Jump to content

Talk:Post-Confederation Canada (1867–1914)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Possible subjects to add:

[edit]
  • Quebec act --not sure what this refers to??

A.: It's from 1774; I'm in a rush now, but it all started with the "Petition of French Subjects" of 1773, submitted to King George III, who passed virtually the whole petition into law, verbatim in 1774. The Quebec Act is a constitutional instrument which acknowledges the distinct race and culture of the French Canadians, and protects these by enshrining as fundamental the right of French Canadians to their religion, civil law, and culture, as well as to the necessarily implied right to the use of their language. It was an extraordinary advance for its day, as conquered or ceded territories normally saw the language, law and culture of the conqueror imposed upon them. The Quebec Act 1774 is therefore often referred to as the first example of "indirect rule", i.e., of allowing the people to govern themselves locally, for the most part by their own law.

Accusations are often made that King George III passed the Quebec Act 1774 to control or oppress the French Canadians; this can hardly be true, as almost every word in it is taken from the 1773 Petition of the French Canadians themselves, requesting its passage. The existence of the Petition is unfortunately overlooked in most modern articles on the Quebec Act 1774.

Parts of the Quebec Act dealt with the extension of colonial borders to -- I think, their previous locations -- which cut far South to the Ohio River. This was viewed as a threat by the American colonists, and likely contributed to the fervor with which the war of independence was launched in 1776. Ironically, this also unleashed Northward a stream of English-race Loyalists to King George III, who fled into French Canada and thus helped to swell the challenge to French Canadians of preserving their race and culture.

While subjects such as boundaries in the Quebec Act, 1774 were affected and altered by subsequent events and legal documents, the Constitutional protection of the right of French Canadians to exist on their own terms has never lapsed as law. A Supreme Court of Canada Judge, Louis-Philippe Pigeon, has affirmed in one of his books on statutory interpretation that the Quebec Act, 1774, is still "law" and constitutional for French Canadians.

In 1982, with apparent passage in the UK of the Canada Act to transfer constitutional amending mechanisms to Canada, the Constitution of Canada is defined as "including" a few of the major documents. The 1774 Act is not mentioned; however, the word "including" is typically interpreted as being non-restrictive, i.e., meaning that the short list of documents given in the definition is incomplete and can be expanded by judicial interpretation. It could therefore be judicially construed to "include" the Quebec Act, 1774, to the extent of provisions not expressly or impliedly repealed by subsequent Constitution Acts.

Someone should double check the foregoing and get footnotes for it. One good source is canadiana.org which also has an online database of archival documents, including the 1773 Petition of French Subjects, and the Quebec Act, 1774. The 1773 Petition and the 1774 statute should be reproduced somewhere in here; I vaguely recall they were in here, reprinted around 1880 and with footnotes: http://www.canadiana.org/ECO/SearchResults?id=7c8299e2a175c595&query=quebec+act%2C+1774&range=text&bool=span10&subset=all&pubfrom=&pubto=

Another good source is Claude Bélanger :http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/index.htm


If you know about one of these please add your info

Edits re Ontario & BC 15/05/09

[edit]

1. Ontario's Quest for Provincial Rights: Poor Ontario, so important to the country and often overlookd -- I have added Canada's dispute with Ontario in the 1870s-1890s that resulted in court decisions interpreting the BNA Act in a way that favoured provincial interests. I will try and track down the case name references.

2. BC's Not so Beautiful Side: I have addressed a bit more directly the history of race relations between the European (ie 'British' for the most part) population and the Chinese/Japanese/Indian population, trying not to overstate or be POV about it; but it's a topic that needs a pretty direct approach. Corlyon (talk) 22:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Post-Confederation Canada (1867–1914). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:03, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Post-Confederation_Canada_(1867–1914)&oldid=1202506525"