Canada's chief problem during the last fifty years and one's 

 heart sinks a little when one realizes how she has done it. Human 

 nature is tough, the state can bear more than we may have supposed 

 possible, and this may bring us some consolation when we survey 

 the record of the last fifty years. Federation brought three or four 

 great national problems. First of all a wonderful domain had come 

 under the control of government, an empire of land rich in resources. 

 Then there was the vital problem of communications which should 

 make this domain accessible, the creation of railways, of highways, 

 of canals, of lines of steamers. A third problem was that of setting 

 up an efficient central administrative system. Behind all this was 

 the need of creating an effective public opinion which should give 

 reality to the political life of the country. 



I am not a pessimist, but I am bound to say that we have met all 

 these problems in a way that gives me no very great satisfaction. What 

 have we done with the wonderful domain of fifty years ago ? Has 

 it been so used in the public interest as to make us proud of the in- 



