Arthur Meighen A Biography Volume 3

Citation preview

Photo by

A P ortrait

of

A rthur M eighen

by

E rnest F osbery

MÀLAK

ARTHUR MEIGHEN A

B io gra p h y by

ROGER GRAHAM

III NO SURRENDER

CLARKE, IRWIN & COMPANY LIMITED TORONTO

1965

VANCOUVER

© 1965 C L A R K E , IRW IN & C O M P A N Y L IM IT E D

Reprinted,

June, 1966

Printed in Canada

CONTENTS

Vll

Preface A Q uieter L ife

3

In the Red C hamber

26

Issues of the T hirties

49

T he Battle of South Y ork

84

In Search of an Exit

132

L ooking Back

156

N otes

191

Index

199

v

PREFACE T his volum e , the final instalment o f a work which, it must be con­

fessed, has turned out to be much longer than the one originally projected, deals with the period from Arthur Meighen’s retirement from public life following his defeat in the election o f 1926 to his death in i960. It is concerned in the main with his second public career, which began with his appointment to the Senate in 1932 and ended ten years later as a result o f his failure, while leader o f the Conservative party for the second time, to re-enter the House o f Commons through a by-election in South York, Ontario. The three volumes taken as a whole represent an effort not only to tell the story o f Meighen’s life but also to present a somewhat different interpre­ tation o f Canadian political history during the first h alf o f the pres­ ent century from the one which has generally prevailed. My inter­ pretation o f events and my judgment o f men in the two previous volumes have struck some critics as “biased” and “ partisan,” as a point o f view with which one disagrees is likely to do, but it is my hope that this biography w ill be considered to have made some con­ tribution towards rounding out and enlarging our understanding o f that period. I desire to renew my expression o f thanks to all those whose assistance I have acknowledged previously and to add to the list o f the many people to whom I am thus indebted the names o f John Bracken, General J. A . Clark o f Vancouver, P. H . Gordon and M. A . MacPherson o f Regina, Colonel W. E. Phillips and J. W. Thompson o f Toronto and the late C. Harold Hale o f Orillia. T he Honourable Richard A . Bell kindly made available to me the verbatim record o f proceedings at the Conservative Conference at Ottawa in November 1941. I am especially grateful to Mr. T. R. Meighen for allowing me to read and quote extensively from a large collection o f letters writ­ ten to him by his father. Dr. Eugene Forsey gave the manuscript the benefit o f his careful, painstaking scrutiny. Whatever merit the entire

vii

vin

PREFACE

work may possess is owing to his unfailing helpfulness in far greater measure than I can adequately express or than he would be willing to admit. M y gratitude to my wife for her assistance, encouragement and advice is likewise incapable of being sufficiently stated in words. For everything in the book, and especially for any errors or other shortcomings, I am, of course, to be held solely accountable. R oger G raham

University o f Saskatchewan, fanuary, 1964

r t

N O SURREN D ER

1927-1960

CHAPTER

ONE

A Q U IE T E R L IF E morning in the late 1920’s Arthur Meighen came striding down Toronto’s Bay Street from the north on his way ^/to work. His head was bent forward slightly, as though he were deep in thought. His steps were quick and purposeful, as though there was no time to waste in reaching his office, but they were fre­ quently interrupted as he paused to exchange greetings and briefly pass the time o f day with others on the street. Some o f these encoun­ ters were with people he met regularly on the way: storekeepers in their doorways, newsboys at their stands, lawyers and brokers with affairs o f their own downtown. Some were chance encounters with men he remembered from other places, other times, who hailed him as he passed and then could casually say to their wives that night: “ Oh, by the way, I was talking to Mr. Meighen this morning.” “ Really? W hat did he say?” “ He said good morning and asked after you and the children.” “A fine man.” “Yes, indeed. My, what a shame!” W hat was a shame? The shame was that Arthur Meighen, by decree o f the people o f Canada, had had to launch out, in the closing weeks o f 1926 at the age o f fifty-two, on a new career, the fourth o f his lifetime. The first, as a high-school teacher long, long ago, had proved unsatisfactory and o f short duration, lasting only one school term; he had found little love for teaching. The next he had enjoyed, the practice o f law in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba. There he had been successful in a modest way but that second career had been in­ fringed upon and then terminated by the demands made on him by the third. In this, the profession o f politics and government, he had risen to the top in a dozen stormy years, had then suffered over­ whelm ing defeat in 1921, had risen again and again had fallen in the shocking, shattering climax o f 1926. N ow , as the end o f that year ach w eekday

3

4

ARTH UR M EIG H EN

approached, he moved with confidence into yet another world, the world o f metropolitan business and finance. Upon his resignation as Prime Minister following the election in September and his retirement as leader o f the Liberal-Conservative party shortly thereafter, Meighen received many invitations to join law partnerships, as well as several offers o f positions in business firms. The one he accepted, one o f the first to reach him, came from Watson Evans, founder and president o f Canadian General Securities Limited. This concern, which Evans described as “relatively unimportant in the investment banking field,” had been organized in W innipeg in 1920 and now owned or controlled companies with a net worth o f five million dollars. The most important o f these subsidiaries was Trad­ ers Finance Corporation Limited, which financed instalment buying o f durable goods, mostly trucks and automobiles. Evans described it as the largest organization o f its kind in Canada and remarked that it was doing business in a small way in the United States as well. A ll the directors o f the parent company, except Evans himself, and almost all its principal shareholders lived in the West, most o f them in Winnipeg, and many were well known to Meighen. The shares o f the company, Evans explained, were regarded as very valuable by their owners, which made it difficult for a newcomer to secure a financial interest in it. However, he had plans for expansion and this was where Meighen could fit into the picture. Evans pointed out that the accumulation o f its various subsidiaries thus far by Canadian General Securities “was the result o f five years work from an absolutely dead start, and I am hopelessly in error unless the next five years w ill be productive o f very much greater results.” There are literally hundreds o f semi-developed companies in Can­ ada (financial and industrial) languishing for leadership with courage, integrity and ability. The rehabilitation o f these concerns, the intel­ ligent creation o f new enterprises in harmony with legitimate develop­ ment, and the rejuvenation o f substantial though decadent organiza­ tions presents a field o f activity with attractive possibilities for honest gain and the injection o f new and much needed vitality in the com­ mercial life o f a large section o f this Dominion.

In the light o f these possibilities Evans made two proposals. First, Meighen should be appointed general counsel o f Canadian General Securities Limited for one year at a salary to be agreed upon. This was in accordance with the desire Meighen had expressed for an

A Q UIETER L IFE

5

experimental period before he committed himself irrevocably. “The position o f General Counsel,” Evans emphasized, “ should not be con­ strued as restricted to legal work but should imply full participation in the management o f the Company.” Secondly, at the end o f the one year, or sooner by mutual consent, a sister company to Canadian General Securities would be formed with headquarters in Toronto. T he shareholders o f die Winnipeg firm would be allowed to purchase an interest in this new concern but shares would also be offered to “ a small number o f prominent men in Eastern Canada” and “ the active officers would have the right to acquire a sizeable interest.” In this way i f Meighen’s association with the company during the trial period proved mutually satisfactory, he “could and would acquire a substantial financial interest.” 1 These arrangements were approved by Evans’ directors and in November the agreement was formally concluded. There were times after his entrance into this different world when Meighen could not help feeling a nostalgia for the one he had just left, a vague but persistent dissatisfaction with his self-imposed exile from public life, a certain homesickness for the House o f Commons. Still, it was not his habit to repine and he found compensations in this new life. He found him self genuinely absorbed in his duties as vice-president and general counsel o f the rapidly expanding Canadian General Securities, particularly in the establishment o f four subsidiary investment trust companies and o f three insurance companies doing business in all classes except life insurance. He became much en­ grossed in managing the investments o f these enterprises, in studying the barometers o f business activity and the fluctuations o f the stock and bond markets. It was a relatively peaceful and orderly existence for one accustomed to the turmoil o f politics: the morning threemile w alk downtown from his home to his office at 347 Bay, the study o f the financial news o f the day, conferences with associates and sub­ ordinates, lunch at the Albany Club, an eye on the ticker tape, the making o f decisions about what to buy and sell, and finally the walk home again at night. Yes, orderly and peaceful— and profitable just then; he did not foresee the economic calamity lurking just ahead. One m ight miss the old haunts and the familiar faces but it was good to be able to make new friends, which Meighen enjoyed doing, to have a little more time for one’s family, a fow more opportunities to play g o lf and sit around the bridge table, a chance to do more

6

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

reading. One o f his numerous new friends was E. J. Pratt o f Victoria College, whose salty humour and good conversation were among the pleasures that Meighen savoured for the rest o f his days. H e was not sure that he admired Pratt’s poetry, when he got to know it, as much as he did its author; his rule o f thumb in judging such things was to ask, “ Could I have written it? I f so it’s not poetry.” He would not have claimed to possess the talent necessary to write New­ foundland Verse or The Witches’ Brew or The Titans, o f course, but he found it hard to be seriously impressed by anything that fell far short o f Shakespearian or Wordsworthian quality. It was on a g o lf course that he first made the acquaintance o f Pratt, w ho many years later recollected the incident. Mr. Meighen came up to the first tee without a golf bag but he had one club in his hand— a putter. And I saw the strangest sight, a man hitting from a tee with a putter. He used only the putter all through the course. I thought to myself, “His score will be about two hun­ dred.” But the amazing thing was what he did with it. H e always drove dead down the middle o f the fairway, about 130 yards indeed, but even that was incredible. W hen he came within range o f the pin he became more deliberate and cautious; the crowd behind yelling “Fore!” didn’t disturb him. He would take a parliamentary stance and by some kind o f calculus known only to himself he would assess all the factors and then he would strike. The pin was up there like a political opponent which had to be out-manoeuvred, not so much reached as attacked.2

During his career in politics Meighen had never had much time to lavish on his children. O f course, even had there been more time at his disposal, his would have been by no means a “ child-centred” household, for he did not believe that parents should cater to the whims and fancies o f the young. The result o f that was moral flab­ biness. W hat children needed were discipline, a spirit o f self-reliance and an example to follow and these he tried to give his own in every way he could. But he had always been so busy and preoccupied, out o f the house so much o f the time, so frequently away on political campaigns and speaking tours, that he was something o f a stranger to his children while they were growing up. And now, he realized, suddenly they had grown up. The boys were both away from home and Lillian, the youngest, was eighteen years o f age and “ ‘coming out’ whatever that means,” he remarked to her eldest brother.* It hardly seemed possible that time had slipped by so quickly. How-

A Q U IETER L IFE

7

ever, it was never too late, nor would Meighen ever think his children too grown up for him to give them the benefit o f his counsel and experience. Thus Ted Meighen while at Laval University, subsequently in Paris where he spent a year improving his knowledge o f French, and even after that when he was a practising lawyer in his own right, received frequent admonitions from his father which were not diffèrent from those the latter had been given by his own parents and they, no doubt, by theirs. Respecting one o f the expense accounts Ted sent home periodically from Laval, Meighen wrote: “ The only items which do not appear to me to be wholly necessary are those for taxis. I rarely, very rarely take a taxi m yself unless Nanny [Mrs. Meighen] is with m e .. . Riding in taxis was not only a waste o f money but was no way to stay healthy. Meighen’s own recipes for bodily health, as well as for success and satisfaction in this world, were spelled out in various letters to his son.6 Take good care o f yourself physically all the time. That does not mean less work. Wholesome effort hurts no one— it helps. But get all the air and exercise you can— especially walk a great deal. I f you walk alone you do good thinking. Breathe thoroughly— morning and night. Keep your lungs clean and strong. . . . I wish I had 30 years earlier kept all drugs away. This applies to the whole frame. Lastly dear boy: stand by your good start on liquor. Don’t touch a drop till you are 30. Then decide for yourself in the light o f your experience and thinking up to that time. T o get most out o f life it is my firm belief that “no liquor” is the best above all things; consider think thoroughly and be strong— true to yourself I am sending you a clipping about milk. Certainly it has pleased me to see you drinking milk regularly. The more the better— it will tell to your advantage as time passes. So will the stopping o f cigarettes. I was truly proud o f you for having done this. Work and character decide everything in life or very nearly everything — and only a fraction o f the race value them at even a tenth o f what they mean. The eager worthwhile young man loves responsibility. It is a won­ derful thing to have it come and to measure up to it in early years. A lost opportunity never returns and is rarely followed by another. . . . . . . Law and literature— these you should make your constant com­ pany. There is little or no value getting into politics unless you have

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

the foundations of learning and solid attainments to enable you to go far. [One should show] ambition to diversify his knowledge, and roam through literature and gain a culture that is about the rarest thing in the world and the most precious. It is the only way to get the really best out of life and to qualify as a desired partner in any company. All prizes in life do not take material form. Without the intellectual treasures the finest by far are lost. The number who make themselves possessed of these treasures is diminishing. Save your nights or nearly all for study and when you are out—be out, be outside in wholesome air all you can. And see that your company when you have it is worth while. Time taken from you by people who can contribute nothing to you by their conversation, is a theft from your future— a mortgage against your success. There is nothing so rare as the ability to speak well and nothing so potent as an instrument of advancement in the world. Guard well your words— especially words of criticism. This injunction I would have been better to have heeded earlier myself. T he great W all Street crash o f 1929 occurred while Ted was in Paris, a somewhat fearsome place in his father’s eyes. “ D o not think that I do not trust you,” the latter wrote. “ Very certainly I do and quite realize the terrible dangers surrounding a young man in Paris.”6 Notwithstanding these dangers and the severe losses he had suffered in the collapse o f the stock market, Meighen was determined that he would continue to finance his son’s stay in France. “ Dear son cut your expenditures all you possibly can— don’t come home unless I cable you— finish the necessary work though as soon as you can. Cash is at an awful premium now but I w ill support you there under the circumstances and trust wholly to you.” T “ Make sure dear son that you come back a better man in every way. That means more to me than all the stocks in Christendom.”8 Like most people Meighen was caught by surprise when “ all the stocks in Christendom” took their tumble on “ Black Tuesday,” Octo­ ber the twenty-ninth, 1929; like most he failed at first to see that the crash portended a long bleak depression, although as the days went by and the market failed to recover he began to fear the worst. “ Even yet,” he told Ted three weeks after the collapse, “ I don’t know how serious things may become.” His own largest holding was in Cana-

A Q U IETER L IFE

9

dian General Securities shares “and it means that it is gone. Losses generally to other securities . . . have crippled me greatly. I was not over-extended though by any means, and would not worry much but for the Trusts.” H e felt a special responsibility for the four investment trusts in which, he knew, many people had put their savings because o f his connection with them. “ These though still sound are depleted and w ill have to pass their dividends, which I foar w ill bring much criticism on m y head. . . . I f I survive this trial— or rather i f we sur­ vive it as an organization (for nothing can crush my spirit utterly) it w ill be due to the devoted loyalty o f m y friends__ ”9 It soon became apparent that the trial would involve much more than passed dividends and the wiping-out o f one’s investments in the stock market, that the world was in the grip o f the worst depression in history, and as things went from bad to worse Meighen became more blackly pessimistic. O n the various farms he owned around Portage la Prairie, which were managed for him by his brother Ed­ ward, he lost about seven thousand dollars in 1930. “ T he crops are not all sold,” he wrote, “but one can get nothing for them— hardly more than enough to pay for drawing them out. Barley for example is 10^ a bushel. Western Canada is in simply a terrible position.” His pessimism, however, did not arise solely from his personal troubles, serious as they were. M y own affairs are certainly bad enough but I feel sure even now that I can fight them through and if I can’t I have still my health and can work. They do not give me the grief that other things do. The whole economic structure o f the world seems to be insecure. Undoubtedly western Canada cannot survive under existing prices and conditions. N or can I see better ahead— rather worse. With commodity prices as they are it looks to me that wages will have to fall and that means social convulsions o f all sorts— and I don’t like even to suggest what will be the effect on the market should that take place. These things may not come. I don’t know. The lot o f thousands, clerks, workers, accountants, lawyers— all classes is bad. I never had so many appealing to me for help. Many o f them I have known for years well. The procession o f these to my office daily is depressing. Probably that makes me feel worse than I should. But the thing to do is to use courage when courage is needed and bear one’s whole share always and as cheerfully as possible. One thing may be true and worth a great deal. This comes when

10

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

you are young. The lesson you can learn just at the right time. The lesson is— make the very limit o f every opportunity. Use the sunshine, being sure that dark days are certain to come, and come periodically. They have always come and they always will come. That certainty never really impressed itself on me in my life before.10

But there seemed to him just then to be nothing but dark days ahead as far as one could peer into the future. I sometimes wonder what kind o f tempests my sons are going to en­ counter. M y opinion is that the period they will live through will be more difficult and dangerous than that allotted to me— even though the world war was part o f our lot. It is still probable that conditions in the next few years will improve. I do hope so; but the long range view is troublesome in the extreme and the immediate short range view is very depressing. Still I wish I was younger. Youth always gives a person time to recover. Never before did I ever feel a tinge o f despair or concern about myself. My trouble now is the years ahead are so few and there is so much ground to overtake.11

The perils ahead were even greater than he imagined but there were to be years enough to overtake the ground and it would be overtaken. W hile Meighen was largely out o f sight during his retirement from public life in the late 1920’s and early 1930’s, he was not entirely out o f the public mind. The volume o f his mail, while naturally smaller than it had been in Ottawa, remained very substantial and it was not at all a new experience for him that most o f his correspond­ ents wanted something, especially after the onset o f the depression. People in trouble not only beat a path to his office door, they plied him with letters describing their misfortunes, often in great and heart­ rending detail. Some wanted free legal advice and this he gave on occasion i f the supplicant was known to him and in obvious financial straits. Some requested money, either as loans or gifts, but these were usually declined. Still others wanted jobs with one o f his own companies or in some other where his influence m ight count or in the civil service. He tried to do what he could for anyone w illing to work but it was not easy to oblige when work was scarce. M any people wrote him for advice about buying and selling stocks but, while he appreciated the confidence in his judgment reflected in these letters, he normally refrained from advising any but his close friends. As one o f his prominence had to expect to be, he was much sought out

A QUIETER L IFE

II

by canvassers for various good causes, charities, community services, artistic productions and so on. To some o f these he gave donations, some were refused, in certain cases abruptly i f candidly. W hen ap­ proached about a subscription to help finance a new book, Women in Canada, he replied: “ Really I can think o f no book that would be o f less interest to me than one on ‘Women in Canada’, nor one that I would be more absolutely certain never to open.” 12 A nd when he was asked for permission to use his and Mrs. Meighen’s names as honorary patrons o f the Canadian Grand Opera Association his re­ sponse was somewhat deflating. “There is nothing more foreign to my talents and interest than Grand Opera. Nature denied me the slightest capacity to appreciate it.”13 One o f his donations was a cup to be awarded annually to the owner o f the best Aberdeen Angus herd shown at the Portage la Prairie Fair, with permanent possession to go to the exhibitor winning it three years in a row. In 1931 the cup was taken permanently by none other than his old political adversary, Harry Leader, who wrote gratefully that it was occupying “ the place o f honor on our mantel. We are proud o f its possession, and the honor o f receiving it from one o f our brightest Canadian statesmen.” 14 “A m glad you have won it,” Meighen replied, “and especially that it has gone to someone in the Portage district. One does not get very much good news from that territory now and your letter is much appreciated.”15 A gift o f another kind, entirely unsolicited, went to his four-year-old god­ daughter, Barbara Ann Scott, to whom he wrote solemnly: “ I am sending you in this letter a Guaranteed Trust Certificate for $50.00. This is in the name o f your Mother and yourself, but need only be so until your writing becomes perfect. It bears interest at 5% which is intended to be enough to keep you in candy through each year and is sent on the condition that you never buy any more candy than you can get with the interest on this Certificate.” 10 Meighen was honoured with invitations to join various select clubs, for instance the Embassy Club in Toronto, which sent him the following letter: We have not, as yet, the privilege o f having your name on our Mem­ bership Roster. The facilities which the Embassy Club offers for entertaining are unique in the City o f Toronto. A Continental Chef,— the most perfect Dance floor on the Continent,— the B. F. Goodrich Silvertown Cord

12

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

Orchestra,— luxurious appointments and flawless service, all combine to make the Embassy Club the smartest and most exclusive Dinner and Dance Club on the Continent. We are happy to extend the privilege o f Membership to you, and are enclosing an application form for your consideration.17

N o one could possibly have been less interested than Meighen in worldly allurements like these, especially just a week after the stock market crash, and his reply wasted no words. “Answering yours o f 8th, I w ill not be joining the Embassy Club.”18 Another invitation came from the Seigniory Club in Quebec, an exclusive reservation for the rich. The letter from the membership secretary, a classic o f its kind, probably made Meighen snort with sardonic laughter i f he bothered reading it at all. Obviously it was written in complete ig­ norance o f his attitude to organized snobbery. M y duty to the Club is to assist in bringing into its membership such members as yourself and to courteously eliminate those who would not add to its virility or contribute o f their ideas and ideals to what is destined to be the Greatest Club o f all Time. My duty to you is to tell you what the Club might mean to you so that not a day should be lost to you o f its pleasures, advantages and value. I would not want you to some day chide me for not having written you. . . . Prominent people are buying Seigniory Club Memberships because they are going to live. They want to live a long time. They know the clear crisp atmosphere o f a Canadian Winter is good for them. They know that the pine-scented forest and perfume o f wild flowers is good for them. Men like to sit in a flat-bottomed boat under a slouch hat angling for the elusive members o f the finny tribe while their wives sip tea under colored parasols on spacious lawns and their children swim under the eyes o f attendants or play tennis in white flannels. But the value o f bringing all ’neath a single roof at the end o f the day to talk or boast o f a hole-in-one, a speckled beauty, a win at bridge or the dip o f a dingy [sic] is known to the Board o f Governors. These are men whose lives are written into the fabric o f the life o f Canada. They are long experienced in the creating o f community life and are cognizant o f its virtues. They steer youth from the pitfalls o f City night life into the wholesome outdoors and make them like it and want it because it is made so attractive. I f they and you unite with the ob­ ject o f keeping young people within the care and confidence o f their parents, you have both rendered the nation a real service.

There was much more in the same vein, including some delicate

A QUIETER LIFE

13

references to how the rather expensive privilege o f performing this service to the country could be paid for on the instalment plan, and then the letter ended: “ Contribute to the life o f the Club from now on; a superior sense o f proprietorship accrues to the oldest members. You w ill often thank me for what I have written to you.” 19 Meighen seems not even to have acknowledged this, much less offered thanks for it. But it is piquant in the extreme to imagine him sitting in a punt with directors o f the club like E. W. Beatty, Sir Herbert Holt, Charles Dunning and L. A . Taschereau, angling for the finny tribe, or walking with them through the pine-scented forest sniffing at wild flowers while they talked about the values o f community life or plot­ ted to keep the youth o f the nation off the streets. A good part o f the heavy mail Meighen received carried invita­ tions to speak to various organizations in Canada and the United States. Had he accepted all o f them he would have been on the go almost constantly and most were declined. W hen he did speak he avoided as far as possible any comment on Canadian political issues, especially before the Conservatives under Bennett were swept into power in 1930, so as not to be “ accused o f even so much as the utter­ ance o f a word which would embarrass or impair the fighting power o f my successor.”20 Certain o f his topics were somewhat recondite, though suited to the audience. “ Yesterday I spoke to die Mathemati­ cal Society o f the University on ‘Greek Mathematics and Astronomy’ so for some days was spending my spare moments in preparation. There was a fine attendance— especially o f professors.”21 But usually he dealt with things closer to the present and to this earth. Early in 1931 he talked at a meeting in Toronto about Soviet Russia, depend­ ing heavily on the contents o f a memorandum prepared and sent to him by L. B. Pearson o f die Department o f External Affairs. When Pearson invited him a few weeks later to address the Ottawa branch o f the Canadian Institute o f International Affairs on the Soviet Five Year Plan, Meighen was forced to refuse, regretfully, “because you were so good as to assist me substantially in thinking out the plan o f that speech I made on Russia.”22 One o f his favourite subjects once the depression had settled in was the need for currency reform. This he thought could be achieved by adopting a system o f bimetallism through which the proportion o f currency to the gold reserves behind it would be increased and the price and supply o f silver in circulation raised. T he first step towards

14

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

a world financial recovery, he wrote in a letter briefly outlining his views, must be a settlement o f the war debts owing to the United States, which that country would have to write down drastically i f not write off altogether. This was essential and vital, and the conduct o f the United States in this crisis imposes a fearful responsibility upon them which they do not seem as a people to realize. Then there will have to be later a devaluation o f the units o f cur­ rency in leading countries— Great Britain, Canada and the United States included. Another way o f expressing this is to say that the gold con­ tent o f these units would be reduced. The latter process really means a levy on capital and it will help to restore debtor and creditor to something like the relation they were in when the debts were contracted. In this way the chasm between private debtors and private creditors (companies included) will be bridged to a considerable extent. Canada is on the gold standard in the sense that she is redeeming her outside obligations in gold. . . . The great difference, however, be­ tween this Dominion and the other Dominions is that we owe our money largely to the United States— I mean not only the Dominion but the Provinces and our utilities and industries. Therefore, we have to pay in gold or in American currency. The other Dominions owe largely in Britain and can pay in the depreciated pound. It follows from this that the maintenance o f our credit in the United States is vital, and any action on the part o f the Dominion Government to depress the Cana­ dian dollar would impair that credit. We are as it were between Scylla and Charybdis, and have to choose our steps carefully and with the greatest sense o f responsibility.23

I f there were to be reform along these lines, with a devaluation o f currencies and an increase in the worth o f silver in relation to that o f gold, the United States would have to take the lead and other coun­ tries act in concert with her. Meighen’s major speech on the subject was presented before an American audience, the Buffalo Chamber o f Commerce, in February 1931. H e knew it was most unlikely that anyone in Washington would listen seriously to a Canadian but it was worth while to help influence American opinion in every possible way. Before going to Buffalo he prepared with great diligence, reading everything pertinent he could get his hands on and canvas­ sing his friends for any material they m ight know about or have in their possession. H e was delighted by the warmth o f the reception

A QUIETER L IFE

15

given the speech and by the number o f requests for copies o f it he received from people in Canada and the United States who had seen it reported in the press. His attack on the existing gold standard, however, was not likely to endear him to the conservative financial Solons and the “ moneyed interests” with whom he was soon to be­ come associated in the popular imagination. One m ight expect to hear some western radical espousing the cause o f the debtors against their creditors and preaching easier, depreciated money but it hardly seemed to be the thing to come from the vice-president o f a Bay Street investment banking firm. N or was Meighen in accord with his suc­ cessor in the Conservative leadership, to whom the sanctity o f the hard, fully valued Canadian dollar was part o f the A rk o f the Cove­ nant. Meighen, in fact, was sceptical o f Bennett’s whole initial plan o f dealing with the depression, the main element in which was a marked increase in the protective tariff. He did not depart from his long-held conviction that Canadian producers in some sectors o f the economy required moderate protection but recognized that economic nation­ alism i f carried to extremes would prevent the necessary recovery o f world trade. “ . . . the world is undoubtedly suffering,” he wrote, “from too exaggerated trade restrictions on the part o f almost all countries. Canada has to adjust her policy to world conditions, but Canada would be wise to fall in line with any united effort on the part o f industrial nations toward lower tariffs. Events have so shaped themselves in recent years. . . as to put the United States in a position where that country alone can give the leadership required at the pres­ ent time. So far it has not measured up to the responsibilities which destiny has placed in its way.”24 The main grounds o f his impatience with the Americans were summed up in some comments he sent to Malcolm Wallace on an article by Professor J. T. Shotwell o f Colum­ bia University, who had been an undergraduate with them at the University o f Toronto. The article is well written, but, frankly, I am disappointed in its terms. Dr. Shotwell leaves the inference that he is quite in accord with what he describes as the American viewpoint, namely, that war debts and reparations are in no way connected, the reason being that repara­ tions represent profit out o f the war while war debts are on a higher footing. This is the most transparent o f casuistry. War debts and

i6

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

reparations are twin evils, arising directly from a common origin, namely, the war itself. It appears to be Professor Shotwell’s opinion that the United States has occupied quite exalted ground in refusing to accept profit (that is reparations) from its enemies in the great conflict, and at the same time insisting on retention o f immense profits made out o f its allies. Surely it cannot seriously be suggested in these times that any nation profited from the war by way o f reparations or otherwise, or indeed that any nation in the allied world entered the war for purpose o f profit. It is not much wonder that the world cannot see any particular virtue in refusing to accept damages from a nation which desecrated homes and slaughtered children, and in insisting on recovering loans, including profits, from friends and neighbors who had to incur these obligations to drive the invader back. Professor Shotwell seems to think, however, that the subject o f war debts is logically tied in with the reduction o f European armaments and o f world tariffs, and that the United States’ position o f creditor should be used as a lever to bring about these reforms. One cannot but stand amazed at the spectacle o f the American Republic posing as in­ ternational pedagogue on the subject o f armaments and tariffs when it stands itself on both these matters as the arch offender in the whole world.25

In addition to being much in demand as a public speaker Meighen was frequently asked to introduce distinguished visitors to Toronto, for example W ill Durant, who spoke to an audience in Massey Hall on “The Ten Greatest Thinkers,” and Winston Churchill, who ap­ peared in the same hall and whom, in his introduction, Meighen credited with having written before he was thirty “ one o f the three greatest books in the English language.” A member o f the audience later wrote Meighen to say that he had gone over from St. Catharines to hear Churchill “ and was not disappointed, particularly as for good measure there was thrown in your so graceful introduction— to me a perfect example o f ‘how it should be done.’ ” But what, he wanted to know, were die other two greatest books? O f course, Meighen replied, he had meant to say “ greatest biographies,” Churchill’s life o f his father, Boswell’s Johnson and Trevelyan’s Macaulay being in his judgment the three best.26 Later on Meighen happened to be in Calgary when Churchill, on another o f his visits to Canada, arrived there to give a speech. Meighen was asked to introduce him and agreed, but this time did not show “how it should be done,” at least in the opinion o f the visitor. It being a non-political occasion with

A QUIETER L IFE

17

people o f various parties present, Meighen thought it would be ap­ propriate to mention the fact that Churchill had never been a hide­ bound partisan, that he had moved from the Conservative party to the Liberal and back to the Conservative again and was now some­ thing o f an Independent. W hen he was in the midst o f reciting these footnotes to history Churchill growled very audibly, “ I don’t know w hy he’s bringing all that up.” Somewhat nonplussed, Meighen hesitated and then finished his remarks, whereupon Churchill rose and started to speak without so much as a nod or a word o f acknowl­ edgment in Meighen’s direction. T he latter never quite got over this display o f rudeness by a man for whom he had such great ad­ miration. O n another occasion, in contrast, it was Meighen who some people thought breached the proprieties. J. W. Dafoe, while on a visit to Toronto, was entertained at a private dinner attended by a number o f the city’s leading men. It was arranged that Dafoe would address them and Meighen was asked to move the vote o f thanks. Dafoe’s speech was like something right out o f the editorial columns o f the Free Press, dwelling on the iniquities o f the protective tariff, the various ways in which western Canada suffered under Confederation and so on. Meighen could not possibly let this pass and instead o f thanking Dafoe with a few conventional compliments, he embarked on a slashing point by point rebuttal. As the company were leaving the room after this unexpected bit o f excitement, one o f the guests said to another, “Well, what did you think o f Arthur’s speech ?” “ I thought it was all right,” was the answer, “but God forbid he should ever move a vote o f thanks to m e!” Partly because o f speaking engagements and partly because busi­ ness sometimes took him out o f the city, Meighen continued to spend considerable time away from home, though o f course much less than he had as a politician. But for years he had been accustomed to travel­ ling usually with a secretary, who saved him the bother o f arranging things with railway companies and hotels and coping with all the trivial nuisances that travel entailed. N ow when he went away he was on his own and one never knew just what would happen, whether he m ight absent-mindedly get on the wrong train or what personal belongings he would forget to bring home. He was known to arrive at the railway station with just enough time to buy a ticket and catch his train, only to discover that he had forgotten to bring any money

i8

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

with him and would have to ask the railway company to cash a cheque. As often as not he came home minus one or two articles o f clothing which he had left behind somewhere: a scarf in the train on the way home from Buffalo, which the Pullman Company and the N ew York Central, despite his insistent urgings, were unable to find ; his hat and topcoat in the Royal Alexandra Hotel, Winnipeg, which were obligingly forwarded to Toronto. Once after returning from Ottawa on the night train he arrived at his office to find a telegram: “ Good morning. Expressed your hat. Return other Charles Bath, 77 Cartier St.”27 In Meighen’s opinion his best speech during these years away from public life, and one o f the best o f his entire life, was delivered before the Good W ill Congress o f the World Alliance for International Friendship at Washington, D .C. in November 1930. By that time he had come to realize that there was no longer any real hope o f world peace being maintained by the moral and physical power o f a great alliance o f Britannic nations and the United States, such as his faith had been pinned upon in earlier days. That faith had rested on two principles: the diplomatic unity o f the British Empire in a foreign policy arrived at by consultation between its members; and the closest possible co-ordination o f that policy with the world policy o f the United States. This ideal had come close to realization in the Imperial Conference o f 1921 and the genesis o f the Washington Conference but since then had been dealt a number o f blows, any one o f which would have been mortal. The interest o f Great Britain in a common policy arrived at and administered as Meighen thought it should be had in reality always been slight and declined still further after 1921, whatever lip service was paid to the concept. The involvement o f Brit­ ain in Europe, which he detected in the Treaty o f Lausanne and which he thought unwise, became more pronounced in the Treaty o f Locar­ no o f 1925, by which she guaranteed the inviolability o f the existing frontiers between Germany and France and Germany and Belgium. There was no effort to include the Dominions in the making o f these arrangements or in the commitments they entailed but Meighen thought the commitments not only potentially dangerous both for Great Britain and the Dominions, but inappropriate to the head o f a world empire whose real strength lay on the sea. But the trend o f British policy was not the only factor that worked

A Q UIETER L IFE

19

against the kind o f concert within the Empire and between the Em ­ pire and the United States which he believed desirable. With a pro­ fessional autonomist like Mackenzie K in g in power in Canada any effort to maintain such a concert in a more concrete form than mere oratorical platitude would have been given short shrift by the Cana­ dian government. Indeed K ing, by consistently exaggerating the dangers o f Imperial centralization, magnified his own contribution to their removal and was more interested in the shadow o f national status than in the substance o f collective action. Finally, the United States after the Washington Conference tended to turn her back on the world, as she had before in refusing to join the League o f Nations. The kind o f unwritten alliance between her and the Empire which Meighen thought would have such a beneficent influence in the world was impossible, given the prevailingly isolationist mood o f her people. By the time o f Locarno he recognized that his approach to foreign policy had been seriously, perhaps fatally, undermined. . . the whole progress o f events since 1921,” he wrote gloomily, “has been lamentable and the project o f Empire co-operation in foreign policy seems to have broken down.”28 W hen he came to consider what his stand ought to be as to whether Canada should adhere to that treaty he consulted Loring Christie, as he had been accustomed to do re­ specting questions o f this kind.29 Christie’s advice was unsettling. He had become disillusioned with the whole idea o f a united Empire foreign policy, which he now regarded as impracticable, and had worked his way around to the belief that Canada must follow her own independent course in world affairs. Great Britain, he said, was not interested in a collective policy collectively arrived at, not willing to chart her course according to the opinions or interests o f the D o­ minions. T he British were thinking nationally, not imperially. They were conscious o f their closeness to Europe and its problems, more so than o f their connection with the self-governing Dominions overseas. In his view Meighen should not oppose a refusal by the K in g govern­ ment to adhere to the Locarno Treaty.30 “ Sometimes,” Meighen an­ swered, “one is tempted to think you are too logical, but, o f course, that is an absurd allegation.” He could readily see the logic o f Chris­ tie’s argument but was afraid that “those who form the Conservative Party o f this Dominion have not moved far enough in the thinking out o f this question to put them in the mood to accept the conclusions

20

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

at which you have come. . . H e thought they would “demand another trial to work out a plan o f Empire co-operation” and clung to the belief that such a plan m ight be practicable. Still, he remarked sadly, the “whole situation is disturbing and I feel m yself more or less in the position o f a man who does not know whether or not his idols have been shattered, but who fears.”31 Indeed they had been shattered and by the time o f Meighen’s visit to Washington in the autumn o f 1930 he no longer pinned his hopes on the scheme o f things which at one time he had thought so promis­ ing. The result was that he gave a different kind o f speech from the one he might have delivered eight or ten years earlier. The propo­ sition that security and peace could only be maintained by collective action was still his keynote but, whereas on an earlier occasion he m ight have tried to summon the Americans to make common cause with the British Empire, now his plea was for collective security with­ in a League o f Nations made universal. H e had not after the war had much confidence in the League’s ability to enforce the peace, be­ lieving that such an organization was ahead o f its time, but events had moved so rapidly, the times were so out o f joint, that logic drove him to the conclusion that a strong League was the one remaining hope. Despite all the conferences o f the post-war period, despite Washing­ ton and Lausanne and Locarno, despite the Pact o f Paris o f 1928, by which many countries, including the United States, had solemnly renounced war as an instrument o f national policy except for selfdefence, he saw a world o f sovereign, fear-ridden states drifting towards another conflict. With all the eloquence at his command he appealed to his audience to consider certain dominating facts by which the course o f nations must be governed i f catastrophe were to be avoid­ ed. “ . . . this race o f human beings has to adjust itself to new facts— that is, facts which never existed before; it has to adjust itself to new tremendous facts or pass out.” W hat were these facts? First and most important: “ Science has given us so great a command over the elements o f nature that mil­ lions can be snuffed out in this day in a mere matter o f moments. Where hundreds fell before in manly contests arm to arm, great cities now, a whole countryside, can be eaten up by the insatiate m aw o f chemistry.” War had become three dimensional with the invention o f the airplane and the submarine, weapons against which there was no adequate defence.

A Q UIETER L IFE

21

W e have even now British experts and American experts arguing as to how many cruisers each country is going to be allowed. . . . one hundred modern aeroplanes in ten minutes can lay a cloud o f poison gas from fifty to one hundred and fifty feet thick over an area o f one hundred square miles. H ow long would a thousand cruisers last against a weap­ on like that? Aeroplanes travelling three hundred miles an hour, un­ detectable by sound, can carry gas bombs which would depopulate London. The only way these weapons can be met is by reprisals. Re­ prisal will follow reprisal until the civil population passes, this nation today, that nation tomorrow, by millions, into eternity.

A second fact, one that isolationists and neutralists in North Am er­ ica and elsewhere overlooked, was that while war “exists at all, those who want to escape its curse cannot escape. The sea is one and the air is one, and you m ight as well say the world is one, and as one it must stand or fall according as it shows capacity or fails to show capacity to meet the new conditions which mankind has brought upon itself.” Furthermore, war has lost its efficacy; it never can bring victory again; it can only bring defeat and despair for both conquerors and conquered; it can leave nothing behind but victors in reaction and vanquished in revolu­ tion, and all alike impoverished. War once served a human purpose; it can now o f its very nature serve such a purpose no longer; it solves no problem; it affords no security; it offers no prizes to the victor. But, someone says : W hat about International Law ? W hy not out­ law, by International agreement, these barbarisms that besmear the con­ duct o f belligerents? . . . W hy not . . . have all agree to banish both aeroplanes and submarines, the bombing o f cities, and poison gas? Well, perhaps it might be done on paper, though that itself would be hard enough; but if it got to paper there would be its end. N o agree­ ment to limit the means o f destruction ever yet stood the test o f war. Century after century has told us that you cannot make rules or make laws to govern war. War is itself the negation o f law; it means that the reign o f law has collapsed.. . . Times change, methods change, old fuies do not apply to new conditions, and they are not observed even if they do apply. A ll these prearranged regulations crash and are con­ sumed in the furnace o f war. A belligerent fighting for his life will stop only where it is in his interest to stop. He may restrain himself rather than make an enemy out o f a neutral, but he knows no other restraint.

T he world, then, was “ in the presence o f these stupendous facts, great facts, new facts, which make it imperative that war as an institu­

22

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

tion has to go. The question is:— Can mankind at this fateful epoch make and enforce the biggest decision in history? Can mankind once more accommodate its institutions to its necessities? Can it demonstrate again that capacity for adjustment by which, and by which alone, it has survived the crises o f the past ? Failure o f capacity for adjustment is nature’s unforgivable sin.” Sufficient adjustment to the facts, Meighen argued, was not accomplished by the various treaties and agreements concluded since the war, certainly not by the Pact o f Paris which so many Americans, whose government had taken the lead in its negotiation, seemed to regard as having solved the problem. In a spirit not o f cavilling but o f gratitude, and profound gratitude, for all that the Pact o f Paris means, permit me to say that the gaps in it are very wide and very dangerous. I think it unlikely that you could point to a war in the past hundred years where both parties to the struggle did not claim for their conduct the sanction o f self-defence, and where the people o f each country did not sincerely believe in the justice o f their claim. Besides, what appears to be self-defence at first may afterwards, in the light o f fuller disclosures, turn out to be skilful and concealed aggression. . . . Furthermore, as there are no material sanctions [in the Pact], it is very likely that provocative or impatient statesmen will, in a crucial hour, feel confident that others will not op­ pose them, and that they can gain a quick and easy victory. Do not let us, I beg o f you, be too easily content. A ll these treaties are good; they are all encouraging; they testify to the existence o f an essential fundamental, a consuming hunger, an anxious groping for peace on the part o f the masses o f mankind. But look over the space o f these last twelve years and tell me what it is that has accompanied this procession o f treaties across the panorama o f history. The heartbreaking answer is in every man’s mind: It is a remorseless growth o f armaments, more destructive, more colossal, than the world has ever known.

It was the bitterest o f truths that so soon after the war to end war the nations were gripped by fear and were arming to save themselves when a new holocaust should descend. It is out o f fear that Britain pleads for the right o f cruisers, which she thinks will guard her trade routes and assure her people food when Armageddon returns. It is in fear born o f the bloody battles o f her past that France watches even yet across the Rhine, the Channel and the Alps, and while she looks with hope but without sureness to L o­ carno and the Pact o f Paris, she gathers her decimated youth around

A Q U IETER L IFE

23

her home fires again, tells them the story o f Sedan and Verdun, and warns them to depend upon themselves. Italy is summoning memories o f ancient Rome, and fears, or seems to fear, the hostility o f neighbours jealous o f her restoration. “Russia,” says Churchill, in a memorable sentence perhaps a little extreme, “Russia, self-exiled, sharpens her bayonets in her Arctic night, and mechanically proclaims, through selfstarved lips, her philosophy o f hatred and death.” What o f the United States ? The favoured o f all nations, powerful, strategic— strategic by her power, strategic by her history, strategic by her geography, strategic by her universally acknowledged devotion to peace, strategic by her association in language and in blood with an Empire equally devoted, the United States holds, as does no other power, the key to the safety o f the world. And the United States is arming not for aggressive war, we all know that, but arming for pur­ poses o f neutrality, arming to preserve her rights in neutrality when a great war comes again.

But all this was being done under the influence o f a great illusion. “We know, they know, everybody knows, that security by armaments for one country means insecurity for another, and that competitive armaments w ill end where they have always ended, in competitive war.” The one way out o f the frightful dilemma was for mankind as a whole to organize itself against war, “nothing else and nothing less.” I am going to say something now which I hope will be heard in thoughtfulness and not in resentment. Such an organization cannot be brought about without the United States. That sentence opens to my last observation. It embraces within its periods the conclusion o f the whole matter, and on the faith o f it I make my appeal. Does this country accept the truth o f that sentence? I do not know; but believing as I do that destiny hangs on the American nation coming to accept it, I dare to implore you not lightly to cast these simple words aside. From your own viewpoint you, yourselves, must make decision and from that viewpoint I am hardly qualified to judge and perhaps I have no right to speak, but these hundred million people are, like all the rest o f us, citizens o f the world and far more vitally interwoven with its fate than we are apt to appreciate and understand.

T he United States must outgrow the habit o f basing its modern foreign policy on an admonition by George Washington a century and a h a lf before. “ ‘Entangling alliances,’ ” said Meighen, “ was a phrase brilliantly coined to describe a peril o f the eighteenth century,

24

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

but surely it should not be used now to prevent that co-operation by which alone we can escape a far greater peril in the twentieth.” A n effective world organization must not only be universal, it must rest upon an international law backed by force, without which all law was meaningless. The leading American isolationist, Senator W. E. Borah o f Idaho, has argued that to provide for force against an aggressor in a Pact o f Nations looking to peace is an anachronism, and he applauds the Pact o f Paris because it has no such provision. The very compact o f this United States, the compact upon which it is built and its peace and order rest, provides for that very thing. The covenant o f man with man over the whole sweep o f this Republic, the covenant by which you are citizens o f one nation, binds each and all not only to obey the law and keep the peace, but to put forth, when called upon the hand o f force to hold in check an offender. It is no anachronism; it is the very essence o f the Social Contract itself; it is the principle by which the integrity o f a nation is assured and the reign o f law sustained. The practically minded man keeps telling us this whole plan is Utopia. Maybe so; but there is nothing too Utopian if it has to be done. The civilization o f today would be Utopian to all ages gone by. He tells us it presupposes confidence in a World Court on the part o f at least a dozen mighty nations and submission to its decrees. Even so, I put against him the plea o f necessity, for otherwise man who has conquered the forces o f nature is in turn conquered by his own dis­ coveries; man who has made a slave o f the elements becomes himself a slave. H e tells us it means the curtailment o f a sovereign right asserted by every State from the beginning o f recorded time to make war when it deems itself aggrieved. So it does. I put against him the plea o f necessity; the sovereign right o f a single people to fight must yield to the sovereign right o f all to live. H e tells us finally that it means the allocation o f forces now controlled by Governments, those physical forces which make for international destruction; that it means their allocation to abide the judgment o f an International Congress and their steady reduction to the dimensions o f an interna­ tional police. Let us all pray that it does. I plead again the law o f necessity, o f imperious overwhelming necessity, for a movement to­ wards this goal is the only substitute for the armament system o f this day, a system which left alone may in no distant time send civilization crashing to its doom.

It would, o f course, be more than the work o f a day, said Meighen in conclusion, for “ this evolution in human relationships [to] be

A Q U IETER L IFE

25

brought about and Anarchy, which long ago by the organization o f individual States had to yield to law and order there, be banished also from the larger field o f International Affairs. N ot today, per­ haps not tomorrow, can all this be done, but the time for preparation is now, the time for learning and for teaching and for mission work, for high resolve, for definite progress day by day, that time is now, and let us all rejoice to take our part.” 32

CHAPTER

IN

THE

RED

TW O

CH AM BER

it h t h e retu r n o f the Conservatives to power in the general election o f July the twenty-eighth, 1930 an agitation devel­ oped to bring Meighen back to the House and into the Cabinet, or at least to public life in some capacity. He gave no serious thought to being a candidate in the election and declined the nomina­ tion in Long Lake, Saskatchewan, when it was proferred to him.1 He felt it very keenly that Bennett ignored him entirely during the cam­ paign, as indeed he had ever since the Conservative national convention o f 1927, and made no effort to enlist his help in any way. O f course Meighen had firmly announced his retirement and knew that he had sorely provoked Bennett by his performance at the Amphitheatre Rink in Winnipeg. Still, he remembered the handsome terms o f the letter Bennett had written him following the 1926 election: “ You have played a very great and commanding part in the public life o f our country and you are still a young man. The fortunes o f war have compelled you for the moment to retire from the firing line, but no one possessed o f your ability and flair for public life can long remain in retirement. You w ill play an ever increasingly important part in the public life o f Canada__ the longer I have lived and the more I have seen o f you, the more certain I am that together we m ight have accomplished much more than we could hope to do singly.”2 N ow the opportunity had come for them to do something together and Bennett had made no overtures o f any kind, had given not the slightest intimation o f a desire that Meighen should join him in the fight. “ Bennett’s conduct to me since he got his leadership has been very bad,” Meighen wrote as the campaign neared its climax. “ It could scarcely have been worse. He is a very small man and has oceans o f trouble ahead. A t present the fates are with him .”3 Although Bennett seems not to have shared it, a strong feeling existed within the Conservative party that Meighen’s rightful place was in the House o f Commons and in the late months o f 1930 there

W

26

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

27

was a certain amount of speculation that he would be appointed Minister of Finance— a position Bennett had thus far kept for himself — and that a safe seat would be opened for him, probably Carleton in Ontario. This was not the only possibility mooted. One member o f Parliament, who thought there was little likelihood o f Meighen’s appointment to the Government as “ I fear, without evidence, that Bennett thinks there is not room enough in the sky for ‘two moons,’ ” suggested that he should succeed Sir Robert Falconer as President o f the University o f Toronto.4 Another idea, fantastic enough to make the steadiest mind boggle, was that Meighen should “get together” in the House o f Commons with the Liberal Ian Mackenzie o f Vancou­ ver, Robert Gardiner, leader o f what was left o f the Progressives, and J. S. Woodsworth. Just how the pooling o f the diverse talents o f this ill-assorted quadrumvirate might save the country was not made clear. “Your proposal is certainly ingenious,” Meighen told its author.5 Still a different suggestion as to how he might be o f public service came from a group of Saskatchewan farmers, who invited him to ap­ ply his intelligence to finding a solution to the economic problems of western Canada. “Unfortunately I am not in a position so to do,” he responded, “ and for this you people yourselves must assume your share o f responsibility. In three general elections I was not favoured with the election o f a single supporter in the Province o f Saskatche­ wan.”6 Most people who wanted Meighen’s intelligence put to the use o f the country again thought that the obvious and proper way to do it was to bring him into the Government. A close friend in Ottawa wrote that he was “ still hoping against hope that the way may be opened for you to come, should you so desire. A t the present mo­ ment . . . you are required. Things are not in good shape, Mr. Ben­ nett is trying to do everything, which is impossible, and he can’t stand the strain forever. Some o f his Ministers, while certainly lacking experience, are not measuring up to what was expected, and Bennett is having his own troubles. I do wish he would approach you proper­ ly and ask you to help him out, because he does need you.”7 Another letter, this one from Halifax, told Meighen o f pressure that was being brought to bear on Bennett but urged him to make the first move. “Get into the house— never mind whether the leaders invite you or not so long as the public approves.”8 Personal differences between him and Bennett should not prevent his returning to Ottawa, another

28

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

correspondent, Dr. J. C. Webster o f Shediac, N ew Brunswick, em­ phasized. “There are rumors about that you and Mr. Bennett dont [sic] pull together. It is probably foolish gossip, but I believe that you are both too big to let personal differences stand in the way o f a combined effort to do the best for the country in these distressing times.” Webster recalled a long conversation he had had with Bennett two years earlier. Your name came up and he said to me that he considered that you had the finest brain in all Canada. Now, whatever faults Mr. Ben­ nett may have I feel certain that he is sincere and truthful. His words were spontaneous and there could have been no ulterior motive in uttering them. Indeed, they came out in response to my remarks about the bril­ liancy o f Birkenhead’s mind. He compared you with the latter and then stated what I have said. You should be Finance Minister without any doubt. I hope to see you in this role soon. I should like to see you on the front bench for another reason. A great friend o f Mr. K ing told me recently that the late Prime Minister feared you more than all your colleagues put together, and that you always filled him with anxiety. It would be a pity not to keep him on an uneasy seat during the coming sessions.9

O f course he appreciated what Bennett had said about him, Meighen replied. “A t the same time I have heard practically nothing from him, indeed nothing at all since leaving Ottawa, and I have not the least thought that he has anything in contemplation as respects myself. Also I feel very keenly my obligations to the organization with which I am associated and especially during the times that now are upon us. Things are somewhat improved, but I w ill want to know that everything is in excellent condition and that I have done my duty to the shareholders who have trusted me before I could think o f asking to be released from my responsibilities here.”10 For whatever reason Bennett apparently turned a deaf ear to all suggestions that he make Meighen Finance Minister and arrange his return to the Commons. Instead the Prime Minister offered the position o f chairman o f the Board o f Railway Commissioners, after first sounding Meighen out through Borden to see whether he might be interested. “ . . . I have given no thought to the subject at all,” Meighen told Sir Robert. “ In fact I have quite assumed for a good

IN T H E RED C H A M B E R

29

long time past that there was no thought o f considering me above the earth at all, and have proceeded on that assumption to attend to busi­ ness. O f course, I naturally feel also a desire to stay with the or­ ganization I am with until the skies look brighter, but I suppose there is nothing really imperative from that standpoint.” 11 W hen it was reported in the press that the position had been offered, R. B. Hanson implored him not to take it. “ I think you should be in Parliament & there are thousands who think so with me.” 12 But there was no need for Hanson to worry. “ Privately may I say to you,” Meighen replied, “there is not the least fear o f my accepting the position to which you refer.”13 A few months later, in June 1931, he was asked by Premier George Henry o f Ontario to become a member o f the province’s Hydro-Electric Power Commission and, after getting the approval o f Watson Evans, agreed. That he should have accepted this relatively minor appointment after refusing the more important one offered by Bennett caused some surprise and renewed speculation about his intentions. Theodore Hunt in W innipeg sent him a clip­ ping from the Free Press with the pencilled notation beside it: “Dafoe is still worried about you and your future plans.” 14 T he editorial conjectured that Meighen had taken the H ydro job after turning down the other because “he could not accept a major public appoint­ ment in good faith i f he did not intend to retain it, while the accept­ ance o f a minor appointment would leave him free to drop it and re-enter public life i f he chose to do so.” “ The guess is not quite right,” Meighen commented, “ though possibly it is partly so. . . . It w ill be possible for me to give a lot o f energy to the Hydro work, and I hope to be useful.”15 W ith no offers from Ottawa that he cared to accept, with things very slow in the financial world o f Bay Street and with his duties as a Hydro Commissioner not exceedingly onerous, Meighen decided in the latter part o f 1931 to resume the practice o f law on a limited scale. He accepted a number o f briefs, some from the Dominion government, and when the shareholders o f the old Grand Trunk en­ tered suit against the Dominion and the Canadian National Railways respecting the terms o f the agreement o f 1919 nationalizing the Grand Trunk, he offered him self as counsel for the C.N .R. “ I would like very much to act in this matter,” he wrote. “ . . . I ought to be in a position to render the best possible service.”16 H e was assured by R. J. Manion, now Minister o f Railways and Canals, that he probably

I

30

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

would be asked to do some work in the case17 and thus he began to review a subject about which, through personal experience, he prob­ ably knew more than anyone else in Canada. However, his second legal career was nipped in the bud by an unexpected turn of events in January 1932 which compelled him to return all the briefs he had accepted. He was invited to attend a luncheon in Bennett’s honour at the Rideau Club in Ottawa and when it was over the Prime Minister asked him to come over to his office. To Meighen’s great surprise Bennett offered him the position o f Government leader in the Senate and Minister without Portfolio, and seemed genuinely anxious that he accept. W hen it was announced shortly afterwards that the Conservative senators would meet on Feb­ ruary the second to choose a new leader, the newspapers, putting that news together with the fact that Bennett and Meighen had been seen in consultation, predicted that the latter would come back to Parlia­ ment in that capacity. “ I think all the Boys w ill be down for that date i f there is anything in this,” Senator Billy Sharpe told him. “ But i f not I think there w ill be a small attendance, so please let me know .”18 There was something in the story, Meighen answered. “ I have come to no decision at all on the subject as yet, and the intima­ tions to me have been very confidential.” 19 It did not take him long to make up his mind. Watson Evans readily agreed that he could perform both his duties in the manage­ ment o f the companies and as Senate leader, and Premier Henry saw no objection to one o f the H ydro Commissioners taking on this extra work. So Meighen notified Bennett that he was willing, sub­ ject to certain conditions: he would be in Ottawa only when the Sen­ ate was actually sitting and would spend the rest o f his time in Tor­ onto; he would not regularly attend Cabinet meetings; he would engage in no political campaigning; and he reserved the right to ad­ vise such modifications of Government Bills coming to die Senate as he might think desirable. These stipulations were accepted and the senators at their meeting approved his appointment. “ I cannot say that I feel particularly enthusiastic about the House I am in now,” he remarked in acknowledging a message o f congratulations, “ as compared to the House where I spent most o f my life.”20 A nd to Ted he wrote: “ I never did and do not now like die Senate but with present duties and obligations at Toronto it was only in the Senate that I could be o f any service now. There is difficulty everywhere

L

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

31

here [Ottawa] and I find it very hard not [to] be completely absorbed in work along the old lines; but I simply have to keep going at Tor­ onto both in Hydro and in C.G.S.”21 The opening o f Parliament was on February the fourth. A new Governor-General, the Earl o f Bessborough, officiated with the count­ ess at his side and flanking them in the Senate chamber were Bennett and Meighen, two lions at the foot o f the throne. It was a home­ coming for the latter, even though he was in the wrong House, and at the reception given by the Speakers after the opening old friends from all parties flocked around to welcome him back. He was glad to be back and Bennett appeared happy to have him. Together they paraded the corridors arm in arm in a demonstration o f cordial soli­ darity, which perhaps neither o f them felt unreservedly, while their followers murmured approval. Meighen’s appointment was regarded by many as a measure o f Senate reform in effect. Upon hearing the news the parliamentary correspondents reserved space in the Senate press gallery, which had been closed for the last ten years, and their editors for the most part greeted his return to Parliament with approval and in many cases with enthusiasm. Perhaps the most remarkable welcome o f all, con­ sidering its source, came from the W innipeg Free Press, which inti­ mated that the country should not have been in the first place de­ prived o f his services and rejoiced that it would no longer be. Remarking that from a strictly partisan standpoint the Liberals would not be glad o f his reappearance, it added: “To take the nar­ row party view about a man like Arthur Meighen, however, is to misconstrue the whole intention o f democratic institutions.”22 I f he read this Meighen must have wondered what had come over John Dafoe all o f a sudden ! As leader o f the Senate he had to be able to speak for all the de­ partments o f government in the upper House and to familiarize him self with the total legislative programme for each session. Here his long experience, his thorough knowledge o f the machinery o f government, and his gift o f amassing and remembering large quan­ tities o f detailed information stood him in good stead. So, o f course, did his incomparable ability to elucidate the policy o f the Govern­ ment in a few crystalline sentences and to defend the policy against attack, i f need be, with the kind o f analytical rebuttal in which he had never had a peer. “ M y Ottawa duties cause me no anxiety at

32

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

all,” he assured Ted. “ These I feel easily master of.”23 But, while he was well suited to the work, he never felt that he quite belonged in the Senate, with its radier somnolent and easy-going atmosphere, as he had in the Commons. A few years after his appointment he drew a contrast between the two Houses. T he Commons, he said, is and must be the forum o f debate. It must be there that champions o f conflicting parues meet and struggle and decide their issue. There is the arena where young ambition goes; there he enters the lists and flashes his sword in battle with his peers; it is there that leaders o f public opinion, and those who aspire to lead, mount the rostrum and brave the storm, the bustle and the hurricane, the arrows o f a hundred foes in front, and the scowls o f critics behind; there they press on in the measure o f their talents and their courage to the glittering prizes o f our public life. The House o f Commons is the place where West and East each finds out what the other wants; where races blend their thinking; where classes learn, or ought to learn, by contact and conflict, that they are all o f the same clay and need pretty much the same laws. It is the melting pot o f the nation.

The Senate, however, existed for a very different purpose. The Senate has a more prosaic task. Its duty is to see that great principles upon which the Dominion has reposed are carefully reflected in its Statutes, to design legislation so as to meet the realities o f busi­ ness, to review and temper proposals o f the other House so as not un­ necessarily to discourage enterprise or restrict the area o f employment; to oppose the ravages o f partisanship from whatever source they come, and at least to give public opinion time and opportunity to be deliber­ ate and to be understood; to be governed not so much by emotional appeal or fleeting spasms o f popular fancy, but to listen to the accoun­ tant, the operator, the employer, the employee and the unemployed, and to make sure that legislation when finally passed will work with fairness and facility. The Second Chamber should be a workshop and not a theatre.24

Meighen took great pride in the manner in which the Senate operated as a workshop during the four sessions he was its leader, believing that it had never functioned more effectively, and for this he gave Bennett much o f the credit. As he recalled ten years later, It was Mr. Bennett’s view that there was worthwhile, long-term work to be done in that Chamber. . . . I . . . devoted several years to an en­ deavour, in co-operation with my colleagues— and many o f them on both sides were very competent— to make o f that House a truly valu-

IN T H E RED C H A M B E R

33

able part o f our Constitutional machinery and a real service to our nation. To the credit o f Mr. Bennett I want to add that no man ever gave another freer scope than he gave me; no Prime Minister ever be­ fore committed to the Senate constructive work o f such consequence, or ever accepted from it with so good a grace such a formidable cata­ logue o f amendments to legislation initiated in the House o f Com ­ mons. Whatever was our success in raising that Chamber to a stature o f real national worth, it was in no small degree due to him.25

But i f the Senate required this kind o f treatment by the Prime Minister in order to be useful, it also needed the kind o f leader who could take full advantage o f the latitude Bennett was w illing to give. In the opinion o f Grant Dexter, a by no means uncritical admirer, it was really Meighen who made the Senate count for something in the 1930’s. I would say that Arthur Meighen single-handedly [sic] restored public confidence in the Senate; it became a great Chamber just because he was there. A ll the sharply controversial techniques that were natural to him in the House o f Commons weren’t present in the Senate. This was a man o f reasoning, o f great experience, who spoke as it were from a great eminence and who talked, not so much to the Senate, but to the country.26

In discarding to a considerable extent his “ sharply controversial techniques” Meighen was simply conforming to the spirit o f the Senate, where partisan fireworks were seldom seen and discussions were carried on with less regard to elections past and elections still to come. To conform in this way often required a conscious effort o f will on his part and the necessity o f doing so was one o f the reasons why he never felt that he quite belonged in the Senate as he had in the House o f Commons. In the lower House his kind o f skilled combativeness was a valuable asset but in the upper it was frowned upon as unbecom­ ing and out o f place. Raoul Dandurand, Liberal leader in the Senate, perhaps viewing Meighen’s appearance with some trepidation, em­ phasized in his welcoming remarks that controversy was not the order o f the day in the red chamber. “Impulsiveness does not avail us to any extent in this chamber,” he said, “ because . . . there is really no op­ position here . . . there is no standing opposition to government measures. . . . Unlike the members in another place, we do not ad­ dress the electors ; we are content to address ourselves to the question

34

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

— which is much the briefer way.” for a few wry remarks.

This gave Meighen an opening

The honourable senator has dealt concisely but in a way which to me has been illuminating, with the nature and function o f this Chamber as disdnguished from the other, from which many o f us have come. I take no exception at all to the distinction which he draws. I hope that the atmosphere o f the other Chamber does not too closely pursue us, and I promise honourable gentlemen opposite that I will make an honest effort to escape from that atmosphere and to acquire, even more than in the past, the habit o f addressing myself to the question instead o f to the public at large. Indeed, I thank the honourable member for giving me tonight for the first time an explanation o f the unfortunate fact that my public life to date has not been an unbroken and unquali­ fied success. It occurred to me as he spoke that in the other Chamber I had been addicted too much to the practice o f addressing myself to the question instead o f to the public, and that the palm o f victory finally went to those who addressed themselves to the public instead o f to the issue.27

It so happened, however, that Meighen’s first duty as Senate leader had to do with a matter as partisan and controversial as it could be: the implication o f certain Liberal senators in a scandal involving the granting o f hydro-electric power rights on the St. Lawrence River. In the House o f Commons Mackenzie K ing, after referring to the ironical fact that the man whose interest had been in the lower House was now Government leader in the Senate while Bennett, who had at one time aspired to enter the Senate, was leading the Government in the Commons, said: “ As I looked at these two gentlemen on either side o f the throne I could not help wondering what in the course o f time this double-barrelled leadership o f the Conservative party would mean.” A t this point Bennett blurted out: “ It w ill mean two or three fewer senators at an early date.”28 This remark revealed the real reason w hy the Prime Minister had been so anxious to place Meighen in the Senate just then. It was not so much his desire to have that body do “a worthwhile, long-term work,” as Meighen put it, as his determination that the case against the three Liberal senators allegedly involved in the scandal should be prepared and presented in the most unanswerable form. Meighen was the man w ho could best do this in a way that would redound both to the advantage o f the Government and to the integrity o f the upper House.

IN T H E RED C H A M B E R

35

The scandal arose from the efforts o f the Beauharnois Light, Heat and Power Company, headed by R. O. Sweezey, to obtain from the K ing government the necessary Order-in-Council permitting diver­ sion o f water from the St. Lawrence for hydro-electric power develop­ ment. T he efforts commenced early in 1928 and when they were not at first successful Sweezey set out to enlist all the political in­ fluence he could in order to create a favourable atmosphere in Ottawa and bring pressure to bear on the Government, at the same time sub­ scribing large amounts o f money to the campaign fimd o f the Liberal party. In March 1929 his application was approved and the Orderin-Council passed. Thus when the complicated transactions con­ nected with the affair were divulged following the 1930 general elec­ tion it appeared that the very valuable right to divert water from the river had been bartered by the Government in return for Sweezey’s financial assistance to the party. The whole matter was investigated by a committee o f the House o f Commons in 1931 and one o f its unanimous findings was that senators Donat Raymond, Andrew Haydon and W ilfrid Laurier McDougald had acted improperly and inconsistently with their positions o f public trust on behalf o f Swee­ zey and his company. Specifically it found that Raymond had ac­ cepted campaign contributions from a company whose future was wholly dependent upon the favour o f a government o f which he was a leading supporter; that Haydon, long prominent in the Liberal organization and chief collector o f party funds, had done the same and had also accepted for his law firm a very large retainer from Sweezey, payment o f the fees— which were much more generous than the routine work to be done called for— being contingent upon passage o f the Order-in-Council; that McDougald, who had a sub­ stantial though elaborately concealed personal stake in the success o f the Beauharnois venture, had used his positions as Senator, Chairman o f the Montreal Harbour Board and member o f the National A d ­ visory Committee on the St. Lawrence Waterways to influence Gov­ ernment policy to Sweezey’s (and his own) advantage. O f the three McDougald was clearly the chief culprit and the Commons commit­ tee declared that “his actions in respect to the Beauharnois project cannot be too strongly condemned.”29 A t the, beginning o f the 1932 parliamentary session the Senate struck off a committee o f its own to look into those aspects o f the scandal which concerned its three accused members. Its conclusions

36

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

corroborated those o f the Commons committee but they were not unanimous; the committee members divided on party lines and the same division occurred on the floor o f the Senate itself when a motion to adopt the report o f the committee was debated. Meighen’s first major speech as a senator was made in support o f this motion. It was, wrote Grant Dexter after listening to it, “ a masterpiece o f clarity. The vast maze o f the Beauharnois ‘deal’ was treated with an ease and assurance that was little short o f amazing. N ot once was Meighen compelled to refer to a note, to refresh his memory for a date, a name, a sum o f money or the precise detail o f stock and share transactions. H e spoke with his desk clear o f papers and memoranda.”30 Shun­ ning the heavily self-righteous tone that had marked Bennett’s ut­ terances on the scandal in the House o f Commons, ignoring the many ramifications o f the affair that did not touch directly on the conduct o f the three senators, the only issue before the upper House, Meighen proceeded in characteristic fashion to analyze the evidence, building up step by step the case against two o f the three. Donat Raymond’s involvement he disposed o f in four short sentences, since the real guilt attached not to him but to the other two. McDougald and Haydon both came in for extended and merciless treatment, Meighen being especially concerned to demolish a defence o f the latter offered just before he spoke by Senator George P. Graham. It was an irre­ futable indictment in the classic Meighen style which ended with a plea to his colleagues to look beyond the mere party or personal in­ terest to certain larger considerations which he thought were inherent in the whole nasty, sordid episode. “ I should lament a party verdict,” he said. “I should not like to see hon. members on this side vote their approval o f misconduct so plainly revealed, but I would rather see a divided conception o f duty behind me than that honourable senators opposite, to a man, should vote against this motion. A party verdict on this matter would be a very serious outcome. W e do not want it.” I ask honourable senators, while being scrupulously careful not to do injustice to one o f their fellow-members, to be at least equally care­ ful not to do injustice to those who are our first concern, the people whom we are here to serve. Let us, I beg o f you, not be contemptuous o f the long-established, fundamental rights o f those people in respect o f their legislators. This country is passing through trying times. These are testing hours. Few are the homes not now struggling in the

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

37

ruthless grip o f economic forces. Questionings are abroad everywhere as to whether the system under which we live will endure. Even while we speak, the institutions o f democracy are being held up to interroga­ tion, and there are those who wonder whether they will survive the storm. The public mind is today more sensitive than ever, perhaps, within memory o f those now living. A t this time, i f ever in history, we must stand faithful to our trust. But whether the public mind is uncommonly sensitive or not, assuming that we act as we would in normal days, can we face the people o f our country and proclaim to them, and before the world, that the conduct o f two o f our number has been such as to be within the right o f every senator? If we vote down this motion and say that their conduct is not cen­ surable and unbecoming, what are the people o f Canada going to think o f the Senate ? Yea, more, what are they going to think o f our institu­ tions, one and all? I f confidence in parliamentary government is still further reduced, if it is affected detrimentally by our verdict, it will be the responsibility o f every member who votes “Nay,” and a very painful and lasting responsibility.31

A party verdict there was, however. On the day the report o f the committee was approved by the small Conservative majority M c­ Dougald resigned from the Senate, stating that he regarded the vote o f his fellow Liberals there against the report as a vindication o f him­ self that permitted him to withdraw honourably. As far as Meighen was concerned M cDougald’s resignation closed the case. Raymond, he thought, deserved no additional punishment beyond the unfavour­ able publicity he had already received. Haydon was extremely ill, as he had been for some time, and was not expected to recover; under the circumstances it would be inappropriate to take further action against him. That page o f the Senate’s history could be turned over now and one’s attention devoted to making it a more useful branch o f Parliament than it had usually been before. In pursuing this object Meighen had the co-operation o f a number o f senators from both parties upon whom his advent seemed to have a revivifying effect. Shortly after the end o f the 1932 session Billy Sharpe, who knew even better than most, from his long, close friend­ ship with Meighen, that the latter would expect a body led by him to be something more than a fellowship o f nodding pensioners, report­ ed that there had been “ a meeting o f a few o f the good fellows o f the Senate and we took up the question o f how we could help you in making the Senate worth while, & it was decided that we should

38

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

take up some leading questions and have them brought before the Senate & . . . fully discussed.” Various individuals had already agreed to make a serious study o f certain subjects. “ N ow Arthur,” Sharpe wrote, “ we w ill arrange ( if you approve) to have all these fully dis­ cussed & this w ill only be a start for i f we are going to continue as a Senate we must justify our existence.”32 Meighen answered that he was “very glad so many men have been thinking o f this matter, and the more they prepare for next Session, the better.” H e planned to call a meeting o f about four Conservative and three Liberal senators shortly before the session “ in order to work out a programme from the general Senate standpoint.”33 Just at this juncture, in the mid-summer o f 1932, a tragic blow fell with the sudden death o f Watson Evans, still a comparatively young man. The burden o f managing Canadian General Securities and its principal subsidiary, Traders Finance, which had been borne chiefly by Evans, was transferred perforce to the shoulders o f Meighen, who became their President, and the time he was compelled to devote to business affairs was therefore increased very considerably. “ The re­ sponsibility is now centred on me,” he remarked, “ and I think I can discharge it about as well as most people— anyways I w ill try.”34 Evans’ death made it more necessary than before that Meighen be on the job in Toronto as much as possible and this prevented him from taking an active part in the Imperial Economic Conference which met at Ottawa, even though he was a member o f the Canadian dele­ gation. By die time he looked after business in Toronto, attended meetings o f the Hydro Commission and directed the work o f the Senate, he had no idle moments left in which to experience the horror he always felt i f he was not working to the limit o f his capacity. Because o f the depression the volume and variety o f legislation increased markedly in the early 1930’s as unfamiliar problems and new responsibilities thrust themselves upon the state. However, one o f the first major pieces o f legislation to receive close study at the hands o f the Senate after Meighen became its leader had to do with a subject more familiar to him than any other. The difficulties o f the railways, with which he had been so much concerned year by year since 1914, were sorely aggravated by the depression, which dras­ tically curtailed their revenues, and this made some solution o f the ever-present railway problem seem even more imperative than it had in days gone by. The seriousness o f the situation was shown by the

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

39

fact that the C.P.R. actually had to halve the dividend on its capital stock with the possibility that subsequent dividends m ight have to be passed altogether— a shocking prospect! As for the C.N.R., the pub­ licly owned system, the penalties incurred by over-building in the early part o f die century and by extravagant expansion in the roaring twenties were now more starkly evident than ever before as its net earnings shrank almost to the vanishing point in 1931 and its already inadequate ability to pay the interest on its gigantic debt declined still further as a result. Late in 1931 a Royal Commission was ap­ pointed, headed by Mr. Justice Lym an P. D uff o f the Supreme Court, to investigate the whole field o f transportation in Canada, o f which the railways’ troubles were by far the most bothersome feature, and in September o f the following year it presented a report. The Commission rejected any idea o f amalgamation o f the two systems or o f their unified management, which was strongly advo­ cated by E. W. Beatty, as it had been in one form or another by him­ self and his predecessor, Lord Shaughnessy, ever since 1917. Sir Joseph Flavelle, one o f the Commissioners, took the stand that the dangers o f monopoly ruled out that possible solution and in any case Bennett made it clear that die Government would not accept a recom­ mendation o f railway unification.35 But while rejecting unification the Commission also strongly condemned the costly competition be­ tween the two systems which had been carried on during the past nine years and which had led to extensive construction o f unnecessary branch lines, as well as o f hotels, resorts and other auxiliary facilities. This, its report argued, should give way to a policy o f co-operation between the railways, the pooling o f services and the sharing o f fa­ cilities wherever possible in the interests o f retrenchment. Recogniz­ ing that political pressures had been partly responsible for the expan­ sion o f the C .N .R.’s operations and therefore o f its capitalization and debt during the regime o f Sir Henry Thornton, who resigned as President in the summer o f 1932, the Commissioners recommended the replacement o f its large board o f directors by a board o f three trustees who would be placed in a position o f greater freedom from political interference. T he question o f how to deal with the railway problem, which had been before the country for so long, was one o f the few im­ portant subjects on which Meighen ever changed his mind. Up to the 1930’s no one had resisted more adamantly or outspokenly than

40

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

he the notion, consistently advanced by C. P.R. officials and always finding some political support, that the two great railway systems should in some way be merged. By the time the D uff Commission reported, however, he had become convinced that unification o f some sort was the most hopeful way out. “ Confidentially,” he wrote to a member o f the Commission, “ I may tell you that I have been for two years firmly o f opinion that the interests o f the whole nation would be best served by a placing o f the one road under the other for co-operation, and a distribution o f the earnings among the securi­ ties o f both in an equitable manner. . . . The public interests w ill be looked after by the Railway Commission [i.e., the Board o f Railway Commissioners] supplemented by additional powers from Parliament, i f desired.” 38 W hat had brought him to a conclusion he had so often rejected in the past? For one thing, what seemed to him the carnival o f extravagance which marked Thornton’s presidency o f the C.N.R. had disillusioned him somewhat with public ownership o f railways in practice. T he trouble lay not in the experiment o f public ownership having been tried in the first place, as Beatty was contending in a series o f public speeches, but in the way the experi­ ment had been conducted after 1922 when Thornton had succeeded D . B. Hanna. According to Beatty the major blame for the problem belonged to Meighen for having foisted the competition o f publicly and privately owned lines on the country in the first place and then refusing to accept the plan advanced by Lord Shaughnessy in 1921.37 But Meighen vehemently denied this. “ . . . I do not,” he told a meet­ ing o f investment bankers in Toronto, “just like being held up to-day as the chief author o f this folly and thus made responsible for the conduct o f that system from 1922 to 1931. I do not just like being branded as the man who plunged Canada into this great ‘abyss’ o f National ownership o f [rail] roads.”33 T he fault, rather, lay in the prodigality that had prevailed from 1922 on. For this, for the fact that public ownership had not been given a fair trial, he held both Thornton and the K in g government responsible, and, beyond them, the Canadian people. Thornton had failed to resist the demands o f the Government and its supporters that the railway extend its opera­ tions in ways that would be politically advantageous; the Govern­ ment had failed to put a damper on Thornton’s exuberant optimism and expansive ideas about equipping the system with luxury facilities. The result was that under Thornton the debt o f the C.N.R. had in­

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

41

creased by more than nine hundred million dollars. He was not blaming Sir Henry alone, Meighen told the investment bankers. I make him primarily responsible. It was his business to resist. Do not think that I am attributing this to the government o f the day alone. I make them very responsible. It was their business to resist. But the people o f Canada, from one end to the other, applauded this fine per­ formance through the whole intoxicated night. N o one raised his voice in criticism between 1922 and 1926. When I passed from the scene there was hardly a newspaper in the Dominion that would not rise in its wrath and defend from attack the policy that was being pur­ sued. A nd it did not matter which party that newspaper was supposed to uphold. There was nothing but one long continuous roar o f ap­ plause through the whole Dominion, and the greater the extravagance the louder was the roar. Many a lashing I took from newspapers in this country, newspapers which had been friendly to me, for daring to criticize this adventure or that adventure, and daring to admonish that the whole course was a direct violation o f the only way in the world in which we could compete with a great system like the Canadian Pacific within the means o f the people o f Canada. The position this Dominion now finds itself in is primarily the fault o f a man, a clever man, an excellent speaker, a likeable man personally, a master o f pub­ licity, his fault and the fault o f the government which brought the pressure upon him; but, back o f all, the fault o f the Canadian people, and especially, o f the Press o f Canada. N ow, I have said what I have longed for a long time to say. (loud applause).39

To the fact that experience with public ownership thus far had been less than reassuring and that the experience m ight be repeated in the future was added the overwhelming presence o f the depres­ sion. In Meighen’s view it was absolutely essential that railway ex­ penditures and deficits be pared to the bone. The depression consti­ tuted an emergency that demanded drastic measures. Formerly he had always thought railway amalgamation too drastic; now it ap­ peared to him to be the best means available o f effecting large econo­ mies and avoiding financial catastrophe. However, he refrained from voicing this opinion publicly, know ing that to do so would badly embarrass the Government. “ . . . it seems to have been the accepted belief,” he wrote, “ that the Canadian public was not ready for this change. T he tragic truth is that the Canadian people does not realize how extreme the financial situation is, and how the problems o f Gov­ ernment are commensurate with the problems o f the individual, which

42

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

at this time are staggering.”40 For the Government to “ appeal to the country on anything in the nature o f united management policy at the present time would mean overwhelming defeat, and i f such a policy is ultimately to triumph, would retard that triumph almost indefinitely.”41 Because he knew that the policy he privately favoured would be suicidal politically, Meighen readily concurred in Bennett’s decision to implement the recommendations o f the Duff Commission. He took an active part in formulating the terms o f the Bill giving them effect and persuaded Bennett to have it introduced first in the Senate early in the session. In this way the body with more time at its dis­ posal could give it the careful, detailed consideration so important a measure deserved, especially in the standing committee on Rail­ ways, Telegraphs and Harbours, it being in its committees that the Senate could make its most useful contribution i f legislation came to it in good time and not in a great mass just before prorogation. This particular Bill spent four months in the upper House, under­ going substantial amendments in the process, before being finally passed. In its essential principle, though, it was not amended: two separate entities separately managed were to be compelled to co-oper­ ate, by means o f procedures set forth in the Bill, instead o f being brought together under a single management. T hat principle was hotly opposed by a good many senators o f both parties who preferred the concept o f unification which Beatty advocated enthusiastically before the standing committee. As a result Meighen was kept busy defending a policy with which he was no longer in entire sympathy. Adm itting the attractiveness o f unified management from a balancesheet point o f view, he argued that the huge railway monopoly which would result was not acceptable to the people o f Canada, that not without reason they feared its power. For unified management as a business arrangement, a very formi­ dable argument can be made. That greater economies can be achieved through a single management operating both railways than can pos­ sibly be attained by the co-operative agencies we are creating here, I do not doubt. I believe that we can save millions, under this Bill, but that under unified management, i f we could adopt it, we should save millions more. . . . I can understand the position o f honourable gentle­ men who say: “We realize the position; we realize the difficulties; we realize that the mountain ahead o f us is a colossal one. But here is the

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

43

alternative that we support— single control and management. This is something masculine, this is something practicable. Let us adopt it.” Before its adoption, however, I should like to offer a few considera­ tions. These considerations are not new, they are not original with me at all. . . . We already have two gigantic industrial entities in the life o f our country. The United States have two hundred, and in that country the power o f each is proportionately diminished. In our country we have only two. Because o f fortuitous events the evolution o f our rail­ ways has gone much further. Each of these great entities is tremen­ dously powerful. Unite them and you will have a power which, in the hands of competent, shrewd, far-seeing men, could be made an almost insuperable factor in the political life of this Dominion. Some attach to that spectre more sinister and more terrible consequences than do others. That it is undesirable I admit— that it is very undesir­ able I admit; and I say most emphatically that the great mass o f the Canadian people consider it so undesirable that so long as the democ­ racy that reigns in Canada is the democracy o f mind that now reigns, there is no possibility o f bringing about such a condition o f affairs. Those who say that this is so only in regard to political matters— that we are being political when we ought to be business-like— are really in­ dicting democracy. It is not at all a political party that is being chal­ lenged but democracy itself; and I do not know that democracy is al­ together foolish in seeking to guard itself against what conceivably, because o f its immensity, might become domination.42

A ll this was not different in substance from what Meighen had said many times before; he had frequently pointed to the dangers o f a railway monopoly controlled by the C.P.R. and had incurred the wrath o f that corporation and its friends in Montreal as a result. But these words uttered in 1933 hid his own private conviction that the dangers o f monopoly were not as great as he had formerly thought them to be, that there was a sufficient element o f public control through the Board o f Railway Commissioners to safeguard the public interest. This conviction he brought out into the open six years later when the Conservative party was again in opposition and the policy of enforced co-operation between the two railways had failed to result in the large economies hoped for. In 1938 the Senate appointed a special committee to investigate the railway situation once again. W ith the two alternatives before it— unification as proposed by Beat­ ty or continuation o f the policy recommended by the D uff Commis­ sion and inaugurated in 1933— the committee laboured throughout

44

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

the 1938 session, hearing witnesses and accumulating a large amount o f evidence. Unable to complete its work before prorogation, it pre­ sented an interim report and in the next session o f Parliament its chairman moved that it be reappointed and resume its task. The Government leader, Senator Dandurand, while not objecting to the committee’s revival, observed that there would be no point in its any longer considering railway unification as a practicable policy. The Government, he pointed out, had no intention o f departing from its present policy, which was to maintain the independence and integrity o f the C.N.R. The Conservative party at a national convention in 1938 had officially gone on record as opposing unification. The House o f Commons would overwhelmingly reject any resolution from the Senate in favour o f unification and for these reasons the committee might as well forget all about that approach to the problem. Since the return to power o f Mackenzie K in g in 1935 Meighen had become increasingly oppressed by the futility o f the Senate, which K in g had still neglected to reform but which he seemed to regard with contempt, preferring to ignore it rather than make use o f it as an investigative and deliberative body. N ow Dandurand’s suggestion that the upper House or one o f its committees should be governed by the pronouncements o f political parties or governments or by what was thought to be the opinion o f the other House brought him to his feet in indignation. “ I do not know what we can do,” he expostu­ lated. “ I think the whole status o f the Senate has been reduced by the leader’s speech to-night. I f this House is to be nothing but the reflection o f the w ill o f political parties, the sooner the country calls for our abolition the better. We have no worthwhile purpose to serve for the good o f Canada.” Suppose the House o f Commons was o f a certain opinion. “ Can we do nothing in the face o f that? Are we not free to seek a solution in another way, to drive it home to the con­ sciousness o f the people o f the country and the Government o f the day? That freedom we were denied by the leader o f the House.” But, Dandurand replied, Meighen was overlooking one salient fact. Hon. Mr. dandurand: W ill my right honourable friend allow me to remind him that whatever resolution we pass here has to go to the Commons for their opinion? Right Hon. Mr. meighen : Certainly, I know that. Hon. Mr. dandurand : Then, if it is rejected, where are we? In 1925 we passed a unanimous resolution here, and my right honourable

I N T H E RED C H A M B E R

45

friend, who was the Leader o f the Opposition in the other Chamber, spurned it. Right Hon. Mr. m eighen : O f course. W ill the honourable leader not stand to the point? That we find or recommend a solution does not mean that it must be accepted by this country or by the other House. I know that. We should be none the less free, and it is our plain duty to steer our way to a solution. We are or ought to be just as free now as we were before, but the honourable leader says we are not .. . . The honourable leader tells us that the situation has changed be­ cause o f something done at a Conservative convention. It has not changed a particle, and the honourable member knows it has not. What was declared there was the policy o f both parties right up to that time. It is surely for the Senate to stand above both parties and see if we cannot be useful to Canada, and to Canada’s Government, whatever it may be, in relation to the great problems that vex our country. The honourable leader should have welcomed this resolution [for the re­ appointment o f the committee] with all the vigour that is in him. He ought to have done so in justice to the Senate and in justice to his high position. He never should have sought to let the country get the idea that because a political party puts on its programme a resolution em­ blematic only o f the position it has taken for years, our duties are con­ founded, our hands are tied, and there is little more we can do.43

The committee was resuscitated and in due course submitted a re­ port, from which a minority o f its members including Meighen dis­ sented, advocating continuance o f the policy o f enforced co-operation. Meighen’s speech in the debate on this issue— his last major pronounce­ ment on a subject which had engrossed him for much o f the past quarter o f a century— was as convincing a case for unification as could be imagined, one which even Sir Edward Beatty (as he now was) might have envied. For once in his life Meighen had said something about railway policy which pleased Beatty exceedingly and the latter wrote to compliment him on his “extraordinarily able and penetrat­ ing analysis o f the situation. I do not drink I have ever read a clearer presentation o f this problem than you made. . . .”44 Acknowledging this, Meighen remarked that the Toronto Daily Star and the Ottawa journal had “ come out with antagonistic editorials. Both take the line that the public is against unification, and, therefore, we should forget about it. Serious thinking seems to be going out o f fashion.” 45 But since he had more than once over the years rejected unification on

46

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

that very ground, he was hardly in a position now to complain if the editorial writers followed suit. Meighen commenced his speech46 by saying that it gave him no pleasure to continue the debate. Dandurand’s advance notice that there was no point in even considering unified management gave him “a very real and distressing sense o f futility, because I think I see the usefulness o f this House under serious reproach and the func­ tions intended for us in the scheme o f Confederation reduced largely to atrophy.” He had long since, he went on, “resolved to remove from my own mind every constraint that would impede me in the exercise o f my soundest judgment as to how best to treat this great business problem; but I am sorry to say that I feel this session in the conduct o f the honourable leader (Mr. Dandurand) with respect to this question the intervention o f other than business considerations and o f regard for matters for which we were never intended to have regard.” But that was not all. The main reason why participation in this debate gives me no pleasure is this. I find myself in direct and definite conflict with the avowed platform of the party with which I have been associated through life and which once I led, and with the leader o f that party, a man whose talents I admire and for whose personality I have affec­ tion. Performance o f my duty in these circumstances, with no organ­ ized body o f public opinion anywhere, in support, certainly cannot carry with it any great pleasure. I had hoped that others on both sides o f the House could consider this matter from its business aspects alone, and thus enable the Senate to show this country that we were seeking to serve rather than to follow.

The attempt begun in 1933 to force the railways to co-operate and economize had failed, Meighen continued, citing statistics to prove it. “ . . . we have had six years of this so-called co-operation, but the results achieved would not fill the hollow of our hands.” N or was there hope that better results could be achieved by that method in the future. I do not speak these words with any pride. I never had consum­ mate faith in government operation. I was convinced years ago, and rightly, that we had come to a time when, as mortgagees o f many roads in distress, we had to take them over and try our hand. We had no other course open to us. I must not be drawn into a long discussion o f our reasons. We were mortgagees and creditors, or we had guaran­

IN T H E RED C H A M B E R

47

teed their bonds. We might have wiped these securities out by a re­ ceivership, but if we did so we wiped out ourselves. I have seen government operation in various spheres, and my con­ victions have been reinforced. There are often advantages o f unifica­ tion under government operation. They have these in the Hydro Electric System o f Ontario. But do not let anyone think the benefits o f that great system are due to government operation. They are not. Much duplication o f services and waste are avoided because it is a united system— that and nothing else. I have had enough o f govern­ ment operation. . . . . . . the Canadian National cannot now be run in the way in which it must be run i f the country is to be saved from bankruptcy. We are on the downhill slide.

The one hope o f getting off that slope lay in unified manage­ ment. This, Meighen stressed, would not mean an end o f public ownership, only o f Government operation. There would be no amal­ gamation o f properties and the C.N.R. would remain in the posses­ sion o f the Crown. But it would mean monopoly o f control and he turned his attention to meeting that objection, one that he him self had often raised in other days. The bugbear o f monopoly is held before us. I know many people are fearful o f monopoly, but I do not think it is the duty o f honourable senators to endeavour to inject into the public mind something that does not appertain to railway monopoly at all. Surely it is our part to lure on to brighter, saner worlds, and lead the way. W ho is afraid o f a monopoly controlled by the country? We are told competition will be gone. . . . Is there any competition in a real sense now? What have we to fear? Service has to be up to Transportation Commission requirements; fares must be dictated by them; every form o f service to the people— railway stations, trains, everything else— is under the supervision o f the nation through its commission. W ho should be afraid o f monopoly? Monopoly in transportation? We know that vast areas o f the country never have had anything but monopoly, and they have not suffered at all. People there get just as good service as people who are situated in the midst o f duplication. But is there not competition enough? N ew competition has arisen; old competition has been reinforced. N ew competition has arrived in the form o f buses and trucks and motor cars— a keener competition than that o f any rival railway. Never fear we are going to lack com­ petition. Unless we get our railways into a sounder economic condi­ tion than they are in now, they can never meet the competition they al­

48

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

ready have to face. Even water competition is more severe than ever before.

The speech ended with a call to the senators to perform their duty without regard to whether its performance m ight be popular. We all know there are economic laws which no man or group o f men and no country has ever successfully defied. We may impede their operation, i f we are foolish enough, but they will sooner or later grind us to powder. It may be important for some to watch and to seek acclaim by echoing the moods o f the populace, and to forge their opin­ ions in the light o f what they think the people like. But surely that is not the duty o f the Senate o f Canada! Surely i f we have one func­ tion it is to point the way and try to advance public thinking toward settlement o f business problems on business lines. W hat we have in front o f us is nothing but a business problem. If the Senate o f Canada is to disregard its duty— and I say with reluctance that this session we have made in that respect a more sorry performance than I have ever seen before— then let us retire from these seats o f emolument and dig­ nity, and let us go back among the masses o f our people, whom we are always ready to load with burdens, and always eager to flatter and cheer, but whom we fail to serve.

O n division the minority report o f the special committee, propos­ ing unified management, was approved by the Senate by a narrow margin but it was a meaningless victory as far as its effect on policy was concerned. Neither Mackenzie K in g nor Robert Manion, who had succeeded Bennett as Conservative leader in 1938, was w illing to consider so fundamental a change. In any case within four months the guns were roaring in Europe and Canada was again at war. The railway problem was relegated to the background by more pressing concerns and urgent dangers, and as the economic boom resulting from die war developed the financial troubles o f the railways disap­ peared for the time being. A great national problem which had been brought to a head in the first place by one war was made deceptively to vanish by the next and with it went one o f the issues that had dominated Canadian politics during Meighen’s era in public life.

CHAPTER

THREE

ISSUES O F T H E T H IR T IE S hile M eighen was Government leader in the Senate the breath o f scandal touched him for the only time in his life. Like many another man he ran afoul o f the swashbuckling Mitchell E Hepburn, an ebullient onion farmer from Elgin County. Hepburn had first gained prominence in 1926 by winning election to the House o f Commons from West Elgin, a seat held by the Conserva­ tives for the past twenty-five years, and retaining it with a larger major­ ity in 1930 in the face o f Bennett’s surge to power. In the latter year he also became Liberal leader in Ontario and with great skill commenced the work o f reviving the virtually moribund party he was to lead to victory in the province four years later. One o f the techniques he used to good advantage was to keep spraying his opponents with charges o f corruption and malpractice and Meighen was one o f the chief targets fixed in the sights o f his verbal scattergun. In the spring o f 1933 a question was asked and speeches were made in the Ontario legislature which insinuated— there was never anydiing really definite enough to be called a charge— that Meighen had improperly taken advantage o f his position as a member o f the Hydro-Electric Power Commission to benefit him self personally and the companies with which he was associated. The insinuations arose indirectly out o f Hepburn’s allegation that the H ydro Commission had improvidently contracted to buy more power in the future than the Province o f Ontario would ever be able to use— a peculiarly illfated prophecy— and had thus stimulated the construction o f super­ fluous generating facilities for which the people would ultimately have to pay. One o f the contracts made before Meighen became a Commis­ sioner, and in any event not by the Commission but by the govern­ ment o f Premier George Henry, was with the Ontario Power Service Corporation, a subsidiary o f the Abitibi Power and Paper Company, which was organized to develop power at the Abitibi Canyon. Con-

W

49

50

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

struction o f installations there was to be financed partly by the sale o f Ontario Power Service bonds and partly with funds furnished by the Abitibi Company. In the spring o f 1932 the latter informed the Government that it was unable to carry out its commitment to the enterprise. The Government thereupon decided to take over Ontario Power Service, making it public property, and set out to purchase its bonds as a necessary first step. Negotiations with a committee o f bondholders resulted in agreement that the Government would buy up these securities at the rate o f sixty cents on the dollar. After this agreement was made public in the summer o f 1932 the Government by Order-in-Council authorized and requested the Hydro Commission to get the bonds in at the stated price, establish the province in ownership o f the property, complete the installations and sell the power produced. Up until this point the Commission had had nothing to do with the whole transaction. Neither individually nor collectively had its members acted in determining the price at which the bonds would be bought by the province and Meighen had no knowledge o f the price until he saw the agreement announced in the press. T he objection raised by Hepburn and others, insofar as it affected Meighen, was that public funds had been used to purchase a bankrupt concern for which the province had no need in order to save the investment in that concern held by Premier Henry, Meighen and certain companies with which they were respectively connected. It was suggested that Meighen knew before the public did what amount would be paid for the bonds, which but for the intervention o f the Government might have been rendered worthless, and that this enabled his companies to buy them up very cheaply before selling them to the Crown at the higher rate agreed upon. Had this been true it would have been a serious offence but the facts were otherwise. He was in no way privy to the negotiations between the Government and the committee representing the bond­ holders and had nothing whatever to do with setting the price o f sixty cents on the dollar, which in fact he thought was lower than the circumstances warranted. Nor had he been consulted in the first place by the Government as to whether Ontario Power Service should be taken over. “ H ow anyone,” he told the Senate, “could imagine— I mean, in good faith— that I would be a party to the negotiations, I am at a loss to understand. N ot only was I not a party, but I had no knowledge whatever, beyond what was given to the public through

IS S U E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

51

the press, o f the progress o f those negotiations.” 1 Furthermore, at no time did he personally hold any Ontario Power Service bonds, al­ though some had been purchased in the ordinary course o f events for the investment trusts subsidiary to Canadian General Securities, in amounts insignificant in relation to the total holdings o f the trusts. As soon as he learned that the Government was negotiating to pur­ chase the bonds he gave instructions that none o f his companies was to buy or sell a single one. This command was violated in one in­ stance when an officer o f Canadian General Securities, despite being reminded by the company’s market clerk o f Meighen’s prohibition, ordered a five-thousand-dollar bond for one o f the investment trusts. W hen Meighen heard o f this he instructed that it be sold at once. Explaining his position in the affair to the Senate, he said: I have lived among my colleagues here and taken part in the public life o f this country for very many years. I do not think that an accusa­ tion involving wrongdoing has been hurled at me, even indireedy, and certainly it has not been by anyone associated with me on the side o f the House on which I happened to sit, or the other. And if there is at this moment one thing in which I can take some pleasure it is the fact that he who has especially taken it upon himself to play the role o f accuser in the present case is not one whom I know personally at all. From the first intimation o f this matter I have been ready, and more than ready, to submit my conduct to any tribunal that may be chosen, to be judged by the best standards o f British public service— by its severest standards, i f you will— and before that tribunal I shall re­ joice to meet my accuser.2

Meighen was convinced that the agitation against him was moti­ vated by a desire to avenge the senators he had indicted in the Beauharnois affair. The comments o f Saturday N ight o f Toronto, whose editor, B. K . Sandwell, Meighen believed had been close to Senator McDougald, suggested as much at any rate. Referring to Meighen’s statement in the Senate, it intimated that the members o f that body ought not to let the matter rest where Meighen had left it. We rather suspect that more will be heard o f this matter in the Senate, some o f whose members have not forgotten that Mr. Meighen entered it for the express purpose o f effecting its purgation from the evil influences which flow from too close a connection between the ad­ ministration o f public affairs and the making o f speculative profits. It is true that the purgation did not go very far, and that the doctrine o f the power o f expulsion by majority vote, introduced for the first time

52

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

into Canadian constitutional theory by Mr. Meighen on that occasion, was not put to the test o f practice. But enough was done to make it fairly certain that there will be an interesting debate on the O.P.S. bonds before the Senate rises.3

Meighen had borne in silence some earlier jabs by this journal at his connection with the Hydro “ scandal,” jabs typically Sandwellian in their urbanity and wit, but this latest editorial was too much to let pass unnoticed. So he wrote a characteristic letter to the editor. In your last issue you inform your readers that the facts regarding Hydro-Electric Power Commission and Ontario Power Service Cor­ poration are not as they were represented by me to be in my speech in the Senate on the 6th o f last month— which speech you take it upon yourself to describe as an “ apologia.” I take the occasion to assure you, and through you your readers, that the facts are entirely as stated by myself at that time and there are no qualifying facts. Inasmuch, however, as you intimate in your editorial that “more will be heard o f the matter in the Senate”, presumably by way o f attack upon myself and my statement o f 6th April, there is no need o f elabo­ rating further on the subject now. I will await the opportunity which you are good enough to forecast. The Senate in which I sit is the prop­ er place to launch charges or attacks o f any kind against me. There are very able men in that body sitting on the Liberal as well as on the Government side. Permit me to urge you, Mr. Editor, to leave no stone unturned in making certain that this is done. M y chief object in writing is to refer to another feature o f your article. For the very obvious purpose o f prejudicing your readers, you say that I entered the Senate “for the express purpose o f effecting its purgation . . .” and that while the “purgation did not go very far”, I introduced “on that occasion” for the first time in Canadian constitu­ tional theory “the doctrine o f the power o f expulsion by majority vote.” It may perhaps be conceded that I am capable o f expressing my own purposes, and I now ask you to tell me when and where I ex­ pressed the purpose you attribute to me above. I also call upon you to substantiate your statement that I introduced the doctrine which you ascribe to me. I f you cannot succeed (and you certainly cannot) would you be good enough to show your readers that I even mentioned it? Fortunately everything said in the Senate is recorded— consequent­ ly you will have no difficulty in producing quotations from my words, if what you have written is true.4

In the face o f this Sandwell retreated, but with enviable jauntiness.

ISSU E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

53

W e appear to have done Mr. Meighen an injustice in suggesting that he took any steps towards the expulsion from the Senate o f any o f the Senators concerned in the Beauharnois affair. We originally read Mr. Meighen’s “Catiline Oration” against the three Senators con­ cerned at the time o f its delivery, and with our mind very much under thé influence o f the impressions created by Mr. Bennett’s reference to three impending Senatorial vacancies and by the practically unanimous demand o f the Conservative press for the “purgation” o f the Senate. . . . we unreservedly accept Mr. Meighen’s statement that there was nothing in his speech to indicate a desire for that purgation or a belief in the existence o f any constitutional power for effecting it. We have no intention o f reading the speech again; it is true that Mr. Meighen is incomparably the ablest forensic pleader in Canadian public life, but there are many other among his utterances which we should peruse with far greater pleasure than this one.5

Twice Meighen requested Premier Henry to have any charges o f misconduct against him fully investigated but for some reason Henry failed to comply. In the meantime Hepburn and some o f his friends, notably Arthur G. Slaght, K .C., continued their attacks on the O n­ tario Power Service purchase and on Meighen, with much talk o f crooked “deals” and swindles. They were not at all deterred by Meighen’s speech in the Senate on the matter; clever politicians could always be sure o f mass popularity, especially in the midst o f a depression, by attacking the machinations o f Bay Street, o f which Meighen was a denizen. A nd the pursuit o f so eminent a Conserva­ tive, w ho was at once a member o f the provincial H ydro Commis­ sion and leader o f the Senate o f Canada, offered an irresistible op­ portunity to assist the cause o f the Liberal party, both provincially and nationally. In April 1934 Meighen resigned as Hydro Commissioner, feeling that in view o f the allegations against him his continued pres­ ence might be an embarrassment to the Henry government with a provincial election in the offing. He then began to urge Bennett to arrange a judicial investigation, arguing on repeated visits to his office, that when a member o f his Govern­ ment was charged, as I had been, with conduct certainly unbecoming a Minister, it was the duty o f his Government to initiate a Judicial enquiry itself. A s a former Prime Minister and now Leader o f the Upper House, I felt, and pressed upon him, that I was entitled to an enquiry by a Judge o f the Supreme Court o f Canada, and, indeed, by the Chief Justice i f he would accept and undertake the task. Two

54

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

or three times anyway I visited Mr. Bennett with this request, and pressed upon him my contention by letters as well. I told him I would make no condition as to who should be appointed— any Judge o f the Supreme Court o f Canada would suit me whether such Judge had been placed on the Bench by a Liberal Government or a Conserv­ ative Government. Mr. Bennett plainly had no belief whatever in the bonafides o f the allegations and I found it most difficult to get him interested.6

As Hepburn had promised to stage his own investigation i f elected to office, Meighen was no doubt anxious to forestall this by having one already in progress under Dominion auspices. A t length Bennett acceded to his request and C h ief Justice Sir Lym an Duff consented to conduct the inquiry. However, just after accepting the assignment and before beginning to organize his investigation Duff left the coun­ try for a holiday with the result that when the Liberals under Hep­ burn were swept into power in June the inquiry had not begun. A few days after his victory Hepburn went to Ottawa for an interview with Mackenzie K in g at which, it is not unreasonable to surmise, the possibility o f “getting” Meighen may have been one o f the topics dis­ cussed. T he day he and his colleagues were sworn in, July the tenth, Hepburn announced that Meighen’s connection with the Ontario Power Service transaction would be probed without delay and two days later, allowing no grass to grow under his feet, he appointed C h ief Justice F. R. Latchford o f the Ontario Supreme Court and Robert Smith, a retired Justice o f the Supreme Court o f Canada, as a Royal Commission. C h ief counsel for the government o f Ontario was to be none other than Arthur Slaght, one o f Meighen’s most vo­ cal accusers. N o sooner had Latchford and Smith been appointed than they held a meeting, without advising Meighen or the others who were to be investigated and, indeed, before Meighen even knew o f their appointment, and ordered a large quantity o f documents, several truck loads Meighen was told, transferred from the Hydro offices to Osgoode H all. Clearly C h ief Justice Duff was going to find it diffi­ cult to get his hands on any written evidence i f and when he com­ menced the inquiry he had undertaken to conduct. However, he solved this problem by announcing after his return to Canada that there was no need for him to start since the Latchford-Smith investi­ gation was already in progress. Its progress was quite remarkable.

IS S U E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

55

N o specific charges were made against Meighen or any o f the other men whose behaviour Latchford and Smith were looking into; what was going on was a fishing expedition with the nets being cast out at random in all directions. Meighen’s application to the Commis­ sion for a recommendation that he be supplied with legal counsel, to which he believed he was entitled since his conduct complained o f was in discharge o f public duties, was turned down. Therefore he had to represent himself. Day after day he sat in the courtroom at Osgoode Hall, along with the others concerned as well as several employees o f Canadian General Securities who were also under sub­ poena, while one by one they were interrogated by counsel for the Commission. Meighen was first in the witness box and the questions put to him confirmed the suspicion he had had from the beginning that his tormentors were moved by the hope o f gaining revenge for Beauharnois and o f showing that he was guilty o f exactly the kind o f misconduct he had so ringingly condemned in that case. “Tim e after time throughout the proceedings Counsel for the Ontario Govern­ ment would refer to m y speech against Senators McDougald and Haydon in the Beauharnois case, and quotations would be made from it defining standards o f public conduct. I would then be asked how I would like, in the present investigation and in respect o f my own conduct on Hydro, to be judged by these standards. M y answer was that I was ready to have applied to m yself every standard I had ever set up, no matter how severe they were considered to be, and i f Coun­ sel wished to make those standards still more severe than I had ex­ pressed them, I was still ready to have my conduct on Hydro judged accordingly.” 7 W riting to Bennett some months afterwards, he said: “ I shall not comment on the conduct o f their investigation, as the nature and spirit o f it was [sic] glaringly clear from the beginning. . . . T he whole affair was used mainly as a sounding board for the accuser, acting as public prosecutor, for the purpose o f newspaper headlines.”8 Years later he dictated some opinions about this kind o f harassment by Royal Commission, which in some respects resembled a congressional committee investigation in the United States. If a Government can put every member o f a previous Govern­ ment on trial, or every important officer or Commissioner o f a previous Government, on trial whenever it wishes, no one taking responsibility for charges made, and no one making specific charges at all, and then can compel them not only to give all their time for as long as Royal

56

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

Commissioners desire to demand that time (such Commissioners being paid high fees for their services as such) and then can as well put them in the witness box to prove their own guilt, put all their employees in the witness box and virtually disintegrate their business, no one taking the least responsibility for recompense, it is sheer pre­ tense to call this country free. This cannot be done with a prisoner charged with crime: nothing approaching it can be done.9

Meighen was out o f the country when the report o f the Latchford-Smith Commission was issued in October, having gone to Aus­ tralia on a mission for the Dominion government. In his absence his solicitor, P. H . Gordon, attempted to obtain a copy but was denied one or the right to make his own copy on the grounds that the docu­ ment could not be released until it had been tabled in the legislature. This exquisite solicitude for the rights o f the legislature, however, did not seem to preclude copies being given to certain newspapers, in which extracts were published months before the weighty conclusions o f Messrs. Latchford and Smith were presented to the Legislative Assembly. Meighen never did succeed in obtaining a copy and had to rely on the published excerpts. These were enough to show that the Commission had judged him guilty, i f not o f any offence, at least o f poor judgment and indiscretion. The report rejected his contention that the Hydro Commissioners had acted in a purely pro forma manner in completing the acquisition o f the Ontario Power Service Corporation on terms negotiated by the Henry government. Latchford and Smith found, and in time were proved to be entirely mistaken, that the original agreement entered into for the develop­ ment o f power at the Abitibi Canyon was improvident in view o f the costs involved and the probable power needs o f Ontario and that the price o f sixty cents on the dollar subsequently paid for Ontario Power Service bonds was out o f all proportion to their real value. Since, according to the report, Meighen as a Hydro Commissioner “had to share in a responsibility and exercise a discretion cast upon the Com ­ mission,” instead o f merely acting with his colleagues as agents o f the Government, he and they should have refused to sanction this latter transaction. H ow the Hydro Commissioners could have vetoed an action which the provincial government had every legal right to take, and did take without consulting them, the report apparently did not explain. Regarding Meighen’s position as the head o f certain companies

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

57

holding Ontario Power Service bonds, Latchford and Smith indulged in some pious tongue-clucking. It was open to Mr. Meighen to have said to the other two [Hydro] Commissioners, the Government and the public, that he was interested, personally and on behalf o f his companies, in bonds that the Gov­ ernment was requesting the Commission to purchase, and that, there­ fore, he could take no part . . . in the purchase. He failed to do this, and thus was placed in the position as a Commissioner o f being buyer o f these bonds and o f being a seller o f them in his individual capacity and as a director or manager o f the companies in which he was in­ terested.10

Evidently the authors o f the report had seen fit to ignore Meighen’s sworn testimony, which was not contradicted by other evidence, that he had no knowledge o f the price to be paid for the bonds until it was announced to the public, that he personally had held none o f the bonds, and that none was bought or sold by his companies once ne­ gotiations between the Government and the bondholders’ committee began with the single exception o f the one that had been purchased mistakenly and then immediately disposed of. T he portions o f the report he was able to gather from the news­ papers convinced him that the whole production was a compound o f error and misrepresentation with a deliberately defamatory intent.I11 He could not rest content while these slurs on his reputation and char­ acter remained enshrined in the report o f a Royal Commission with­ out being officially refuted. Therefore he besought Bennett to pre­ vail upon C h ief Justice Duff to carry out the task he had earlier ac­ cepted. This Bennett declined to do, observing that the LatchfbrdSmith report could not be seriously regarded as reflecting on Meighen’s honour as a public man. A ll that the latter could then do was invite the Senate to investigate his conduct i f it so desired. I accept the position taken by the Prime Minister; but if any honour­ able member o f this House takes another view, or feels that upon that report my honour is even in the most oblique or remote way con­ cerned, I invite him to move here for a committee to investigate the allegations made against me. I shall accept such a motion without the shadow o f a feeling o f resentment. W hat is more, I shall support it and invite and urge honourable members to support it as well. I shall gladly appear before that committee. But if it should not be the wish o f any honourable member so to move, then from this date onward

5»

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

I shall treat this report of the Latchford-Smith Commission with the attention it deserves, which is exactly none at all.12 N o honourable member o f the Senate seemed w illing to accept the invitation. Receipt o f the Latchford-Smith report by the Government did not end the vendetta o f Hepburn and Company against Meighen. In fact a new sensation was caused ten days before the report was sub­ mitted when Stewart Lyon, formerly editor o f the Globe and ap­ pointed by Hepburn to the chairmanship o f the Hydro Commission, disclosed that there was evidence in the files o f Hydro that the pre­ vious regime had hired a firm o f private detectives to investigate the source and motives o f anti-Hydro propaganda thought to be ema­ nating from private electric power interests in the United States. It had been suspected that the purpose o f the propaganda was to dis­ credit public ownership o f utilities by attacking a notably successful publicly owned power system and that the Americans were encourag­ ing Hepburn’s charges against the Hydro Commission by supporting the Liberal party in Ontario financially. A sum o f $4,300 had been paid to the detective firm for its services and Lyon announced that the two former Commissioners still living, Meighen and C. A . Maguire, as well as Hydro’s former solicitor, I. B. Lucas, and former chief en­ gineer, F. A . Gaby, were being sued for recovery o f that amount. W hile past being surprised at anything that Hepburn might do, Meighen thought it odd that he was among those being sued since he had not been present on the Commission when it decided to em­ ploy the detectives and had resigned by the time payment o f their fees was authorized. W ith this suit hanging over their heads the defendants through their counsel, J. R. Cartwright and W. N . Tilley, pressed for a speedy action but the Attorney-General’s Department was in no hurry to bring the case to court. Not until late in 1936, about two years after the suit was originally entered, did the trial commence. The con­ tention o f the defence was that the former Hydro Commissioners had had every right to retain the detectives and had done so in good faith. This view was accepted by the presiding judge, Mr. Justice Rose, who in dismissing the suit stated that it “failed miserably” and assessed all the costs against the plaintiffs. T he case against Meighen, he added, “falls hopelessly and entirely.” 13 Although Meighen’s testimony was not necessary to the defence, so weak was the position

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

59

o f the plaintiffs, he insisted on taking the stand in order to declare that he would have supported hiring the detectives had he been pres­ ent. Before stepping down he asked counsel for the plaintiffs “ i f he could explain to the Court why my name had been included as a defendant. His answer was: ‘You will have to ask somebody else.’ ” 14 The somebody else was undoubtedly Hepburn and also, perhaps, his Attorney-General, Arthur Roebuck. And they were not through with Meighen yet. The day Justice Rose dismissed the action Hep­ burn intimated at a political meeting that all was not right with the management o f Meighen’s investment trust companies. A few days later Roebuck announced that he would request the Mackenzie K ing government to order an investigation under the Dominion Companies Act. The request was either not made or it was refused but even so there were more threats by Hepburn o f an investigation, i f not by the Dominion then by the province. “This Province is not fit to live in under present conditions,” Meighen wrote in exasperation early in 1937. But he was still ready to fight Hepburn any day the latter might choose. “ I f he thinks he can pursue me to my death, he has a long, long race ahead.” 15 However, he was glad to notice that Hep­ burn tired o f that particular race before long as other pursuits engaged his attention. Meighen’s visit to Australia in the autumn o f 1934 resulted from Bennett’s insistence that he represent Canada at the centenary o f the founding o f the State o f Victoria. He was accompanied by Mrs. Meighen and Lillian and early in October they sailed on the Aorangi from Vancouver. After about a week’s travel the boat stopped for a day at Honolulu. “ I remember well the reception, which presuma­ bly was a regular occurrence on the landing o f all passenger ships: a large chorus o f natives o f the Islands greeted us with really delight­ ful singing. The custom o f hanging leis around one’s shoulders was indulged in with much enthusiasm. One could not but note the apparently universal happiness which prevailed.”16 T he next land­ fall was the Fiji Islands, with a call at Suva. The customs and habits o f the natives Meighen recalled later, “ were distinctly Southern. Nobody seemed to have any interest in work.” Hearing that the Fiji Parliament was in session, he got a guide to take them there. . . . I found two tables, each perhaps fifty feet in length, reaching from both ends o f a head table. A t this head table those seated were

6o

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

apparently members o f the Government. The Governor took the chair at the opening o f the Session and in all ensuing proceedings it became clear to me that those seated at the long table to the right o f the head table were Government officials— all, or very nearly all, English — and that at the left table were what we would call mere Members o f Parliament, including native Fijians, Japanese, Chinese and others. The native Fijians were in their bare feet, and certainly they had thoroughly developed feet. We remained for over an hour and heard debates as to the necessity o f an extra bed in some hospital, and other equally formidable subjects. Proceedings were thoroughly well con­ trolled by the Government, and adequate answers seemed to be given to every question asked.. . . we felt we had a fair idea o f the standard o f this Colonial Parliament, and, indeed were rather favourably im­ pressed by the spirit prevailing and the lack o f artificial animosities, the general efficiency o f the form o f Government and its suitability to perform its task. On the road home I asked our guide what was his opinion o f the three native Fijians who sat as representatives. He told me they were “ no good.” I asked him i f the reason was that they did not have the necessary education. “Oh,” he said, “not at all; they are all Oxford men,” and explained his description o f them as “ no good” by sticking his cane in the earth and saying that they were “ just sticks,”— “had been there seventeen years and never made a speech.”

From Suva the Meighens went on to N ew Zealand, making a brief call at Auckland before proceeding to Sydney. The voyage had taken about three weeks and Meighen found it rather tiresome, despite the fascinating sights that were to be seen during their calls at unfamiliar places. He spent most o f his time on the ship reading and most o f the rest o f it walking. Before leaving Toronto he had borrowed a history o f Australia from the Ontario Legislative Library and, not know ing that he was entitled to keep it for only two weeks, took it with him on the voyage, a misunderstanding that caused him some embarrassment when he got home. He read this, along with such other books o f interest as he could find in the ship’s library, and also occupied him self for two or three afternoons in preparing a speech which he thought would be useful on a non-political mission o f courtesy like his. He called it “The Greatest Englishman o f History” and it was about Shakespeare. There was no collection o f the bard’s works on board but Meighen found a treatise on them which was helpful in composing one o f the few speeches he ever wrote out fully in advance. “ . . . I thought this special care was necessary in order

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

6l

that I m ight be satisfied with m y effort to show a real and lifelong appreciation o f the greatest dramatist the world has known.” H aving written it, he committed it to memory so that he would not have to use the manuscript. “It was not difficult to memorize.” In Melbourne, capital o f Victoria and centre o f the centennial celebrations, the Meighens stayed at Menzies Hotel, “ a very comfort­ able and likeable abode. Compared with hotels in Canada it was surprisingly small— five stories in height and served by one elevator, and this elevator was operated with a rope. But Menzies Hotel was famous and seemed to be the pride o f Australian people.” Contrasts between Australia and his own country struck Meighen at every turn: the fact that the railway gauge was narrower and changed as one moved from one state o f the Commonwealth to another, a curious anachronism; the lack o f industrial development comparable with that in Canada. Also he thought that the centenary occasion was not as well organized as it would have been back home. “ . . . I was not impressed on the whole visit with the efficiency with which things connected with the celebration were carried on.” There seemed to be a slap-dash, catch-as-catch-can spirit about the whole affair and about life in general on that far-distant frontier. For one thing— and Meighen thought it truly remarkable— there seemed to be less public interest in this historic occasion than in the Melbourne Cup horse race which was run shortly after their arrival. “ I found that very many o f those who learned o f our having come from Canada presumed we were there to attend ‘the Melbourne Cup. ’ This seemed to them a greater event than the Centennial.” Mrs. Meighen and Lillian did in fact attend the race but the head o f the family did not. T he major social occasion o f the centenary was a huge formal ball at which the chief guest o f honour was the Duke o f Gloucester, who was visiting the country. “ I did not think that arrangements for the ball and the conduct o f the event were at all well thought out or executed. There was no provision for introduction o f guests representing other Domin­ ions to the guest o f honour. The whole event was one ill-organized jam.” During his visit Meighen gave only h a lf a dozen speeches and “ The Greatest Englishman o f History” was not among them. He suggested it to his hosts on one or two occasions but “there was no enthusiasm at the prospect,” only incredulity that a man o f affairs, a practical statesman, should have this queer desire to speak on a sub-

62

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

ject so remote as Shakespeare. One o f the organizations to which he thought he might give the speech was the Millions Club o f N ew South Wales, which he was invited to address in Sydney just before sailing home, but when his offer was greeted with polite indifference he elected to deal instead with the trade agreements produced at the Ottawa Economic Conference o f 1932 and with the economic state o f the world in general. He thought it the best speech he had given in Australia and evidently it made quite an impression, judging by an account in die club’s magazine. “ His is an ideal type o f forensic oratory. Deliberate, incisive, with an extraordinarily attractive choice o f diction, Mr. Meighen held the unabated interest o f the large com­ pany. . . .” Unaware o f the fact that Meighen had not practised law for many years, the writer continued: “ One could not help re­ flecting . . . how successful he must be in the persuasion o f juries. His points were so excellently taken, his subject matter and his expo­ sition o f it so readily assimilable.” 17 The gathering most enjoyed by Meighen because it revived some stirring memories and appealed irresistibly to his lively sense o f the droll, took place in Canberra, capital o f the Australian Common­ wealth. A t a luncheon tendered by the Government one o f those present was his old adversary o f 1921, W illiam Morris Hughes. T o Meighen’s delight after he had made a few remarks Hughes rose to his full five feet o f stature to respond. “ Never can I forget m y amaze­ ment as he proceeded to extol my conduct in 1921 and to belaud with his own inimitable rhetoric the results attained. One who had not been present when the controversy over the extension o f the Japanese Alliance was at its height would have thought that the decision not to renew and to steer for a wider settlement o f Pacific affairs was a joint product o f Mr. Hughes and myself.” Many years later Robert Menzies, visiting Canada in his capacity as Prime Minister o f Aus­ tralia, called on Meighen at his home. He had been present at the Canberra luncheon. “ The story he told me o f Mr. Hughes’ warnings before the event as to my being a dangerous man was interesting to the last degree, and not less interesting was the story o f a contrast demonstrated by the same Mr. Hughes on his next talk with Mr. Men­ zies after the luncheon, at which time he seemed— insofar as his re­ lations with m yself were concerned— to have been entirely born again.” Becoming anxious to see how business affairs stood in Toronto and

IS S U E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

63

to get ready for the opening o f Parliament in January, Meighen sailed alone for Vancouver late in November, leaving his wife and daughter to linger a little longer in the Far East. His ship, the Maunganui, stopped first at Wellington, N ew Zealand, and then at Tahiti. Meighen was intensely interested, though not altogether favourably impressed, by what he saw during his brief stay at this French island, about which he knew little except that it had been the residence o f Robert Louis Stevenson. I, o f course, was alone and wandered off to see what could be seen in the hours before sailing. It certainly was a cosmopolitan population with which one came in contact wherever one went. The growing crop was mainly cocoanuts and nearly anyone I talked with was ready to run up a tree and bring down a fresh one for my enjoyment. In the evening I noticed a large gathering in a building near the shore; the sounds o f music were circumambient and apparently a dance was on. I got as far as the door and found almost every colour and nation­ ality mingling together in the dance— Japanese, Chinese, native Tahi­ tians, English, French, Italian, Negro— everyone apparendy was wel­ come and everybody friendly. There were tables, many o f them, around the dance floor, all well stocked with liquor, which seemed to flow in almost unmeasured abundance. . . . while I did not see anything that was in any way repellent, there did not appear to be the restraints anywhere which such a variegated populadon would require i f reasonably good standards o f living were to prevail. I thought the evidences o f efficient administration were more apparent in Suva than in Tahiti.

After the oasis o f Tahiti there were no more stops on the desert o f the sea until San Francisco and Meighen fretted as one long day succeeded another while the ship crawled across the Pacific. “The trip is awfully long,” he complained in a letter to Ted. “ . . . I have read 14 books and parts o f others on the water. . . . A m now out o f books but w ill try to buy or borrow in Vancouver.”18 The tedium was relieved somewhat by receipt o f a wireless message inviting him to address the Vancouver Canadian Club on his arrival there. He wired his acceptance and said he would talk about “T he Greatest Englishman o f History,” not explaining in his message who that was. With this unlooked-for opportunity to use his speech at last he set about to polish it up, making it as perfect as he could. W hen the people in Vancouver received his message there was much speculation as to which o f several great political figures in

64

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

English history he would talk about. As he stood before them some days later and announced his subject was Shakespeare, the audience drooped visibly, slumping in their seats to endure an hour’s boredom. W hat could be worse than a politician on Shakespeare ? Before long, however, they were aroused, sitting up straight and listening intently. W hen he had finished they stood and gave him a resounding ovation, shouting and cheering and throwing their table napkins in the air. One would almost have thought that a Finance Minister had just announced the permanent abolition o f the income tax! Meighen was both astounded and pleased beyond measure by the reaction to the address, not only in Vancouver or in Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto and Pittsburgh where in due course it was presented, but among the public generally. It brought him a very large volume o f mail. The response was occasioned, no doubt, partly by surprised delight that a Canadian public man was able and had chosen to get up and talk about something other than business conditions or public affairs but partly, also, by the intrinsic merit o f the speech, a graceful and eloquent appreciation o f Shakespeare’s writings as literature. For the plays as theatre he had relatively little taste; he much preferred reading them to seeing them enacted on the stage where the sublime artistry o f the language, he thought, was apt to be eclipsed by set­ tings, costumes, noise and motion. To him the words were the thing and one could best enjoy them sitting quietly before the printed page, a practice he tried to encourage in those who heard or read “The Greatest Englishman o f History.” Am ong those who wrote to him were Sir Robert Borden, who gravely raised some points o f interpre­ tation, and the newly arrived Governor-General, John Buchan, Lord Tweedsmuir, who disputed while Meighen upheld Shakespeare’s authorship o f portions o f Henry VIII. N ot all the mail was entirely friendly, o f course. He was attacked by certain Baconians who ob­ jected to his crediting Shakespeare with having written the plays and he heard indirectly reports that some literary people and academics, professionally resentful and condescending towards outsiders who in­ trude upon their preserves, were inclined to sneer at what they took to be his effort to establish him self as a Shakespearian critic. I f these reports were true his detractors were misinformed. He had no such pretensions. He had read the plays and the sonnets over and over and with his extraordinarily retentive memory could call up long pas­ sages at w ill or identify the source o f lines and phrases whose origin

IS SU E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

65

was totally obscure to most people. H e knew what there was to know about Shakespeare’s life and had read every book about him he could get his hands on. He claimed nothing more than to possess a pro­ foundly felt love o f the man’s work— it was a love that bordered on idolatry— and the kind o f exquisitely academic Shakespearian criti­ cism produced by scholarly authorities was as repellent to his taste as it was alien to his talent. As he him self said in “ The Greatest English­ man o f History” : My life . . . has been spent in the busy battlefield o f affairs. In literature I am only a layman and it is to laymen alone that I have a right to speak. But for years I wanted, and opportunity finally came, to satisfy what seemed a sense o f obligation; to reach back among giants o f long ago and put my hand in gratitude on the man, who, more than any other o f all the bounteous past, had contributed to make my own life worthwhile to myself, to bring light and warmth and joy to those pilgrimages o f the mind which fill one’s quiet hours. W hat I seek to do is to pay tribute in my own way to him who appears to me to have quaffed most deeply and passed around most generously the very wine o f life and to have left to us o f later times the richest legacy o f all the dead.19

W hen he delivered the speech before the Toronto Canadian Club in February 1936 a recording was made, one o f the few times the sound o f his voice was preserved. The record was sent to him but it proved to be a sixteen-inch disc and neither he nor anyone he knew had equipment on which it could be played. Nearly twenty years went by and still he had not listened to the recording, which was all but forgotten, until finally on the initiative o f Max and with the help o f Meighen’s son-in-law, the musician and broadcaster, Don Wright, it was arranged to have a new master record made off the original from which twelve-inch copies could be pressed. Meighen ordered a large number o f these copies to send to his friends and later an ad­ mirer o f the speech, who preferred to remain anonymous, ordered a copy sent to every college and university library in Canada, an act o f faith and generosity which Meighen found most gratifying. To those accustomed to modern performances o f Shakespeare, whether record­ ed, staged or filmed, Meighen’s reading o f the copious quotations in his address, which he uttered in cadences o f reverential recitation, sounds curiously unnatural and old-fashioned. T he speech is perhaps better read than listened to, as he thought the plays themselves were,

66

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

in order to capture his joy in what he called “ the priceless treasure which this, the greatest o f Englishmen, has bequeathed to the sons o f men.” The last two sessions o f Parliament under the Bennett govern­ ment, and especially the very last one in 1935, were particularly busy from a legislative point o f view as Bennett attempted energetically, i f belatedly, to counteract the depression. In 1934 there were two major enactments, the Natural Products Marketing Act, which set up complicated machinery for the orderly disposal o f such products by producers’ boards, and the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement Act, pro­ viding means by which the load o f debt being carried by the agri­ cultural class, notably in the Prairie Provinces, could be eased. In the following year a package o f social legislation was brought in, patterned to some extent after Franklin D. Roosevelt’s N ew Deal in the United States, o f which Bennett had reputedly become enamoured through the influence on him o f his brother-in-law, W. D. Herridge, whom he had made Canadian Minister to Washington. Bennett’s own N ew Deal legislation was foreshadowed in a series o f remark­ able radio broadcasts by the Prime Minister shortly before the start o f the 1935 parliamentary session. In these he sounded like a flam­ ing radical, announcing in alarming tones and provocative language that the capitalist system had failed, that it was in need o f funda­ mental reform i f it were not to be overthrown completely and that he proposed to effect that reform in a positive and comprehensive manner. Bennett’s ominous warnings o f profound changes to come and his apparent acceptance o f the Rooseveltian gospel thoroughly alarmed the more conservative element o f Canadian society, especially in the business class, to whom the Prime Minister’s pronouncements seemed all the more extraordinary and lamentable coming as they did from one o f their own, a corporation lawyer o f great wealth and business acumen who heretofore had always seemed to be a man o f reliable common sense and moderation. N ow he seemed about to descend on the malefactors o f the business world like an avenging angel. As Meighen remarked afterwards in Bennett’s presence, “ what a lot o f people have still in their minds like a nightmare is not the legislation, which was enlightened, but the speeches, which frightened.”20

IS SU E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

67

Meighen’s attitude to Bennett’s reforms was one o f qualified ap­ proval. W hile he was not enthusiastic about every single measure brought forward in 1934 and 1935, each o f which he had charge o f in the Senate, he was always ready to see the power o f the state used constructively in an emergency; that the depression constituted an emergency, just as certainly as would pestilence or war, he was firmly convinced. H e had, o f course, no sympathy with the kind o f radical dissatisfaction with the status quo which the depression engendered among many people, no patience with proclamations like the Regina Manifesto o f the fledgling Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, which called for the “eradication” o f capitalism and its replacement by a system o f production based not on profit but on need. “We cannot,” he told an audience in Windsor, Ontario in 1933, “reach in this world in any system, perfection, whether o f law or justice; the most we can do is to approximate and adjust our rules and laws to meet the advancing circumstances o f the days in which we live. . . . Private enterprise must be controlled and regulated; perhaps it must be reformed, but with all the force that words can give to truth, I tell you it cannot be destroyed.” 21 Although he later became disillusioned with them, he believed at first that Roosevelt’s policies provided an example o f how adjustment to “ advancing circumstances” could be made. Commenting on the American N ew Deal to a correspondent in N ew York, and particularly on one o f its major elements, the N a­ tional Recovery Act, Meighen wrote: As you can well imagine, we in Canada are watching the great American experiment with keen interest, quite a measure o f appre­ hension, but in general, with great sympathy. Personally, I have never looked upon the principle behind the N R A as wholly unsound at all. It would have been unsound, though, in the days antecedent to the now consummated machine age. In the midst o f the new and formidable forces brought about by the machine age, I am firmly convinced that major readjustment has to take place. It has proven impossible since 1919 in any highly industrialized country to absorb anything like the total o f the vast multitudes o f men displaced by various mechanisms. A method o f distributing leisure must ac­ company any successful efforts to distribute the products o f industrial organization, and in effect, this is the main principle behind the N R A . Unrestrained and mutually destructive competition also follows in the wake o f machines. The competition o f years ago was a competi­ tion o f quality; the competition o f to-day in a vast array o f products

68

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

is a competition o f chicanery, and results in progressive destruction o f capital. Whatever may be the temporary success or failure o f the N R A , I am convinced that there must be governmental supervision o f the distribution o f leisure, and governmental sanction o f a code suited to the character o f the present industrial struggle. My criticism o f President Roosevelt would be that he tried to put his N R A into too immediate and universal effect. Had he tried it on one, two or three industries most manifesdy amenable to its operation, he could have learned by experience where modifications were es­ sential and how best he could adapt his law to other spheres.22

The principal measures in Bennett’s own version o f the N ew Deal presented to Parliament in 1935 were five in number, although there were others intended in one way or another to ameliorate economic hardship. One o f the five established a Trade and Industry Commis­ sion with extensive regulatory and supervisory power over business activity. Resembling in some ways similar bodies established in the United States, it was inspired directly by the findings o f a special committee o f the Commons (subsequently transformed into a Royal Commission) which was appointed in 1934 at the instance and under the chairmanship o f H . H. Stevens, Bennett’s Minister o f Trade and Commerce. This inquiry uncovered substantial evidence o f the sweat­ ing o f labour, die forcing-down o f prices by mass buying on the part o f large merchandising concerns and other practices which it was hoped could be eliminated by the intervention o f the state. A second enactment, the Employment and Social Insurance Act, provided for a contributory system o f unemployment insurance. The remaining three, having to do with minimum wages, maximum hours o f work and the guarantee o f a weekly day o f rest for industrial workers, were introduced in order to implement die terms o f certain draft conventions o f the International Labour Organization which were approved by Parliament during that same session. In the Senate there was relatively little discussion o f the merits o f these policies, though some expressions o f disapproval came from both sides o f the chamber. The main issue in the debates, and this was true also in the lower House, was whether Parliament possessed the constitutional power to pass some o f them. The contention o f the Liberal Opposition in both Houses was, not that this was bad legis­ lation in substance or intent, but that unemployment insurance, wages and hours o f work were subjects that fell within the legislative com­ petence o f the provinces rather than o f the Dominion. In combating

ISSU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

69

this view, which was put forth very vigorously by Raoul Dandurand, Meighen relied chiefly on three legal arguments: that the British North America A ct empowered Parliament to make laws for “ the peace, order and good government” o f Canada and specifically to regulate trade and commerce; that the A ct conferred on Parliament and the government o f Canada the power to fulfill obligations im­ posed by treaties with other countries, which thus validated the meas­ ures carrying out die International Labour Organization conventions; and that the reasoning behind the recent findings o f the Judicial Committee o f the Privy Council that the Dominion had jurisdiction over aviation and radio broadcasting would be applicable as well to the present Bills. But there was also the argument based on common sense and the public welfare. As he put it in the Senate: There are certain things this country has to do i f we are to take our part in the general emergence from the distressing conditions o f these times in respect o f social matters. The things we have to do are o f far-reaching, paramount importance; they are vital and essential to our recovery and to our national existence. People have said, times without number, that the depression we are labouring under now is not o f the same character and kind as any o f those cycles which have disturbed the progress o f humanity in the past. This is true. The discoveries o f man have brought upon us a condition utterly without precedent, a condition which requires remedies never before even tried. Those discoveries have made it possible for a very few o f this world’s population to produce more than the whole can use, unless there is a wider distribution o f earnings and the people in general are better able to buy. This condition can be dealt with, first, by our mov­ ing, in concert with other powers, towards a reduction o f hours o f la­ bour, and secondly by our taking care o f incidental unemployment, which undoubtedly will be our lot in the process. These steps we must take, as must other countries. I humbly submit it should be the purpose o f every man upon whom responsibility for legislation lies to find ways o f performing these duties, and not endeavour to find ob­ stacles that prevent us from performing them and meeting our just obligation. I f we are going to shield ourselves behind— perhaps that is not a fair way o f putting it— if we are going to get behind constitu­ tional difficulties we shall only end up by strangling ourselves and making this country an impediment in the general march o f the na­ tions o f the world towards a brighter and better day.23

The Bennett N ew Deal was duly approved by Parliament but it

70

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

neither saved the Conservatives from crushing defeat in the election o f 1935 nor itself became operative law. Shortly after resuming office Mackenzie K in g announced that the statutes about which constitu­ tional doubts existed would be referred to the courts. These refer­ ences resulted finally in all the enactments mentioned, except the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement A ct and parts o f the Trade and Industry Commission Act, being declared invalid by the Judicial Com­ mittee, as invading the provincial legislative sphere. In common with many others in all political parties Meighen regarded these decisions as calamitous, forbidding the Dominion Parliament as they did the right to deal with problems which were obviously national in scope, or to discharge treaty obligations without the concurrence o f all the provinces i f the subject matter o f the treaty came within the ambit o f provincial rather than Dominion jurisdiction. “ I never can remove from my mind,” he wrote, “the conviction that these Judgments . . . are wholly and palpably wrong. They are at variance with the Radio and Aeronautics Judgments, and were given, in my judgment, only because the Committee o f the Privy Council felt that all Canada as represented by its Provincial Governments for the time being and by its newly-elected Federal Government were against the constitutionality o f the legislation. In a word, the Judgments were considered political necessities. They were, in effect, catastro­ phic. It w ill take many years o f irritation and friction to surmount the obstacles they have created.”24 Despite his support o f Bennett’s social legislation and his horror at the constitutional implications o f the Judicial Committee’s opinions, Meighen in the course o f a few years became completely disillusioned with the one measure that survived the reference to the courts un­ scathed, the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement Act. He found that, as it was administered, it permitted debtors to evade obligations which many o f them were well able to discharge while their creditors, often people o f modest means who in good faith had invested in farm mortgages, were unable to collect. H e had agreed with Bennett at the time, he admitted in 1938, that the A ct “was necessary and could be worked out equitably. Frankly I have seen, though, very little in the actual results to vindicate the faith I had. Many cases have come to m y notice o f fearful hardship on hard-working, thrifty people, who have had the earnings o f a lifetime cut down, though carefully and safely invested, incapable o f realization. . . . T he law which I

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

71

supported is just as wrong as it can be. It has contributed, along with other similar laws, to the disintegration o f debtor morale all through this Dominion. The disintegration o f debtor morale means the de­ cay o f society, the undermining o f civilization.”25 T he weakening o f “debtor morale” was but one aspect o f a general tendency which troubled Meighen deeply and made him in suc­ ceeding years increasingly averse to the whole concept o f remedial social legislation and the welfare state. Action to meet a crisis such as existed in the dark days o f the depression was one thing, though the action might not always have been wise; the idea that a new heaven and a new earth could be legislated into existence, that the state could or should be relied upon to provide social security for all, in good times and bad, was quite another thing and it seemed to him the most pernicious o f illusions. As more and more people came under the grip o f that illusion and as the state assumed wider social responsibili­ ties, he became progressively less comfortable in the last twenty-five years o f his life with prevailing political and moral attitudes which he thought as dangerous as they were wrong. Old principles like the responsibility o f the individual and the old values o f thrift and toil and self-reliance appeared to be losing ground and the populace to be attracted by false prophets announcing false visions which, in his opinion, struck at the foundations o f democracy. The C.C.F. with its naïve faith in “ social planning” and its repudiation o f the profit motive, Social Credit with its irrational economics and evangelical emotionalism, were only the most obvious outward manifestations o f what Meighen regarded as an accelerating flight from reason and good sense and a degeneration o f the moral fibre o f society. T he increasingly conservative tone o f his letters and speeches in the later 1930’s was partly caused, no doubt, by the fact that Mackenzie K in g was triumphantly back in power with a larger majority than any Prime Minister had ever before possessed ; Meighen could hardly be happy about the way things were tending at such a time. But there was much more to it than that. He became convinced that the general drift o f democracy was towards self-destruction, that there was a movement o f public thought, and therefore o f acquiescent political action, towards some form o f authoritarian collectivism, that the totalitarian regimes o f that day were but extensions, horrible and frightening, o f many o f the slow, socializing trends discernible in the democratic portions o f the world. That there was a remedy

72

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

for this creeping collectivism he was sure, just as sure as he was that it would not be popular or acceptable to those political leaders who thought only o f winning elections. T he pessimism that overtook him during those years, which at its blackest could cause him to write that he thought “it exceedingly doubtful i f democracy can survive universal suffrage . . . for any great length o f time,”28 came from the realization that his philosophy o f life and politics had be­ come, not untrue or irrelevant— those things it could never be— but somehow less convincing and even less intelligible than he had ever sensed it was before to the citizens upon whose wisdom the future o f democracy depended. It could, o f course, be made convincing and intelligible to them— he still believed that— but they could be wise only i f they were wisely and honestly led. Here was the focus o f the disease: the rotting away o f leadership. A t a farewell dinner for Bennett early in 1939 Meighen said: I believe in the British system o f democracy, and would submit to aimost anything before surrendering those liberties which we as Bri­ tish subjects enjoy, but if anyone tells me that fidelity to party and fidelity to country are always compatible, or that the wisdom o f mere numbers is the wisdom o f heaven, then I tell him that he loves ap­ plause far more than he loves truth. Loyalty to the ballot box is not necessarily loyalty to the nation; it is not even loyalty to the multitude. Democracy has failed and fallen in many lands, and political captains in Canada must have courage to lead rather than servility to follow, i f our institutions are going to survive. There must be something better than an ambition to be re-elected, or democracy will fall, even in this Dominion.27

That something better was an end to catering to a popular craving for security without individual effort; to the habit o f saying only and whatever it was thought the multitude wanted to hear; to the heedless derogation o f the glorious heritage o f individual liberty as something antique and not altogether pertinent to the social needs and circum­ stances o f the present. Meighen not only was aware how archaic his opinions seemed to many people, but almost made a virtue o f their unpopularity, as though to console him self with the knowledge that, though outnumbered and perhaps because he was outnumbered, he was right. And yet he never quite lost the faith that i f only leaders o f public opinion, especially in politics, would really lead and not content themselves to wait and see, i f only they would sail into the wind to

IS SU E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

73

reach the other shore instead o f running cravenly before it to find the nearest shelter, universal suffrage need not be destructive o f democ­ racy. Let the electorate be informed and enlightened, let it be told the truth however hard it m ight be, instead o f being softened with optimistic assurances and seductive promises, confused by calculated ambiguities or aroused by appeals to avarice and jealousy and animosi­ ties o f race and class. “ The appeal to the less fortunate to range them­ selves against the successful,” he wrote, “is the easiest way to secure political victory in almost any country, but particularly so in Canada. Other class appeals carry elements o f danger, but the first has been the major sin o f politicians for several decades. It is an easy way to gain power, but some day the price has to be paid, and Canada’s penalties do not seem to me far away.”28 The clearest expression o f his discontent and apprehension about the tendency o f democracy is found in a speech delivered in Toronto late in 1935. “W hither Are We D rifting?” he called it, drifting under a universal franchise.29 “ Because I make inquiry,” he remarked, “ it does not mean introduction o f a doctrine that we have to make a change. I do not believe change is possible; the Anglo-Saxon spirit is to cling to democracy in this its most extreme manifestation. There­ fore, we must make the best o f it; seek to inform it, but above all we must understand how seriously it is taking its duties and what we must guard against in the way o f perils, present and potential.” By way o f illustrating the looseness o f thought and the pandering to prejudice which he deplored Meighen selected two statements made not long before “by a man o f learning— a member indeed o f the ministerial profession,” that one per cent o f the population o f Canada owned eighty-five per cent o f the country’s wealth and that during the depression the dividends paid by companies had increased while wages had gone down. He had, he said, gone to the Dominion Bureau o f Statistics for the facts, and what were they? First o f all, farm prop­ erties unencumbered by debt comprised one-fifth o f the total national wealth. Secondly, debt-free urban property accounted for more than one-third o f the total wealth. In the third place, the mortgage indebt­ edness o f the country consisted largely o f money owing to other than very wealthy people; the great majority o f creditors were not predatory robber barons but ordinary folk who had invested their savings, either directly or through insurance, trust or mortgage com­ panies whose securities they held. Foreign investment in Canada,

74

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

furthermore, amounted to another twenty per cent o f the total wealth and that proportion, too, was not owned by the tiny plutocracy o f whose power the reverend agitator had complained. So, to go no further with arithmetic, said Meighen, there was in all about threequarters “ o f the wealth o f Canada in which the very wealthy have little or no part at all, for landlordism is a negligible factor in this Dominion. . . .” As for falling wages and rising dividends, he cited figures pro­ vided by the Bureau o f Statistics which showed that real wages were a fraction o f one per cent higher in 1933 than in 1930; whereas during that same period the total amount o f dividends paid out by Canadian companies fell by about thirty-six per cent. “This is the kind o f material,” Meighen declared, referring to the statements he was at­ tacking, “ which constitutes the loose and lazy demagogic utterances o f men w ho seek to attract to themselves the focussed rays o f public attention or who determine to pander to the masses because it is the masses w ho have votes and power.” There was one attitude which he thought was increasingly prev­ alent and which he particularly feared and abhorred: a decline in what he thought had formerly been a sacred regard for the validity and enforceability o f contracts. . . . I wonder whether public opinion is considering where such a state o f mind is going to lead this great organization known as the civilized world. Upon what does the fabric o f law and order rest, i f it does not rest upon the enforceability to the extent o f the contractor’s capa­ city o f all terms o f his contract? When you and I were young, we did not hear talk along the lines and on the level we hear today. We were brought up in an atmosphere where if a man failed to pay his debt, or if that proved impossible, failed to divide proportionately among all he owed, he was considered a fraud and an enemy o f society. He was considered an example to shun. Is he today? Can he be so considered again in our time? If there is not to be strict accountabil­ ity for contracts— in the absence, o f course, o f fraud or misrepresenta­ tion— isn’t there going to ensue a light and loose, a free and easy habit o f entering into contracts from this time on? Isn’t that care, caution and prudence which ordered society has heretofore sought to instil into people and which we have been seeking to teach our chil­ dren throughout our lives likely to go by the board ? Into what future are we about to drift if we lead people to think that agreements are made to be lived up to when they pay, and made to be repudiated when they do not? . . . For myself, I do not believe the thinking o f

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

75

today is nearly as careful or as well-informed or as thoroughly guided by moral principle as the thinking o f forty years ago. We frequendy read in the press :— “ Oh, people are beginning to think for themselves.” M y conclusion is quite the contrary. They are ceasing to think for themselves. A myriad o f diversions and preoccupations are stifling the processes o f real thought. Those who represent the public have to forge ahead o f their public in these matters. We have to get away from the idea that if some gilded and dishonest proposals show signs o f popularity, the only thing to do is to get behind and cheer. Believe me, democracy cannot long survive that standard o f service. I f we do not get away from such habit o f mind, we will deserve the con­ sequences, and those consequences will be such that there has been nothing in our past to which they can be compared. We can expect a veritable inundation o f chaos, if anything like general contempt for law and order overtakes us. Ulysses was thinking o f this when he said: . . . the bounded waters Should lift their bosoms higher than the shores A nd make a sop o f all this solid globe.

A t the beginning o f 1938 Bennett resigned from the leadership o f the Conservative party after ten eventful years in that position. Undoubtedly he knew that the debacle o f 1935 was widely blamed on him and especially on his domineering tendencies— his inability to delegate authority, his unwillingness to share the spotlight, his at­ tempt as Prime Minister to do too much himself, “his idea,” as one critic expressed it to Meighen, “that bombast and fury were the im­ portant essentials o f leadership and that in the last analysis he was all there was to the Party— that is, he and his brother-in-law.”30 But Bennett’s predecessor was not inclined to join in the chorus o f de­ preciation. “ . . . o f course, I know o f the infirmities to which you refer,” he replied. “We all have some o f them.”31 From his own ex­ perience Meighen knew that the leader o f a party was the most con­ venient and vulnerable scapegoat for its misfortunes and he thought that the strictures on Bennett were exaggerated and unfair, just as the criticism o f his own leadership had been years before. W hile he had never had entire confidence in the man’s judgment or un­ qualified admiration for his political manner and methods, he res­ pected his undoubted abilities and thought that he had shown as Prime Minister considerable courage and imagination in grappling with an extremely difficult situation.

76

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

However, the great question confronting the Conservative party at the moment was not whether Bennett had been a success or a failure, a great figure in the history o f the party and the country or a calamitous disaster, but rather who should succeed him and try to come to grips in his place with the problems besetting Canada, including Mackenzie K ing. Bennett’s first step in arranging for the choice o f his successor was to call a party conference early in March, which he went out o f his way to urge Meighen to attend. The latter had stayed entirely aloof from party gatherings since enter­ ing the Senate and, indeed, with the exception o f the 1927 conven­ tion, since his own resignation as leader. He had never attended a caucus since becoming a senator, taking “ the position that one with m y responsibility should not be active in any way in party poli­ tics. . . .”32 For the same reason he had refused to take part in the 1935 election campaign, to Bennett’s considerable chagrin. However, he yielded to the plea that he come to the meeting in March at which policy, organization and the desirability o f holding a convention would be considered. “As I said to you on the telephone the other day,” Bennett wrote, “ it is most important that we have the benefit o f your experience and advice in connection with all o f these matters, particularly with respect to the first.” 33 A t the meeting it was decided that there should be a national convention o f the party (now re-christened “National Conservative” in place o f “Liberal-Conservative” ) at Ottawa in the summer and with the announcement o f this the great game o f guessing who would be leader began in earnest. Inevitably Meighen’s name was mentioned in this connection and a number o f people, some o f them men whose views counted heavily with him, tried to persuade him that he should let his name stand. But the thought o f all that a re­ sumption o f the leadership would entail was most distasteful and he knew that many in the party would oppose his selection in any event. “ . . . I have a feeling o f positive aversion to further political responsibilities in Canada,” he wrote. “ The experiences which have brought about this aversion were not by any means wholly confined to years antecedent to my retirement in 1926. Since that time, the very fact that I had been and still was an easy subject o f publicity, exposed the private business I was conducting, and in which many thousands were interested, to the most callous and brutal attacks— attacks long continued after the absence o f even the flimsiest founda­

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

77

tion had been entirely swept away.” The aversion, he added, was “deep-seated, and, I fear, irremovable,” though not in any way caused “by a desire to make more m o n ey.. . . I have as much as I need, and sufficient to assist as far as is wise those for whom I have particular care.”34 W hile determined not to seek the leadership himself, Meighen had doubts about the capacities o f Manion, who seemed to have the inside track in the race to succeed Bennett, and also, probably, about the soundness o f Manion’s views on social and economic questions. H e was fond o f Manion personally and recognized that his amiable, friendly manner was a political asset. Also he saw the force o f the argument that it would be advantageous in Quebec to have a Roman Catholic leader with a French-Canadian wife. “ On the score o f loyalty, courage and long service,” Meighen admitted, “ he is the best entitled. A t the same time I have very serious question whether he can win [a general election], and have still graver question as to how he could handle the job after he did win. With all his ability, he lacks a certain deftness o f utterance— the capacity to formulate his pronouncements along definite and well-considered lines, to make them forcible and at the same time well fortified and defensible. This is very vital in a Leader.”35 Although dubious about Manion’s qualifications Meighen, as the opening date o f die convention approached, could think o f no one who would both be able to beat him in a contest and do a better job as leader. For a time he thought Sidney Smith, President o f the University o f Manitoba, was the man the party was looking for but that idea was discarded and it appeared certain that Manion would easily defeat the three other known aspirants, Earl Lawson, Joseph Harris and Denton Massey. However, just before the convention the situation was complicated by various new possibilities. Stevens, who had quarrelled with Bennett, resigned from the Cabinet in 1934 and left to form a new Reconstruction party, which met with no success in the 1935 election, announced his return to the Conservative fold. This was interpreted in some quarters as being preliminary to an attempt by him to secure the leadership and stimulated a drive to draft Meighen as a means o f heading off Stevens’ candidacy. But the Stevens bubble, such as it was, soon burst and Meighen denied to friends the report in a Montreal newspaper that he was w illing to accept a nomination under certain conditions.36 Additional uncertainty was caused when prairie

78

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

delegates arriving in Ottawa reported that there was a dark horse from the West in the person o f M. A . MacPherson o f Regina, former Attorney-General and Provincial Treasurer o f Saskatchewan, and it was learned also that considerable pressure was being put on Bennett to reconsider his decision to retire. Thus when proceedings started on July the fifth, with rumours flying thick and fast, Manion’s elec­ tion seemed less certain than formerly. Even though Stevens’ chances, assuming he was ambitious, were by that time dismissed as negligible and though Meighen had ruled out his own nomination, there was still some question about the intentions o f MacPherson and Bennett. The former declined to become an avowed contestant as long as there was any chance o f the latter reconsidering but i f Bennett stuck to his decision to retire and, along with Meighen, threw his influence behind MacPherson, the convention would see a real contest yet. Concerned as Meighen was with the leadership question and fearfill as he was that Manion would be inadequate, he was more pre­ occupied on the eve o f the convention with the substance o f the remarks he was scheduled to make at its opening session. There was no doubt this time, as there had been in 1927, that he would attend; he had been asked to be one o f the keynote speakers along with Sir Thomas White. But the day before the convention Bennett asked him to come over to his office and told him that he wanted him to address the gathering, not on domestic political issues as Meighen had intended, but on the subject o f the Canadian government’s refusal to allow Great Britain to conduct the training o f Royal A ir Force personnel in Canada. “I urged Mr. Bennett that as he would be m aking the principal speech he should cover this subject. We both agreed that it was the outstanding question just then. However, he felt otherwise as to who should make the speech, and I yielded to his request.” 37 Therefore the remarks Meighen had prepared in his mind had to be discarded and new ones improvised. The subject o f the training o f British airmen in Canada had arisen in Parliament about three weeks earlier when Meighen asked in the Senate whether there had been any request by Great Britain for per­ mission to establish bases in this country. The following day Dandurand, having asked for time to get the information, answered that there had been no request. Meighen then inquired whether Dandurand would say that “ there has been no inquiry o f the Canadian Government as to what its attitude would be with respect to the

IS S U E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

79

subject-matter?” To this there was no answer.38 A few days after­ wards Meighen raised the matter again, asking whether there had been any conversations on the topic and the following afternoon Dandurand replied: “ Some informal conversations have taken place with persons who did not indicate they had been authorized or in­ structed by the British Government to make any proposals.” Had these conversations, Meighen wanted to know, been with Canadians or British citizens? “W hat I am getting at is this. Informal con­ versations may be just as important as i f all the formalities in the world were attached. It depends on whom they were with.” Would Dandurand, he asked, “say whether the informal conversations were not with a person who might reasonably have been expected to be feeling out the position o f the Government on behalf o f the Govern­ ment o f Britain.” Dandurand refused to state the fact that the dis­ cussions had been with Sir Francis Floud, British H igh Commissioner to Canada, and added: “It would strike me as extraordinary that in­ formal conversations should produce rumours which would reach this Chamber or the other and form the basis for a query as to the action o f the Government on such conversations.” “ I do not,” Meighen retorted, “see anything extraordinary about that.” 39 W hat did strike him as extraordinary was that the possibility o f Britain’s training her own airmen at her own expense in a part o f the Commonwealth possessing the wide extent o f sparsely inhabited territory lacking in the British Isles should be cavalierly dismissed, as he strongly sus­ pected it had been. On July the first, the day Parliament was prorogued, Bennett referred in the House o f Commons to Meighen’s queries in the Senate and Dandurand’s very evasive replies, whereupon Mackenzie K ing stated that as a result o f the conversations, which he described as not only informal but “ confidential” and “ exploratory,” “nothing has developed which it was felt warranted a statement o f policy.” He immediately went on, however, to say what the policy o f the Canadian government would be: any request in peacetime for the right to establish Royal A ir Force training stations in Canada would be turned down. “ . . . no country pretending to sovereign self control,” he declared, “ could permit such a state o f affairs or its implications and consequences.” In wartime, though, it m ight be necessary to grant bases to one’s allies. A country would perhaps be “forced to do so by the actual strategic or tactical necessities and for the purpose, but only

8o

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

for the purpose, o f the actual joint war.”40 K in g’s attitude, no doubt prompted, not only by purely constitutional considerations, but by his fear o f the political consequences in Quebec i f British forces were stationed in Canada and by his North American isolationist point o f view, became in time a grotesquely narrow and short-sighted one in the light o f subsequent events. In the summer o f 1938, however, few people, and certainly not K ing, foresaw the catastrophes lurking just ahead. It cannot be denied that in this respect Meighen was much more clear-sighted than his enemy, that he measured the dangers and re­ alities o f the world situation much more accurately. Thus, never having shared K in g’s obsession with the forms and trappings o f auto­ nomy or his apparent conviction that the chief task o f Canada’s states­ men was to keep her safe from the sinister intrigues and ambitions o f Dow ning Street, his view was not obscured by such sentiments and he dismissed K in g ’s argument as irrelevant. “ I would,” he told the convention, “be the last to consent to the surrender o f any o f those attributes o f nationhood which over our history we have reached, though I deplore and have often deplored the constant disposition o f some to be forever fighting over again the battle o f autonomy, which was won and conceded long decades ago.”41 He invited his audience to consider instead certain more pressing perils.I I ask all o f you present to look abroad, to look around and can­ vass in your hearts the situation which meets your eyes. Can anyone do so and sit with complacency at his fireside and think that from the single standpoint o f Canada no duty devolves upon us? Can anyone commune with his own thoughts and for a moment contemplate that there flashes in the sky no peril to this our home? A division o f international sentiment into two camps has taken place. In the main, those peoples o f the world who love the institu­ tions o f democracy are feeling as one, seeking to act as one, in recog­ nition o f a common heritage. A nd against these— one should not yet say against, but contrasted with these— are those who appear to have revived the worship o f the kingdom o f Might, that love even o f the horrors and devastations o f war which not so long ago broke forth and almost crushed out civilization, and which, with deep la­ mentations, we are now compelled to acknowledge as threatening us all again.. . . In that situation it is difficult indeed to convince ourselves that we have no concern. My first proposition is this: W hile acknowledging and sharing the conviction that our primary duty is the protection o f

IS SU E S OF T H E T H I R T I E S

8l

the security and happiness o f this Dominion, I address this simple question to the minds o f all those within my sight; is there such a thing as the separate and independent defence o f Canada? Is such an idea more than a fantasy and a delusion? Is it within the compass o f possibility or even within the contemplation o f common sense?

As Meighen, having answered these questions in the negative, proceeded to develop his theme that Great Britain was the first line o f Canada’s defence and that the security o f Canada could best be furthered by co-operating with Britain, indications o f disagreement and displeasure made themselves evident on the floor o f the conven­ tion, most noticeably among the delegates from Quebec. The Quebeck­ ers had cheered him lustily at Winnipeg in 1927; now they seemed to regard him with daggers drawn. A t one stage he paused momentarily to allow a murmur o f disapproval to subside and a voice cried out, “ G o on.” “ Certainly I will go on,” he answered. “ I have not finished. I am not accustomed to quit any task in the middle. . . . ” Continuing, he said that, instead o f having locked the gate and turned its back, the government o f Canada ought to have acceded readily to the wish o f Great Britain to establish bases in Canada “ at her own expense, and train in her own way, her own citizens for their defence and ou rs.. . . ” The Government and the people o f Canada should open their eyes “ to the truth that a building up o f our defence is a thousand times more important to us than punctilious constitutional technique. Let us live and work on the assumption that this partnership in the Bri­ tish Commonwealth is a partnership we desire to endure, a partner­ ship we aim to deserve, a partnership we are proud to own.” W hile, according to one newspaper report, it was generally con­ ceded among the delegates that Meighen, had he so desired, could have had the leadership after this speech,42 his remarks split the convention just as he had in 1927. There were some marked contrasts between the two occasions, o f course. A t W innipeg the Quebec delegation had backed him up more enthusiastically than any while Howard Ferguson had led the opposition. N ow at Ottawa Ferguson sat on the platform applauding Meighen’s words while the people from Quebec glowered and made angry noises. In the course o f the speech, one reporter wrote, “ the English-speaking delegates surged to their feet with wave upon wave o f thunderous applause” but “ the Quebec group rose up reluctantly and not a scattered dozen ap­ plauded.”43 There was talk o f defiance and rebellion by the French Canadians, threats that they would bolt the convention i f it endorsed

82

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

Meighen’s sentiments, and Georges Héon, Member o f Parliament for Argenteuil and one o f Manion’s leading backers, was quoted as saying that “ i f Senator Meighen makes another speech like that, we w ill take the first train home.”44 Those who wanted Manion as leader— and the core o f his strength was in Quebec— were said to view the speech as “mere window-dressing, designed to effect a greater split between the English-speaking and French-speaking delegates” and to make Manion’s bid for the leadership “harder-sledding.”45 The reaction o f the Quebeckers both surprised and distressed Meighen, who wrote to Bennett after the convention was over: There was a more or less general feeling about that we had put on this programme o f ours with a view to embarrassing this candidate or the other, or with a view to embarrassing the candidates in general. The senselessness o f such a thought should be apparent. I had not the slightest thing in my mind save to place before the Conservative Party and the Country, in a moderate but convincing way, the fun­ damentals o f what is really a great issue. I took, or at least thought I took, particular pains to say nothing to which any member o f the Conservative Party from Quebec or anywhere else could by any pos­ sibility take exception. In this I was disappointed. The response o f the mass o f the Quebec delegates was to me a discouraging and heart­ breaking experience. The older and more experienced men among them felt the same as we did, but the others did not.46

On the second day o f the convention, the day o f nominations for the leadership, Meighen was approached by two o f Bennett’s friends who told him that Bennett was w illing to accept a call to continue as leader. “They wished me to help him.”47 He was some­ what taken aback by this because it seemed so late to change one’s mind and because Murdoch MacPherson, who had refrained from declaring his own candidacy as long as possible until it appeared certain that Bennett was not available, was now known to be in the running. By this time Meighen was supporting him. I f Bennett were suddenly to enter the field considerable havoc would be wrought and MacPherson’s chances against Manion in all probability greatly reduced. Accordingly he told the two men who wanted him to help Bennett that he would talk to the latter but that as the deadline for nominations was only h alf an hour away it seemed to me too late . . . for reconsideration.. . . I did call Mr. Ben­ nett and on request went immediately to his room. There is no doubt in my mind that the two parties who approached me were right in

IS S U E S O F T H E T H I R T I E S

83

their analysis o f his change o f mind, though he did not in so many words say so. My own definite conviction then was, first, that a change at that time was unfair to other candidates; and, second, that it would be deemed to be unfair to other candidates by the Convention gener­ ally. By reason o f these considerations I very definitely feared that Mr. Bennett would be defeated. His defeat, if it did occur, would be not only humiliating to himself but would result in a serious cleavage to the Conservative Party. Therefore, my influence, whatever it amounted to, was against this change o f front on his part. He agreed.48

Meighen, whose opinion o f a public man was always much af­ fected by the prowess he displayed as a public speaker, thought that o f the five candidates whose names came before the convention MacPherson gave by far the best address, stirring and eloquent. He thought it was in marked contrast to Manion’s, which struck him as “far more directly and definitely constructed to insure his elevation to Leadership than to really serve the true interests o f Canada. . . .”49 Manion, however, was chosen on the second ballot, although MacPherson, with little in the way o f advance publicity and organization, finished a strong runner-up. With the leader chosen it but remained to draft the party’s programme and in view o f Meighen’s keynote speech particular interest centred on the resolution concerning de­ fence policy. It proved to be one o f those generalized statements into which one could read as much or as little as one liked: We believe that the defence o f Canada and the preservation o f our liberties can best be promoted by consultation and cooperation between all the members o f the British Commonwealth o f Nations.60

In reality this innocuous declaration was a victory for those who were against Meighen on the issue. The kind o f co-operation they had in mind was probably well exemplified in the announcement by the Government, on the very day Meighen spoke to the convention, that British airmen would be accepted for training by the Royal Canadian A ir Force, o f which they would temporarily become members, at its own establishments and under the laws and authority o f Canada. Fewer airmen by far would be trained by these means than under the plan which had been broached by Great Britain. But small matter, that. Canada’s independence would be preserved, her status honoured. There would be no rocking o f the political boat, either for the Gov­ ernment or the Opposition. Thus complacently, as though in a daze, Canada along with the rest o f the democratic world slid un­ know ingly down the slippery slope towards Armageddon.

CHAPTER

FOUR

TH E BA TTLE OF SO U TH YO R K leadership o f the Conservative party proved to be o f briefer duration than anyone had expected. It was not a happy period for him or the party. T he forces he led were divided and demoralized and he proved unable to unite and inspire them. The machinery o f the party, its organization, had fallen into disrepair under Bennett. As a onetime Liberal who had supported the Union Government in 1917 and then became a Conserv­ ative, Manion suffered from the suspicion still felt for persons o f that background in some Tory circles. His religion made him sus­ pect in the eyes o f the ultra-Protestant w ing o f the party, as did his efforts to cultivate the friendship o f Quebec, whose delegates had been instrumental in his victory at the convention. Almost immedi­ ately he came under attack from the more conservative element o f his following because o f his “radical” proclivities, his fondness for saying that reform was the only alternative to revolution, and Meighen was one o f many who had doubts about his judgment on this score. Commenting on what he had heard about a tour o f the western prov­ inces Manion had just made, Meighen wrote: “ He will be popular wherever he goes and could hardly come in contact with anyone without winning a friend. I do worry some about his stressing social legislation. I would much rather see a C.C.F. government come in, myself, than see the Conservative Party launched upon any unwise scheme o f so-called social reform. We have had so much o f this already that we are all but strangled, and the population generally is losing its morale. T he Conservative Party has a great tradition, a great record o f achievement, a reputation for practical progressiveness. These are the things it treasures and should conserve.”1 Instead o f understanding this, Meighen was afraid, Manion was too prone to say what he thought would be the popular thing on any issue, imitating the hideous example set by Mackenzie King.

R

obert m an io n ’ s

84

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

85

During 1939 the fact that Manion and Meighen were often pulling in opposite directions became increasingly obvious and more and more irritating to the former. There was even less consultation be­ tween the two men as to the course the party would follow in Parlia­ ment than there had been between Meighen and Bennett, and Manion was rebuffed in his only effort to secure a common front by the Con­ servatives in the two Houses. He would make a pronouncement in the Commons, or somewhere in the country, defining the party’s policy on railways, immigration, social welfare, trade, Imperial rela­ tions or defence, only to have Meighen say something in the Senate which, i f not openly contradictory, was at least at variance with his own views. Manion’s understandable resentment o f this found ex­ pression in a letter to Meighen which he drafted some time in 1939. Although it was apparently never sent, the act o f composing it may have afforded cathartic benefit; at any rate its terms reveal the com­ bination o f sorrow and anger in Manion’s heart. In view of the many years during which I was your loyal supporter, both in the House of Commons and on the election platform from coast to coast, I am venturing to write to you regarding a matter which has been causing me much concern in the last few months. . . . Many misunderstandings are occurring throughout the Dominion due to the fact that, on so many questions, I take one attitude and you take the opposite, either in the Senate or outside. . . . On practically all of these, your attitude has been almost diamet­ rically opposed to mine, and, indeed, to that o f the Party in the House of Commons. This, of course, is your right as a citizen o f Canada and as a Senator; but both in letters and in personal interviews my supporters are complaining of the embarrassing position in which they are being placed, because you, the Conservative Leader of the Senate, take a different view from that which I have expressed on many sub­ jects. I am even asked who is speaking for the Conservative Party. The ordinary man on the street does not understand that I have nothing to do with the appointment of the Conservative Leader of the Senate and that, of course, I have even less control over the view­ point expressed by him, remembering, however, that there used to be a good deal of cooperation between the Conservatives in the Senate and the Party in the House, a cooperation which, incidentally, goes on still between the Liberals in the Government and in the Senate. . . . This is all the more obnoxious to me in view of the many years during which I was fighting your batdes against reactionary elements,

k.

86

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

which now seem to find everything you say right and everything I say wrong. Please believe that this letter is not being written from a purely personal point o f view. I am thinking, as I must think, o f our Mem­ bers o f Parliament and o f our candidates. You are their former Leader to whom they accorded their loyal support. Thus you can realize what an impossible position they are placed in when, in endeavouring to express the policies which I, as the present Leader o f the Party, have enunciated, they are confronted by their opponents with statements of yours expressing entirely contrary opinions. With great respect, I venture to suggest that, although you are no longer the Leader o f the Conservative Party, you have a grave re­ sponsibility towards the members o f the Party who formerly honoured you with their leadership. When you, as Conservative Leader o f the Senate and formerly Leader o f the Party, express opinions diametrically opposed to those o f the Leader o f the Party, it cannot fail to add gready to the difficulties o f the supporters o f the Party throughout the country. However, the real reason for this letter is that I feel you at least owe me this— that, in some way, you make it known publicly that you are speaking for yourself independently o f the Conservadve Party and that you and I do not consult regarding political questions. That we do not consult is at least pardy due to the fact that, when I proposed it in December last, you pointed out to me that Mr. Bennett when Leader never made so much as a suggestion as to what course you should take and that you considered this the best course to take.2

“ Your sizing up o f Meighen and Bennett is 100% my own,” Manion told George Black, a veteran Conservative and former member o f Parliament for the Yukon, who had written: Meighen, as a debater, has, in my opinion, no equal in Canada perhaps not in the world— in English— but as a politician, an organ­ izer, a leader, he is hopeless, nor do I think he has the success o f the party greatly at heart. Bennett is clever, well informed, has a remarkable memory and, when his own financial interests are involved, [is] an able business man. He is disgustingly conceited and feels he outweighs all other Canadians in importance. He is contemptuous o f the intelligence and efforts o f others— in every respect a lone wolf. . . . Gratitude is not in the make up o f either o f those two gentlemen. They have no appreciation o f assistance and support.3

W hile Manion would have found it extremely difficult to overcome the problems facing him as leader even had no great world crisis

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

87

supervened, it was the coming o f war in 1939 that led directly to his downfall and unexpectedly catapulted Meighen back into the leader­ ship. For several years the latter in speech after speech had been warning o f the possibility o f war and, as the machinery o f collective security completely broke down, had watched with gloomy foreboding as possibility turned into likelihood and likelihood gave way to in­ evitability. His appreciation o f the world situation was more realistic than that o f most Canadians. He did not make Mackenzie K in g’s mistake o f dismissing Hitler condescendingly as “ a harmless and rather stupid peasant,”4 and he was not misled by Neville Chamber­ lain’s pathetically naïve assurance that the Munich Pact he negotiated with Hitler in 1938 meant “peace in our time.” “ I cannot dismiss from m y mind,” Meighen wrote, “ the most torturing misgivings as to European peace over the next ten years.”5 But at the same time he was not inclined to be critical o f Chamberlain and o f the Munich Pact, as some people were. People are disposed to forget that Mr. Chamberlain had to take into account not only the immature condition o f Britain’s defence, but the attitude o f Russia and the condition o f France. He had to take such a course as would make certain that Russia would be in at the beginning and not at her leisure, and he would require also as­ surance from France that a few months’ reverses would not land that country in the plight Russia was in after similar reverses in the last War. Bolshevism has penetrated France to no small degree. . . . . . . even i f I thought Mr. Chamberlain wrong, I would consider it impudent on the part o f a Canadian to offer criticism. Besides, I feel quite sure had I been in his place I would have tried to do much the same thing.

N or had he longer any patience with the lingering faith o f some Canadians in the League o f Nations, with the thought that as long as it existed all might be well. He knew that the League had failed, and he knew why. The talk about the League o f Nations in Canada is only irritating. So long as no nation is ready to go to war except in defence o f its vital interests, no conceivable League o f Nations can prevent war— and this even i f all the major nations who deserted or were never in go back into the fold. I do not believe there is any nation in the world today ready to go to war except in defence o f its own vital interests, near or not far away.6

88

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

Meighen’s “torturing misgivings” were proved to be justified sooner than he had expected when the German army invaded Poland on the first o f September, 1939. His long-standing fear that war would result from a lack o f nerve and realism, which he saw as the underlying weakness o f the democratic world including Canada, was superseded now that there was no escape by doubts about Mac­ kenzie K in g ’s fitness to give that vigorous, courageous leadership which the crisis would demand. Small as was his faith in K in g’s capacity to govern well in peacetime, he had a great deal less confi­ dence in the man’s qualifications as a wartime leader, believing that his isolationist outlook on the world as well as his ingrained pre­ ference for moving slowly and cautiously were not the qualities called for in this situation. W hat was needed, in Meighen’s opinion, was not a “broker o f ideas,” not a master o f compromise and procrastina­ tion, not someone who believed that “ to lead” and “ to follow” were synonymous verbs, but someone who could unite and inspire the country, organize its energies and direct its efforts in such a way that Canada’s war effort would exhibit the utmost in valour, in determination and in magnitude o f which her people were capable. Mackenzie K in g was not such a man and neither, Meighen feared, was Manion. However, when Parliament met in special session early in Septem­ ber to approve a declaration o f war against Germany he was disposed to withhold criticism o f the Government until it had a chance to show what it could and would do in this emergency. As he said in the Senate, the moment called for unity, not controversy. It must not be presumed, because I do not make issue o f certain subjects now, that I am not thinking something else might be done which is not being done. There are matters on which many o f us would act differently, but we must realize that a united front at the present time, and indeed throughout, i f it can be secured, may on balance be o f more importance than even the prevailing o f a better line o f conduct. Therefore, I defer controversy to the utmost and seek that my words shall have the effect only o f encouragement, o f assist­ ance, and o f rallying to our cause the devotion o f our people.7

For this reason he refused to put him self at the head o f an immedi­ ate campaign for compulsory military service. Even before the out­ break o f war K in g had promised, in a rare moment o f unequivocation, that no government headed by him would ever impose conscription

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

89

for service outside Canada. Manion had echoed this promise on be­ h alf o f him self and the Conservative party. Meighen believed that such promises were dangerous and dishonest and shared the disgust o f many Conservatives with Manion for having taken the same position on this matter as K ing. Nevertheless, he thought a move­ ment for conscription at the outset o f the war m ight do more harm than good. H e explained this opinion in a letter. It is difficult for one far from Ottawa to realize what is the situation here. The Government is mobilizing certain units, but refuses to state that they are for defence or war purposes outside Canada. They only say that these units will be the nucleus from which an Expedition­ ary Force may be drawn if the Government decides to have such force, and that if such Force is drawn from these units, it will be on a voluntary basis. . . . The consequence is no one as yet knows whether he is wasting his time or not by signing up. You know how I feel about the principle of military service— just the same as I feel about the principle o f any other obligations to the State:— they should be equitably imposed and compulsory. King and Lapointe last Session definitely pronounced against conscription if a war should come, and have repeated same this Session and announced that at no time would the Government advocate conscription. Dr. Manion has been equally firm in his pronouncements against conscrip­ tion. Under the circumstances which I will outline in a second, I have not found fault with the Government for not announcing a conscrip­ tion policy at the present time. The only way they could have done so would have been to take in Members from other Parties, form a strong National Government on the basis of conscription, and go to the country immediately for a mandate. I think such a mandate would be given, and that is the course I would have taken. The sit­ uation which has confronted Mr. King, however, is this:— He could not carry any French-Canadian support, and French Canada would be unrepresented in his Government. He probably fears something in the nature of civil war— at least he fears that our energies would be largely taken up in maintaining law and order in Canada. The Government, therefore, decided to seek to carry Quebec with them into the struggle, more or less letting the future take care of itself What I find fault with is the commitments as to the future. I do not think they were necessary, and I think them very dangerous. There is no doubt enlistment in Quebec is pretty satisfactory so fàr; I fancy almost as satisfactory as anywhere else. I f I had led a campaign here for conscription at the present time,

90

ARTHUR M EIG H EN

it is not impossible that the Government would have seized on the issue and found some means of getting out from under. I think it best that for a good while anyway, if not throughout, the Government of Canada this time be preponderantly Liberal. I think it very important to carry Lapointe, Cardin, Duplessis and others along with us in this struggle, and if we succeed in this now, they can be carried to the end with greater and greater national effort. If the Government were to go out, no matter by what route, who is there on our side who could command French-Canadian support and representation in the Government with any strength at all?8 It seemed to Meighen hardly likely that Manion, for all his wooing o f Quebec, would be able to do in that province what he him self had failed to accomplish in three general elections. Near the close o f the special war session o f Parliament K ing gave an assurance that there would be another regular session before a general election so that Parliament would have an opportunity to discuss the Government’s war plans and measures. True to his word, as the humble servant o f the Commons about to account to his masters, he caused the members to be summoned to meet on January the twenty-fifth, 1940. From near and far they converged on Ottawa, ready to take part in the Grand Inquest o f the nation, only to be told in the speech from the throne that Parliament would be immedi­ ately dissolved, as it was on the evening o f that same day. For this extraordinary action K in g professed to find justification in a resolution just passed by the legislature o f Ontario, and supported by both Liberals and Conservatives there, condemning as inadequate the war policies o f his government. This, he wrote in his diary, provided “just what is needed to place beyond question the wisdom o f an immediate election and the assurance o f a victory for the Government. W hat really has helped to take an enormous load off m y mind is that it justified an immediate appeal, avoiding thereby all the conten­ tion o f a session known to be immediately preceding an election.”9 O f course it was a fanciful notion that a hostile resolution by a pro­ vincial assembly entitled him to treat Parliament with such contempt; i f Parliament were to be dissolved every time the Dominion govern­ ment came under attack from a provincial capital, there would be a national election every year. But the action o f Mitchell Hepburn and George Drew, Conservative leader in Ontario, in combining against him in this way provided a useful pretext for going to the country at once, even at the cost o f going back on his own promise

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

91

that the existing Parliament would be given a chance to examine the conduct o f his government since the outbreak o f war. K in g complained that in the solitary sitting o f the House o f Commons before dissolution “Manion was particularly bitter and nasty. . . . H e could not have been much nastier.” 10 As though he had not a right to be! K ing, however, would have had much more cause to complain had he had to face the wrath o f Meighen over what the latter described as this “insolence and rudeness to the Parlia­ ment o f this Dominion,” this “ crude and shocking insult.” 11 A few days after the abortive session Meighen wrote: You know my opinion of the present Prime Minister and o f his Government. I don’t think he ever showed himself in such an awful light as when he dissolved Parliament a week ago. This was a scream­ ing outrage. King obtained from the representative of the Throne an order calling Parliament “for the despatch of business” as provided for under the B.N.A. Act. He had promised the previous Session to call another Session, and the conduct of the previous Session was un­ doubtedly affected by that promise. Right up until the meeting of Parliament, he had stated that the criticisms o f his Government would be there taken up and that that was the proper place to debate them and decide them. Subsequently, he puts into the mouth o f the same representative of the Throne a statement which in effect told the assembled Members, who had come anywhere from thirty to three thousand miles, that when he called them for the despatch of business he was only fooling them and that they were dissolved. He dares now to say that he com­ plied with his promise in “calling” Parliament. A more impudent pretension was never made by a decent man. By the time the election is held, he will have passed legislation by Order-in-Council for at least seven months— legislation which normally only a Parliament can pass. By his high-handed conduct he has pre­ vented Parliament giving a moment’s consideration to that legislation so passed by his own Council. By the same time he will have made contracts running into hundreds of millions. He denies anyone, no matter where he may be placed, the opportunity o f even seeing a single one of these contracts. In this condition he says he wants the people to support him. The effrontery of the whole thing shocks every sensi­ bility o f the normal man. What is going to happen? Frankly I do not know, but if Canada is worthy to be a nation, it will put King into the political dog-house for the rest o f his life.12

92

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

Shortly after the dissolution o f Parliament Meighen dictated a memorandum at the request o f Major-General D . M. Hogarth, a prominent Conservative business man o f Toronto, setting forth his views as to how K in g might be put in the “political dog-house” where he belonged. Hogarth forwarded this document to Manion, who, it advised, “ should say that as Leader o f the Conservative Party — the principal body opposing the Government— it is his duty to offer his leadership to all opposed to the Government throughout this campaign— to offer his leadership to every man and woman who feels that under Mr. K ing we have not performed our task as we should have performed it; to every man and woman who feels that Parliament cannot be sabotaged, and that the man who dares to do so is unfit to lead a democracy.” Manion took no exception to this suggestion that he should solicit support for a win-the-war National Government from all persons, regardless o f party affiliation, who distrusted the leadership o f Mackenzie K ing. Indeed he had already promised, i f successful in the election, to form a coalition ministry o f the best men available in all parties. But he balked at a further and truly remarkable step which Meighen proposed he should take. . . . it is my best judgment and my very sincere conviction that Dr. Manion would be extremely well advised to proclaim to the country that the elected representatives chosen on this broad and all-Canadian basis shall, after the election, have the utmost freedom, and it shall be their duty to select the man to be sent for to form a Government. The latter suggestion, I know, is very unusual, and ordinarily would not be justified. Indeed, this proposal by anyone would be suspect. In normal elections a party leader who made such a proposal would be considered to be abdicating or offering to abdicate functions which he had assumed, and party criticism would undoubtedly pursue him. . . . These times, however, are far from normal. These times afford the opportunity for just such a proposal, and it will be received as a badge o f bigness, if I may so express it, and as an act of self-abnega­ tion which everybody is looking for in times of war. One of the main purposes, and this purpose I think it will achieve, is to gain the support of very worthwhile sections who have been, and are still, hold­ ing back. Manion would undoubtedly be chosen by the elected members to head the Government, argued Meighen, so there was no question o f his being supplanted by someone else. W h y, that being so, he should

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

93

volunteer to abdicate was not made entirely clear. W hat it did make clear was Meighen’s doubt that Manion could command the con­ fidence o f the populace.13 In any event Manion gave the whole idea short shrift, setting forth cogently in a letter to Hogarth his reasons for rejecting what he called “ an extraordinary piece o f reasoning, coming as it does from a man with the acute brain that Arthur has.” First, it would be a sign of absolute lack of confidence in myself, on my own part. Second, I would be making promises throughout the election with the probability that after the election is over I would step aside and let somebody break the promises that I had made. Immediately they would state in Quebec, for example, that I took a stand against con­ scription but that as soon as the election is over either R. B. Bennett or Arthur Meighen, or someone else, is to come in and put conscrip­ tion into effect. Third: By what right, anyway, could I desert the Party that chose me in National Convention as its Leader without the consent o f the Party? The Party didn’t choose whoever might be my successor; it chose me. . . . In other words, I might well be accused of betraying not only the National Conservative Party but, worse, betraying the whole country by trying to lead a Party to victory and then handing it over to some­ one else who had taken no responsibility in the election and yet who would direct the course of the Government and abandon the promises that I had made. In fact I would be playing a sort of front man for some brilliant gentleman who is so incapable that he can’t lead the Party to victory, only to defeat.11 Fourth: Has such a proposal ever in the world been put up to a Leader in the past? Certainly it never has been in Canada that I have ever heard of, and I doubt if it has ever been put up to any Leader any place.15 N othing could have been more academic than this discussion o f whether or not Manion ought to offer to step aside in someone else’s favour after winning the election, nor could anything have been more unfounded than his high hopes and great expectations concerning the outcome o f the contest. In general his campaign was an ineffectual one and the general disinclination to change horses in the middle o f a rather turbulent stream told against him materially. His chief plank was the promise to form a National Government o f all the talents, but he was made to look rather ridiculous when K in g for the

94

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

Liberals and Woodsworth for the C.C.F. announced that neither they nor any o f their followers would join an administration headed by him. The support which he was supposed to be able to attract in Quebec failed to materialize— in fact die party won fewer votes there than in 1935— and the Conservatives were outpolled by the Liberals everywhere except the Yukon, winning only the same number o f seats, thirty-nine, as they had five years earlier. A fow weeks after the election Manion, who had been defeated in his own riding, resigned as leader and the Conservative caucus appointed R. B. Hanson to act as temporary House leader during the next session o f Parliament. Before accepting the position Hanson asked Meighen i f he would assume the leadership i f a seat were pro­ vided but Meighen said that he would not.16 Hanson knew as well as anyone that he him self was not the stuff o f which national leaders are made. Although long parliamentary experience and brief service in Bennett’s Cabinet had given him considerable knowledge o f national affairs, he had neither the mental toughness o f Meighen and Bennett nor the easy, outgoing affability o f Manion. He was a man competent to follow someone else loyally and with good effect; he neither deserved nor aspired to the permanent leadership o f the party. As he put it, “ . . . I do not believe that I have the mental and intellectual equipment to carry this party through as permanent Leader.”17 Meighen, though, was favourably impressed by his per­ formance in the first session after the election. “ . . . Hanson has done very well,” he told Bennett, who was now living in England. “ His position is difficult and he has not the bodyguard to which a Leader is entitled. Further he is not in the best o f health. His main asset is a certain surefootedness and discretion. Sometimes his resource­ fulness o f expression or rather his thoroughgoing carefulness o f ex­ pression is inadequate.”18 H e was, in other words, a little too timid and carefol to suit Meighen when it came to attacking the Govern­ ment, too reluctant to move on to strong ground and from there press the offensive home. H e had not grasped what Meighen once described as the “one great secret o f successful debate. W hen you have a man under your hammer never be tempted into doubtful ground and give him a chance to diverge. H ow often I witnessed men in the House who had a case, and who really had their opponents cornered doddle off into other ground and give the enemy a chance to change the subject and come out not too badly worsted.”19

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

95

W hen it proved impossible after Hanson’s first session as House leader to find a suitable replacement among the small parliamentary membership o f the party, and because it was at that time deemed in­ advisable to hold a national convention in the midst o f a war, Hanson reluctandy agreed to stay on as leader for another session. However, he was not content to continue indefinitely in a position for which he felt him self not wholly suited and in which he had little real authority to speak for the party. In an effort to resolve the problem o f leadership the caucus approved a resolution calling for a confer­ ence o f the executive o f the Dominion Conservative Association, the governing body o f the party, to be held in Ottawa early in N ov­ ember 1941. The summoning o f this conference, attended by mem­ bers o f Parliament, senators, defeated candidates and representatives o f local and provincial Conservative associations, put Meighen, much against his will, once more directly in the centre o f the party picture. H e had never been entirely out o f the picture, o f course, and since the outbreak o f war had become increasingly a focus o f public attention as he grew more and more critical o f Government policy in his speeches. His early disposition to withhold criticism disap­ peared upon K in g ’s outrageous dismissal o f Parliament at the begin­ ning o f 1940 and his measureless contempt for the Prime Minister found nourishment in all K in g’s deeds and utterances. Later in 1940 he wrote to Bennett, remarking that someone had said that the perora­ tion o f K in g’s recent three-hour speech on the address in the Com­ mons “ ( if the reading o f an essay is a speech)” had been good and must have been written by somebody else. Upon reading the perora­ tion the morning after its delivery, Meighen said, he had been “remind­ ed o f a sentence in Macaulay’s Essay on ‘Sadler’s L aw o f Population.’ Sadler had quoted four lines o f alleged poetry. It was, to be sure, pitifully punk. Macaulay’s comment was about as follows: ‘This quatrain I admit never having met with in my researches in litera­ ture whether ancient or modern, and, while folly conscious o f the fact that it is a charge that should not be lightly laid at the door o f any human being, I venture to assert that this is Mr. Sadler’s own.’ ”20 There were two aspects o f Government policy and procedure that Meighen found most repugnant. One was its treatment o f Parlia­ ment, its denial o f information and its preference for legislating by Order-in-Council. Neither Hanson in the House nor Meighen in the Senate was able to elicit much information about the conduct o f the

96

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

war, their requests being repeatedly rejected on the ground that it would not be in the public interest to answer their questions. Meighen was convinced that this was reducing Parliament to impotence, pre­ venting it from exercising a proper surveillance over the adminis­ tration. So was the Government’s habit o f making law by Orderin-Council rather than by statute, strange behaviour to witness in Mackenzie K ing, who had talked so much about the rights o f Parlia­ ment and the evils o f Order-in-Council autocracy after the last war. Shortly before Parliament assembled in the autumn o f 1941 Senator Dandurand wrote to Meighen, asking i f he had any suggestions as to what the Senate might do early in the session when there would be little business before it. Meighen answered: “ I . . . am quite at a loss to know what on earth we should do. The fact is I think it absurd to be calling Parliament at all, because nothing is submitted to Parlia­ ment o f any consequence whatever, and the whole institution has become a mummery. In fact, I do not intend to continue to waste time on it as I have been doing in the past.”21 The other feature o f policy to which he objected, because he believed it manifestly inadequate to serve the obvious need, was the method o f recruiting military manpower. The policy was voluntary enlistment for overseas service and conscription for home defence; one must either choose to join an army intended to fight or face conscription into an army intended not to fight. This non-combative force was established under the National Resources Mobilization A ct o f 1940. “ I do not,” said Meighen, attacking the measure in the Senate, “ . . . follow the logic o f a contention that compulsion is not necessary to get men to fight outside this country, but that we must apply com­ pulsion to get them to fight inside our own domain.”22 O f course, there would be no fighting inside Canada, “none, at least, until by defeat in decisive theatres the war has already been lost.” Therefore the whole thing was an elaborate sham, setting up a costly but needless and ineffectual force. “ . . . the restraints this Government feel themselves under— the ugly memories that plague them— bend and compress their war energies into the narrow, inconsistent terms o f this Bill. That narrowness and that inconsistency result from an attempt to fit the necessities o f the perilous present into the contortions o f the tragic past.” However, timid and insufficient as the Bill was, Meighen stated his agreement “ with its object, as far as it goes— a poor and miserable distance— and with the principle o f compulsion on which it rests. . . . ” It was, after all,

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

97

a beginning of compulsion, newly christened as mobilization. I will not stand in the way o f action, however fathered, however deformed, if only it is vigorous. Still more, I will help the Government in every manner within my power. And I have helped them. Can any hon. senator point to another in this Dominion who has laboured harder and longer than my humble self to rouse Canadians to some apprecia­ tion of the peril which has been coming upon us? Can anyone be named who started to warn of this calamity sooner, both in and out­ side this House, and continued to do so over a period, not of months, but of years ? The culmination has come. The more virile the means proposed for facing it, the more eager I shall be to support them. W hen the Conservative party conference was announced for Nov­ ember the seventh, 1941 there was immediately speculation that Meighen would be asked to take the leadership again. He described the situation and the apprehension it caused him in a letter to Ted: They are determined to name me leader and to come out for a total war, national Gov’t and conscription. I have worried over this— feeling for months that just such a situation would arise. Hanson I am sorry to say has failed. The job is too big. I really thought he would do better. Cannot go into a long review but I am in a terrible position. If I refuse under the desperate circumstances of this time I will un­ questionably lose the regard o f the party and in large degree of Cana­ dians, at least I fear that. I f I agree— well the consequences are so many and so awful I simply shrink from reciting them. Not unlikely at my age and taking things as hard as I do the turmoil and strain will— well, shorten my life. Truly dear son I have never felt so dis­ tressed as I do now.23 H oping to forestall any movement to draft him by having an avail­ able and suitable leader to propose to the conference, Meighen made an approach to Premier John Bracken o f Manitoba. As a LiberalProgressive, Bracken seemed at first glance an unlikely saviour o f the Conservative party. However, Meighen was persuaded that the party must strengthen itself in western Canada. He believed that Manion’s experience, added to his own and to Bennett’s in 1935, indicated that there was little prospect o f substantial gains in Quebec. He also thought that the C.C.F. would make large inroads in the urban dis­ tricts. If, as seemed to him likely, the Liberals were defeated after the war, the Conservative party would have to rely on the rural vote to a very great extent, and not least on that o f the three prairie prov-

98

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

inces, in order to be in a position to form the next government. Bracken’s hold on the farmers o f Manitoba was attested to by the fact that he had been Premier continuously since 1922. H e was recognized as one o f the leading spokesmen o f the West, was known to have no great admiration for Mackenzie K in g and to share the fear felt by Conservatives o f the kind o f radicalism represented by the C.C.F. With Bracken as its leader, Meighen became convinced, the party would be able to broaden the base o f its support as it must do to suc­ ceed. About ten years later he dictated an explanation and an account o f his overtures to Bracken. Some time before the [Conservative] Conference was to be held, being very apprehensive myself that I might get into a position where the Conference would call on me to take the Leadership, I looked around to see if this could not be avoided by procuring some thoroughly com­ petent man with advantages which I did not have, to be available for the post. The name of John Bracken was mentioned by those who knew him well. . . . I did not have the advantage of anything like an in­ timate acquaintance with Mr. Bracken. In truth, I had only seen him personally once before. I knew, however, that he had a wonderful record in Manitoba as Leader of a Farmers’ Government. . . . I knew he was not noted as a good speaker, but I could not but feel that any man with his experience must have developed powers of Parliamentary presentation which would stand him in good stead at Ottawa. As well, it was my firm conviction that there would be very considerable advantage, both to the Conservative Party and to the country, in hav­ ing a Leader who was so closely and prominently associated with Agri­ culture as was Mr. Bracken. To my mind at that time, as now, the appeal of the Conservative Party should be more and more directed toward Canadian farmers and primary producers generally. Their true and indeed obvious interests were in line with Conservative tra­ ditions and were definitely out of harmony with radical and socialistic thinking. After a great deal of reflection, and entirely on my own re­ sponsibility, I determined to go West and have a talk with Mr. Bracken. Frankly, what moved me most was a dread of being placed in a corner myself. Long years of absence from the House of Commons had extinguished any urge whatever for a return to that Chamber. I can hardly emphasize too strongly my utter dread of being called upon to take leadership again. I was then sixty-seven years of age; both my sons were in the army, and my job was emphatically to look after family affairs pending their return. Further, the result of the 1926 campaign

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

99

had not done much to strengthen my confidence in the judgment of the mass o f the voters in Canada. I wrote Mr. Bracken a personal letter telling him I wished to see him on an important matter and asking for a suggestion as to an early date that would be convenient for me to visit his office in Winnipeg. In his reply a suitable date was suggested and I was present at the Leg­ islative Buildings in the Manitoba Capital for my first conversation with the Premier o f that Province. Needless to say, Mr. Bracken was greatly surprised at the object of my mission. He did not, however, give my proposal an immediate rebuff. A t the same time he gave me no encouragement, or so little that it was far from inspiring. He em­ phasized what he felt was his incapacity for leadership in Dominion politics, principally because he was not a good public speaker and he felt on that account he would be a disappointment in the Federal arena. After an hour or two of very interesting conversation, during which my judgment o f the man as a man continuously improved, it was decided that the interview would be resumed the following day. T he next day the two men were joined by Stuart Garson, AttorneyGeneral o f Manitoba, who, Bracken explained, would be his suc­ cessor i f he were to leave provincial politics. It may be that the intervention of his Cabinet colleague was decided on by Mr. Bracken in order that he also would be able to come to a conclusion as to the bonafides of my proposal and its practicability in so far as the possibility o f my being able to persuade the Conservative Party to accept my recommendation of the man who should lead them. In the course o f our talks, Mr. Bracken questioned me as to the pro­ gressive outlook of the then Conservative Party. I assured him that there certainly was no reason for hesitation on his part on the ground of a lack of progressive spirit in our ranks. Whether he was convinced or not I could not, of course, be sure, but at all events there is no ques­ tion that I thoroughly persuaded the two Manitoba Ministers of my own complete sincerity on the subject of my mission to Winnipeg. We parted on the understanding that each of us would give further thought to the matter, discuss it with such others as we chose, but avoid publicity until Mr. Bracken could see the future more clearly and determine his own position. I then returned to Toronto.24 With Bracken’s position thus far from clear Meighen entrained for Ottawa a few days later to attend the party conference, knowing that strong pressure would be put on him to take over the leadership. Various newspapers were demanding that the conference draft him. The Vancouver Province, for example, declared a few days before the

100

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

meeting that the place for Meighen was in the Commons across from the Prime Minister. “ The Conservative party needs him there. Can­ ada needs him there. It is not going too far to say that the government needs him there, for his criticism would be penetrating, constructive and helpful and he would not only co-operate in carrying on the war but prod and stimulate the government into greater effort.” 25 The need o f the Government was seen in a different light, however, by its leader. The prospect o f being confronted by Meighen again was awful for K in g to have to contemplate, “ chiefly,” he wrote in his diary, “because my own health and strength is not what it was years ago. I am getting past the time when I can fight in public with a man o f Meighen’s type who is sarcastic, vitriolic and the meanest type o f politician. Even Bennett was better than Meighen as an op­ ponent. N ot quite so contemptuous.” 26 There was a larger con­ sideration in K in g ’s mind as well: Meighen’s return would be very bad for national unity. . . . it would be helping to break up our Dominion to have Meighen become leader o f any party or the controller o f its policies. With the situation what it is in Canada today, with not a single Conservative in the representation o f the Province o f Quebec in Parliament, nor, indeed, o f any party other than the Liberal party, there would be a solid province— a third o f Canada— en bloc against the rest o f the Dominion, i f the other parties tried to force the conscription issue at this time, and make Meighen leader in Dominion affairs. . . . Cer­ tainly, the Tory party is at a low ebb today, and deservedly so, with its arrogance, contemptible methods o f carrying on political warfare.27

There were about two hundred people in the Railway Committee room o f the House o f Commons when Meighen rose to address the party conference on November the seventh after an opening speech by Hanson. He began by attacking the Government for “obliterating the Parliament o f Canada.” The Commons, he declared, was now nothing but “ a sounding board for the political advertising o f this Government,” the Senate only “a sepulchre o f pictures and palms.” 28 H e then began to dwell on an even more congenial theme, that the country was “not doing what we ought to do in this war. We are not doing it in any sphere whatever.” Admittedly there had been a great strengthening o f Canada’s effort in the past year or so but it still could not compare with that o f other countries. This was because o f the slowness o f Canada’s start, which resulted from “ the inherent

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

10 1

reluctance to do anything on the part o f the Prime Minister” and “ our failure to recognize till too late that the problem o f defence was a problem o f this Empire and not a problem merely o f the Dominion o f Canada,— that this whole question o f defence, to be treated with any realism at all, had to be— I say, had to be— treated as an Empire problem all the time over all the years. . . .”29 N ow at last the Gov­ ernment, he said, seemed to realize the seriousness o f the war situation, judging by the speeches o f its members. They are telling us now to cut out politics while they do their work. We can’t forget that a great measure o f the peril we are in is due to their failure to cut out politics, to their determination to gain political advantage, in days gone by. I feel more strongly perhaps on this sub­ ject than most o f you, and I am not going to be personal even to the extent o f reminding you o f the reasons why I especially feel as I do. . . . Just review the speeches that have been heard across this Dominion and in this Parliament over these years, and ask yourselves who are those who told the truth, who are those who pointed out the only way.30

But all that was in the past. The requirement o f the moment was that the striking power o f Canada be fortified and to this duty the Conservative party should lend its energy and influence. “ I am not one o f those,” said Meighen, “ who thinks [sic] that we move towards that goal by sitting down as silent or even eulogistic subsidiaries o f the administration.”31 “I don’t believe a Party can justify its existence unless it is a great educative force throughout the nation . . . on the subject that dominates the nation. I f it doesn’t perform that service to this country, then w hy does it live at all ? T he function o f every Party is to lead. We can’t educate unless we lead. We must lead and lead courageously, even though at the end o f our journey, as far as we can see, it means that we remain still on the sidelines.”32 Almost immediately he had finished speaking, a difference o f opinion began to appear between those who wanted to make him leader and those who believed that the powers o f the conference extended only to the setting o f a time and place for a national con­ vention, which the letter to the various associations announcing the meeting had said would be its purpose. After some inconclusive de­ bate about what the conference had been called for and the procedure it should follow, a large committee was appointed, representing each o f the provinces, the parliamentary membership and the Young

10 2

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

Conservatives, to consider and report on three resolutions which had been brought forward. T he committee, having deliberated lengthily and at times heatedly, reported back late that night. It had rejected, thirty-four to seventeen, the first resolution, “That a Convention o f the Party be held.” It had also turned down, forty-three to eight, a motion that in the event o f Hanson’s retirement the senators and members o f Parliament should choose a new House leader to serve pending a convention to be held after the war. The third resolution, approved by a vote o f thirty-seven to thirteen, read: “ That it is the opinion o f this meeting that the Right Honourable Arthur Meighen be asked to be our Leader.”33 The following morning, a motion that the report o f the committee be adopted having been moved, Meighen was asked to state his position. It was fifteen years, he remarked, since he had retired as leader in 1926. “Fifteen years alter completely one’s orientation to life. . . . Public life had many attractions for me in my younger days. I was keen for achievement and while there were many things about it, particulary under universal suffrage, which I really did not very well like, that feeling increasing with the days. . . , I enjoyed the work and when I left it my eyes were on the future and not on the past.” But now, now that he had reached this moment o f decision, he shrank from a resumption o f the work. “ I can,” he said, “hardly overstate how one is filled with that dread sense o f responsibility in venturing at the age o f 67 on an uphill fight in the bleakest hour o f the world’s history, giving over his remaining years, unless he fails, to turmoil and g rie f— I am no different from the rest o f you in that regard— but I did realise this: that it was not impossible. A situation would so develop that a refusal on my part would not only mean the evasion o f a war duty but would mean the inevitable and just punishment for such evasion,— the loss o f that regard and goodwill o f m y fellow Canadians which is all I care about.” H e then turned to a review o f the committee’s report, and to the fact that thirteen members o f the committee had opposed the motion that he be asked to take the leadership. N o man in ordinary circumstances— or any circumstances— has a right to expect unanimity from a great assembly. I think I would have been going too far if I had decided to act on unanimous appeal alone, no matter how reluctant or averse I might have been. 13 is a considerable number and I am not assuming for a minute

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

IO3

that one of those 13 is particularly opposed to myself— in fact, I know some o f them whom [sic] I couldn’t believe are. I believe they took the ground that, notwithstanding the decision, their aversion to action now instead of a Convention some time later was such that they felt they couldn’t support the Motion. Many of these men— may I say, to be very intimate, two or three of them particularly— are men for whom I have a regard exceeded by my regard for none in this Dominion. Their judgment I always trusted and I trust today. The friendship I have always felt for them I feel this very moment, just the same as ever; but I know they are men who realise the present situation. I know they aren’t just dreamers or lovers of mere debate; and I know it wouldn’t have taken them long to scale the hurdle in front if they in their hearts really felt that I should take the helm at this time. May I repeat: Those are men whose opinions count with me and they count very heavily, and I can’t misinterpret the honest thoughts in their hearts. I know them. That discloses a situation that doesn’t hinge on the question of unanimity at all. Those 13 men doubtless represent many throughout the country and among them doubtless are men without whose ardent support, without any reservation in the world in their hearts and their minds, I wouldn’t dream of accepting this terrible responsibility. I therefore shall not. After promising that whoever might be chosen would have his com­ plete support, i f someone were, he said in conclusion: “ The regard and respect o f one’s fellow men, one’s contemporaries in all classes, has never been with me— and I don’t think is, in essence,— just a means to an end; it is an end itself.”34 This outright refusal cast a pall over the assembly. Asked i f he would reconsider were the invitation made unanimous, a question that missed the point o f his remarks, he simply replied that he did not want to be pressed further and that the reasons he had given would apply for all time. Then as he was about to leave the room J. M. Macdonnell o f Toronto, one o f the thirteen, rose to speak and asked him to stay a few moments to listen but Meighen continued on his way with­ out a further word, believing that the leadership question, as far as it affected him personally, was closed. He had also come to the con­ clusion that there was no chance o f convincing a majority o f those present that Bracken should be drafted, having received little encour­ agement from the various individuals with whom he had discussed this idea. Accordingly he telephoned Bracken in W innipeg to let him know how matters stood. “ I felt,” Meighen later recalled, “ that

IO4

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

he received the news with a sense o f relief, and [he] told me on no account to permit his name to be proposed.”35 After Meighen’s departure from the conference room a lengthy debate ensued between the group which favoured holding a conven­ tion and those who wanted to settle the leadership question at once. Some o f the spokesmen for the former, most notably Macdonnell and M. A . MacPherson, emphasized their own admiration for Meighen and their willingness to follow him again as leader. They argued, however, that it would be undemocratic and therefore damaging to the party in the country i f this meeting, summoned for an entirely different purpose, should elect anyone at all to the leadership. It was pointed out that many persons entitled to be present had stayed home in the belief that nothing would be settled except the time and place for a convention. They had a right to be heard from before anything more was done. It would be charged by the other parties that the lead­ er, whoever he might be, was merely the choice o f a faction, that he had been imposed upon the party which would thus suffer in the public estimation. The opposing view, held by such men as C. H. Cahan, Earl Lawson and J. A . Clark, was that this representative gathering o f Conservatives from every province would be ridiculed as utterly pusillanimous by the public and the press i f it did no more than ar­ range for the holding o f a convention. It would appear that its only concern was the fortunes o f the party and that it lacked the courage to act. W hat both the party and the country needed, they argued, was someone o f authority to take charge in the House o f Commons and goad the Government into greater efforts in the war. This was more important than the niceties o f democratic procedure. As this protracted discussion went on it became clear that a very substantial majority was still determined to have Meighen, despite his refusal, and some who had earlier supported the convention proposal changed their minds and spoke in favour o f trying to persuade him to reconsider. W hen the motion that he be asked to become leader was put to the foil meeting it carried with only four dissenters, al­ though there were a good many abstentions. A subsequent motion that the request be made unanimous was also passed and, at Hanson’s suggestion, a special committee was appointed, consisting o f Senator A . D. McRae, Dr. Herbert Bruce and J. R. MacNicol, President o f the Dominion Conservative Association, to go to Toronto and inform Meighen o f the decision o f the conference.

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

105

After leaving the meeting that morning and making his call to Bracken, Meighen received reports o f the effort being made to over­ come the opposition so that he could be presented with a unanimous request. Attem pting to nip this movement in the bud and to steer the conference to some other conclusion, he sent in word through various friends that he would not accept even a unanimous motion. He then left Parliament H ill and stayed away even from his room in the Chateau Laurier, hoping that he would be able to get on the four o’clock train to Toronto without being sought out. However, when he got to the railway station a dozen men were waiting for him with the news o f what the conference had finally decided. He told them he had not changed his mind, that he was “ exceedingly embarrassed” by the refusal o f those at the meeting to heed his desires and that he would have nothing further to say for some days.36 The next few days brought him nothing but mental anguish. The Conservative press demanded insistently that he accept the call and his telephone “was steadily busy throughout those days and a good part o f the nights with all manner o f importunities urging me to take on the task.” 37 T he influence o f close personal friends like H ugh Clark and Stanley McLean was added to the pressure and even Mrs. Meighen, who had been strongly averse to his re-entering public life in a position o f fiill-time leadership, became convinced that he had no choice but to accept. A t last and with profound reluctance Meigh­ en reached the same conclusion himself. “ N o one,” he wrote later on, “could be more convinced than I was that, in the stressful times we were in, a virile but fairly-conducted Opposition was o f immense importance to the country. It was also glaringly manifest that with the delegates on their way home to the ends o f the Dominion a blank refusal to act would be looked upon as infidelity to Party affiliations and especially to friends, and further, as evidence o f a selfish attach­ ment to m y own business interests at a time when the country was at war.”38 But there was another and very personal consideration which finally determined his decision, “ a more or less selfish desire to main­ tain the respect” o f his two sons in the army, as he described it to R. B. Bennett.39 To Ted he wrote: This task is the end o f peace for me but what the conference did was to refuse to accept my repeated refusals and leave the baby on my door­ step and go home. They just thought I could not then decline to take it and they were right. I know i f I had done so you & Max would

L

io 6

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

not find fault with me now and indeed would feel that I had ample justification to refuse; but keeping in mind the march o f dread events and their effect on us all, I did think that you might have an ar­ rière pensée that I had not shown courage when up against a war de­ mand. . . . But oh! what miseries what disappointments what turmoil what angry scenes are ahead! I don’t like them now as I once did.40 Bennett received an expression o f this same foreboding: “ I f only the expectations o f tens o f thousands o f people could be reduced by about ninety per cent, I might not have to endure the disappointments that certainly are ahead.” 41 In still another letter Meighen said: “Previously when men professed they did not want public preferment, I had a reservation o f doubt as to their sincerity; now I know that quite often m y doubt was unjustified.”42 His decision made, for good or ill, he prepared a memorandum in the form o f a letter to the three committeemen, Bruce, McRae and MacNicol, announcing his acceptance o f the leadership and the policy he would pursue. T he policy consisted o f the two ingredients that had been combined in 1917— coalition and conscription. Previously in advocating formation o f a coalition government, Meighen had not thought o f him self as one o f its prospective members. “W hat I would like,” he explained in the spring o f 1941, “ is a Govt from every party and from no party, just able men with me out. A m afraid I could never serve with K ing. It would be intolerable.”43 N ow that he had been drafted into the leadership, however, he would undoubtedly be a key figure in any coalition administration. The idea o f serving with K in g was no less distasteful than before but the possibility existed, or so it seemed to many Conservatives, that a union might be forged between them and the conscriptionist Liberals from which K in g would be excluded and that this combination would be strong enough to form the Government. As events were to prove, the attempt to bring about this clear realignment o f forces resembling the one in 1917 was based on a very unrealistic appraisal o f the situation. For one thing there was not as yet the strong public clamour for conscription that there had been in 1917. Canadian troops had yet to see action; there were no long army casualty lists in the news­ papers, nor had the dreaded telegrams begun to arrive in large num­ bers at the households o f the bereaved. There was, in short, no genuine reinforcement crisis o f the sort that had bedevilled Borden and his colleagues midway through the last war. Thus the argu-

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

I °7

ment for compulsion could not rest at the end o f 1941 on an obvious and pressing need. It m ight rest on a conception o f justice and equal­ ity or on prophecies o f the horrible shape o f things to come but there was no theatre o f war on land where Canadian lives were being lost or seemed likely to be lost on a large scale in the immediate future. This encouraged a certain complacency, as did the widespread belief that mass armies were outmoded in modern mechanized warfare and the frequently expressed belief that, in any case, Canada’s major contributions should lie in the training o f Commonwealth airmen, the guarding o f convoys on the high seas and the manufacture o f munitions and supplies. Furthermore, it was one thing for the leader o f the Government to seek union with sympathetic elements in the Opposition, as Borden had done, and a very different thing for one o f the opposition parties to seek to divide and destroy a government as solidly entrenched as was Mackenzie K in g’s in the early 1940’s. Therefore, in working for the same kind o f conscriptionist alliance as had taken shape in 1917, Meighen faced much greater obstacles than the very considerable ones that had confronted Borden twentyfive years earlier. N ow that he was leader again the first requirement for Meighen was a seat in the House o f Commons. From the Senate he could not effectively direct his own party, subject the Government to close questioning and criticism, or seek to exploit the difference over man­ power policy among the Liberals. He accepted the offer o f Lieuten­ ant-Colonel Allan Cockeram to vacate his seat as member for South York and resigned from the Senate in order to contest the riding in a by-election. The by-election was set for February the ninth, 1942, along with three others, two o f which were being contested by new ministers o f the Crown, Louis St. Laurent and Humphrey Mitchell. Cockeram had won South York in 1940 by a margin o f about 2,500 votes over his nearest rival, a Liberal. J. W. Noseworthy o f the C.C.E had run a distant third, though winning more votes than any other C.C.E candidate in Ontario. In the by-election Noseworthy, a Tor­ onto high-school teacher, was again the C.C.E nominee but the Liberals announced that they would not enter the race, ostensibly in order to facilitate Meighen’s return to the Commons. M eighen’s intention was to ignore Noseworthy and the C.C.F. as much as possible in the campaign and to concentrate his attention on the Government’s war policies, especially its refusal to introduce

io8

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

compulsory selective military service. But the campaign did not as­ sume quite the shape he wanted it to. The demand o f the Conserv­ atives for conscription, which was not popular with all that party’s supporters by any means, was countered in the announcement in the speech from the throne when Parliament was opened on January the twenty-second that a plebiscite would be held to ascertain whether the public desired to release the Government from its pledge not to resort to compulsion in the raising o f troops for service overseas. Although conscription was not certain to follow i f the release were granted (K in g told the House that his policy was “not necessarily conscription but conscription i f necessary” ), the decision to consult the people in this way suggested that the Government was contemplating a new policy. This undoubtedly took some wind out o f the conscriptionist sails being hoisted by Meighen and his followers. Was it reasonable, many voters in South York may have asked themselves, to condemn a Government that was w illing to consult the people in this demo­ cratic fashion? Also, by the end o f 1941 both the Soviet Union and the United States had entered the war ; the British Commonwealth no longer faced the Axis powers virtually alone. In so titanic a struggle with forces o f such immensity already engaged on the side o f the Allies, or soon to be, it was not easy to convince the Canadian public that the outcome would be materially affected by the numbers o f men Canada m ight send abroad. It was especially difficult to do so at a time when the Canadian forces already raised, apart from two bat­ talions engaged in the brief and tragically futile defence o f Hong Kong, had still to undergo their baptism o f fire. Even the fall o f H ong K ong and the heavy losses suffered by those two partly trained and ill-equipped battalions, even the series o f calamitous reverses suffered by Allied arms in the Far East following Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, did not cause any profound unsettlement in Canada. The Far East still seemed far away and so, for that matter, did Europe. Thus from the outset o f the campaign in South York Meighen was faced with a certain stolid indifference regarding manpower policy and an exasperating complacency regarding Canada’s whole part in the war up to that time. This complacency was partly justi­ fied by the facts as they then were but was rendered stronger and more general than circumstances warranted by the skilful spreading o f publicity favourable to the Government through the mass media o f communication. A ll, one would gather from the endless stream o f

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

IO9

handouts issuing from the Government’s information machine, was well with Canada, this bastion o f democracy. Complacency, how­ ever, and the difficulty o f putting the Government on the defensive was not Meighen’s only problem in South York. Almost immediately he found him self on the defensive against a relentless personal attack from Noseworthy and his friends. Impugning his motives, casting doubt on his patriotism, drumming up class hatred and suspicion, they pictured him as the front man for a group o f predatory capitalists, the representatives o f “ the reactionary Old G ang in Canada— die aged Senators and the profit-seeking wolves o f Big Business,” as one o f Noseworthy’s advertisements expressed it.44 The C.C.F., Noseworthy explained, wanted a really total war effort with conscription o f wealdi as well as o f manpower for every pro­ ductive purpose, instead o f merely for overseas military service. “ . . . let us conscript everything that is needed to win,” he said, “without fear or favour. Let us not stop short at the conscription o f men for overseas service.” In addition to soldiers “ the owners o f factories and the holders o f great wealth” must be conscripted. But that kind o f all-out effort, he charged, was the very thing that Meighen and his backers did not want. The fact was that Meighen had been “resur­ rected” by “ the Conservative old guard” and was simply “ the spokes­ man and champion o f those in Canada . . . who still want to run the war on the lines o f business as usual.” This “ small but powerful” group had engineered Meighen’s return to the leadership and wanted to slip him into the House o f Commons “by a back door, without even an election.” His and their talk about military conscription was just “a smokescreen to obscure the vital necessity o f the moment— more and more war production and the planned conscription o f industry.” A n d certainly they could be counted on to resist with their utmost effort the fulfilment o f that great “ social revolution” o f which the war was a part, o f “ the vision o f a new day that must dawn when this war is ended.”45 As this line o f attack on Meighen was developed he was made to seem more a monster than a man. He was depicted as the implac­ able enemy o f the working class and a bitter last-ditch defender o f the status quo. Far from being a patriotic citizen seeking to serve the state and to unite its people in a common resolve, he was, according to this propaganda, just the minion o f the Bay Street oligarchs, fight­ ing for vested interests and narrow privilege, for the perpetuation

IIO

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

o f an unjust and inefficient capitalism under which the many were exploited by the few. And all his past career was dredged up to show what a dangerous, despotically minded menace he was to his country. The bitterness o f this feeling was exemplified in a statement attri­ buted to M. J. Coldwell, House leader o f the C.C.F., who was quoted as saying: “I would just as soon live under Hitler as under that man.”48 The “evidence” out o f which this picture o f Meighen was fabri­ cated was diverse, i f less than conclusive. In part it consisted o f an interpretation o f his past which showed less fidelity to fact than to folklore, in part o f passages quoted out o f context from two o f his recent speeches, in part o f gossip about the alleged cabal which had resurrected him and made him leader o f the party once again. The gossip began to circulate immediately after the Ottawa conference, just as some o f those who had favoured calling a convention, instead o f choosing a leader then, had warned it would. One source o f the story that Meighen’s selection had been arranged in advance by a small clique o f powerful business men was the Financial Post o f Tor­ onto, a non-partisan business paper which had never been particularly friendly to Meighen or to the Conservative party. In a front-page editorial two weeks after die conference the Post remarked: “ Re­ putedly the Meighen ‘draft’ was engineered and executed by a well organized group who in the past have been notoriously more selfish than statesmanlike.” It then quoted from a dispatch by the Ottawa correspondent o f the Toronto Telegram-. In the background, although not in Ottawa, is understood to have been General D . M. Hogarth, wealthy mining magnate, who is credited with holding the view that it was necessary to place Mr. Meighen in the House, where he could spur on the war effort.

“ It is now clearly up to Mr. Meighen,” the Post continued, “ to demon­ strate that he can rise above the rather sinister implications o f his ‘machine’ support.”47 This called forth letters from Herbert Bruce and from Meighen. “ It may be discreet, but it is far from courageous, to introduce a state­ ment o f this kind with the word ‘reputedly,’ ” wrote Bruce, denying that Meighen’s return to the leadership had been engineered by any­ body. “There was not the least organization o f any kind behind the movement for Mr. Meighen. In fact very few on arriving at Ottawa felt that there was any real hope o f his accepting.. . . The movement was spontaneous.” To this the Post simply rejoined that “ there was

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

III

a very general belief that General D . M. Hogarth and his group had engineered the selection o f Mr. Mei ghen. . . The latter, after thank­ ing the Post for some kind things it had said about him, made the obvious point in his letter: “ I am not clear how it can be that the fact that a M ining man, whoever he may be, is credited with holding the view that I am necessary in the House to spur on [the] war effort can carry with it sinister implications.” O n this the Post rather lamely commented: “ In such circumstances as the election o f a leader, any reputed background influence on the part o f individuals or groups, mining or any other interests, can quite possibly be construed by the public as having ‘rather sinister implications.’ ”48 But had this “ background influence,” whether Hogarthian or not, made its sinister self felt decisively at the Ottawa meeting? In answer to Bruce’s denial that it had there came a letter to the Finan­ cial Post from R. C. Smith o f Calgary, who had also been at the meeting. Declared Smith: It was the most brazenly organized effort to put the delegates to the Executive Committee in a false and embarrassing position I have ever seen. On my arrival in Toronto a week before the convention [ffc] was held, the politicians were all agog over the movement. En­ gineered? O f course it was! If Dr. Bruce did not know the move­ ment was on foot, then he was not only blind but deaf to the machina­ tion o f a Toronto clique. He further states that the movement was spontaneous. H ow ridiculous! It was cut and dried before the meet­ ing was held in Ottawa. Western delegates to the Executive Meeting voted against the holein-corner organized movement. There was nothing personal in this opposition. The disgust and contempt was for the manner in which the movement was organized, which turned an executive meeting into a convention. The opposition was on the method, not against Mr. Meighen.49

Unfortunately Smith did not explain how this “Toronto clique” was able to dragoon upwards o f two hundred mature persons from across Canada into submission to its will, nor did he venture to identify its members. His letter, however, was taken as conclusive proof by those w ho wanted to that the selfish interests mentioned darkly by the Post had in effect settled the leadership question beforehand and that the meeting in Ottawa had been nothing but an elaborate farce. The W innipeg Free Press, for example, reproducing the letter in its entirety in a long double-column editorial, said flatly that “ this com­

112

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

bination o f representatives o f very special interests” had, “ by a welldelivered imitation o f the blitzkrieg, captured the Conservative con­ vention in Ottawa and imposed Mr. Meighen upon it as leader.” N ow , “ flushed with their success,” they were bent on “jim m ying a way into the Dominion Government” for Meighen and other Conserva­ tives. “Then they would have friends at court who would have sen­ sible ideas about such questions as excess profits tax, undue control o f private business, too great deference to organized labor and other matters upon which they regard it as their traditional right to dictate policy.” Meighen’s election in South York, the editorial concluded, would cause a disastrously divisive disturbance in the country.50 A few days after reading the Free Press's outburst, which did not surprise him since long experience had taught him to expect the worst from that paper whenever his own political future was at stake, Meigh­ en wrote the following letter to Colonel J. B. Maclean, founder and proprietor o f the Financial Post : I feel justified in writing you this letter because o f the conversation I had with you, about November 9th last, immediately after the Ottawa Conference. I had done everything which I thought a man could honourably do to avoid being put in the position in which I was ultimately placed. I had told the Conference that I would not accept the Leadership, and when asked just before leaving i f I would do so in the event o f the request being made unanimous, I answered that the same response which I had then given would still obtain and would prevail. I sub­ sequently informed three successive members o f the Conference, who came to see me, that I would absolutely not accept, even were it made unanimous. The meeting, however, continued, and . . . a unanimous Resolution was passed, urging upon me to accept the Leadership, and thereupon the Conference dissolved. . . . I was advised o f this action just as I was boarding the train for Toronto. Under these circumstances the pressure commenced, and I can defi­ nitely say that no one was more urgent than yourself. I am not ques­ tioning at all the sincerity o f the stand you took. From all over Can­ ada messages poured in, in hundreds. With the Conference dissolved you can realize at once the position I would have been put in had I declined. Under the circumstances, I yielded, but never did I under­ take anything for which I have to summon my energies more vigor­ ously and constantly. I may add here that prior to the Conference no pressure was brought on me at all by any group o f rich people in

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

ÏÏ3

Toronto, or by any group o f any kind, except some Members o f the House o f Commons. Indeed, I cannot recall a single one who could be described as in the wealthy class as even requesting me, prior to the meeting, to take on the responsibility. . . . In the light o f the events above recited, you can imagine my sur­ prise when the Financial Post o f Toronto joined with the Western Liberal press and the Quebec Liberal press in dubbing me the nominee o f the “ big interests”, by intimating to its readers that I was the choice o f a clique in which mining magnates predominated, and expressing the hope that I would free myself from subservience thereto. I knew as soon as the Financial Post took such a stand that it would be the groundwork for a ruthless and dishonest campaign all through Can­ ada. Such has been the fact. . . . The colour o f authority is given to it all through the mere fact that a Toronto paper accepted as non­ political gave the signal and afforded the fortification o f its name to a grossly dishonest campaign. W hile I know that the Financial Post— a paper which has done much service to the country— is one o f the products o f your life’s toil, I do not know what your present relationship with it is, nor is it indeed my business. I would think, though, there was some relation­ ship, but whether there is or not, I want to express my bitter disap­ pointment and indeed astonishment that this treatment should have been accorded me by a journal in any way associated with your name. This is because o f the fact that the pressure to accept this task was exercised in no more forceful form by anyone than by yourself.51

To this, after a lapse o f nearly a month, Maclean composed a lengthy reply. That it consisted almost entirely o f irrelevancies may have been due to his embarrassment at being reminded o f his insistence that Meighen accept a call which the editors o f one o f his leading periodicals discovered had been engineered by a group “notoriously more selfish than statesmanlike.” In acknowledging Maclean’s letter, which was full o f effusive admiration and sympathy for Meighen, the latter said: . . . Infinitely more harm was done by the line taken by the Finan­ cial Post immediately after my appointment, than all the good that can be done in a long, long time. The Western press . . . use it as an admission from within that I am the stool pigeon o f wealth and was put over on the Conservative Party by a clique in Toronto. The pub­ lication o f Smith’s letter completed the job. . . . The damage done has been in giving the enemy the very tools they wanted, and they will never cease to use them.82

ÏÏ4

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

According to the C.C.F. and to Liberal papers like the Winnipeg Free Press and the Toronto Daily Star, the sinister Toronto group had installed Meighen at the head o f the party and hoped to get him into a coalition government because he shared their aversion to excess profits taxes, social security and labour unions; allegedly he was, like them, a moss-backed, capitalistic enemy o f economic democracy and the common man. This was shown, so it was claimed, by the tenor o f his speeches during the past several years, and by two passages most o f all. In the course o f some remarks in the Senate late in 1940 about the taxing o f business profits he had said: I have no sympathy with those who would tax profits at 100 per cent. People will not work for nothing. Human nature is the same in war-time as in peace, and instead o f helping the war effort you are defeating it by stripping people o f the stimulus to toil and run their business right. Leave the incentive, so that the greater the toil and the greater the success, the greater will be the reward. You have to do that. . . . I do not exaggerate at all when I say I have had business men by the dozen tell me that they are leaning on their oars; they have nothing to work for. They say: “We might just as well take it a little more easily now, for we are only working for taxes anyway.” You will get that result in any case i f you take away the incentive to work.

This was interpreted to mean that Meighen cared more about the making o f profits than anything else and that he would rather coun­ tenance profiteering than have an excess profits tax. In quoting it his critics invariably neglected to include his next sentence: “ Always leave that incentive, let it grow on greater profits, and increase taxes as profits increase. There is no other way I know o f to get results.” 63 Results in the form o f greater production o f war supplies were what really counted, in his view, and he was only trying to be realistic in pointing to the connection between effort and reward. True, men were being asked to risk their lives in the armed forces for a mone­ tary pittance and he believed that some would have to be compelled to do so. But perfect justice in human affairs was even less likely to be achieved in war than in peace and the cold, hard fact, in his opinion, was that war production, on the expansion o f which the outcome o f the struggle so largely depended, would not grow i f in­ centives were not assured. H e interpreted “conscription o f wealth,” a catch-phrase much bandied about but seldom i f ever clearly ex­

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

“ 5

plained, to include the taxing o f profits “at 100 per cent.” That course, he thought, would be suicidal. That he was not opposed, however, to a progressive tax on pro­ fits is abundantly clear from his numerous references to the subject. In the special war session o f September 1939, commenting on the Government’s Excess Profits Tax Bill, he said: “ I am not objecting to a profits tax; in fact, I welcome it and certainly it should be intro­ duced now.” He reminded the Senate that during the previous session he had argued “ that a profits tax was the proper method o f taking care o f what the public regard as profiteering. It is the only sensible way I know.” In fact Canada during the last war and under the government o f which he had been a member was the first country “in the world to put a war profits tax into effect.” He added : “ I want profits to be as moderate as possible. . . . You can hardly make a pro­ fits tax too high, so long as you do not stifle enterprise.” 54 The next year, in the very speech containing the celebrated “leaning on their oars” passage, Meighen declared: “The right method is to tax profits on the same basis and according to the same law and principle as in the case o f income. That is to say, as the rate o f profit increases, increase the tax . . . the percentage growing with the rate o f profit. I do not think any other way is fair. In that way we shall get the money. You must have both prerequisites: one, effectiveness, the other, fairness.” 55 In the context o f this speech, which his opponents in the South York by-election chose to ignore, it is clear that Meighen’s reference to “ business men by the dozen . . . leaning on their oars” reflected his belief, not that an excess profits tax was objectionable, but that the tax as it then operated was regressive in effect. Business profits, he pointed out, were being taxed, leaving aside provincial corporation taxes, at a uniform rate o f thirty per cent. To this rate “no one could take any exception whatever. Money must be raised, and taxes have to be paid.” But on top o f that there was an additional levy on the amount by which a company’s earnings in the current year exceeded the average o f its earnings in the preceding four years. The rate o f this excess profits tax was seventy-five per cent. He protested against using the four-year average as a yardstick. Many companies had shown little or no profit in the four years before the war; now their fortunes were improving but because they had done badly in those four years virtually their entire current earnings would be taxed, first

ii 6

ARTH UR M EIGH EN

at the basic rate o f thirty per cent, and then at the excess profits rate o f seventy-five per cent. In contrast a company which had weathered the depression relatively well and whose present earnings, while large, were not greatly in excess o f those it had shown before the war, would be in a much more favourable position, paying only the general thirtyper-cent levy plus seventy-five per cent o f a much smaller excess pro­ fit. For business men in the first category the tax m ight well be almost confiscatory and cause them to “lean on their oars.” This situation, in Meighen’s judgment, could be corrected only by a graduated tax on profits which would bear most heavily on those best able to pay and at the same time leave an incentive for efficiency and productiveness.88 The other statement o f his most frequently used against him was from a speech delivered in Toronto early in 1941 at the annual meet­ ing o f the Federation for Community Service. It was prompted by the vision o f a post-war socialist world order unfolded in a recent ad­ dress by the British Minister o f Labour, Ernest Bevin. Said Meighen: We hear so often that we are at a juncture o f world history, that a new era is sure to dawn, that there is to be a veering o f our economic system, a sharp turn taken by humanity. W hat is this new world order? I f the dictators win the answer is obvious. . . . But i f as we all hope and trust and pray, the democracies succeed, there is consider­ able doubt as to the distinguishing features o f the new day, and as to the nature o f the curve the economic march o f man may take. Mr. Bevin thinks that universal socialism, with the rights that are the heritage o f the common man, is to come all at once upon us. Privileges are to go at once and forever, and the State is to take charge o f the nation’s affairs in all departments. Is that likely upon earth? Is that what we are battling for? I think not. I f this is the direction in which we move; if property, profit, the reward o f toil, the fundamental instinct o f the human race to gain, to acquire, to have, to reach somewhere is taken away, then I, for one, do not feel that we have anything worth fighting for. Wherever socialism prevails today, the sword, the hangman, the axe prevail. That is not what Mr. Bevin and Britain want.87

This brought down upon his head considerable editorial abuse from sections o f the Liberal press, which professed to find in his oldfashioned sentiments a defence o f vicious, dog-eat-dog laissez-faire capitalism. T he Leader-Post o f Regina, for instance (this was before the C.C.F. came to power in Saskatchewan), found “astonishingly reactionary” the sentence about “property, profit, the reward o f toil.”

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

117

This it thought a most absurd and unfortunate comment on what it described as Bevin’s belief “ that the government will have to become a more active agent in assuring a fair deal and greater social security for the broad masses o f the people.” However, it said, no one should suppose that Meighen was “ speaking for anyone but his apparently frustrated self.” He could, i f he chose, “ continue building his Chinese w all; the nation w ill scarcely be interested. . . . To believe that the future must simply be a reincarnation o f the past, is to be both blind and selfish.” 58 Meighen was not the kind o f man to suffer this in silence, so he wrote to the editor o f the Leader-Post to lodge a protest against “a diatribe o f peculiar malignancy and bitterness.” He failed to see why he “should be made an object o f editorial Billingsgate” for having expressed his dislike o f socialism, the stated objective o f Bevin and the British Labour party. He was not opposed to “ a fair deal and greater social security for the broad masses o f the people,” nor did he “believe that the future must simply be a reincarnation o f the past.” H e did believe that socialism was inevitably destructive o f liberty and in­ dividual responsibility and that, consequently, a socialist order was not a goal that justified the bloodshed and travail o f the war.59 During the struggle in South York Meighen sought to dispel the impression that he was the champion o f an uncontrolled, piratical capitalism, that he cared more about profits than about the war effort, that he was a foe o f all forms o f social security. In one o f his radio talks he attempted to articulate his social philosophy. He was, he said, an individualist. But, while I am an individualist, I am far from saying, and never have said, that we have managed what may be called our individual­ istic system well. There have always been defects, and grave defects, as there are in all things human. Further, and with emphasis, it must be said that the swift evolution o f machine production and the ac­ companying growth in the power, numbers and impact o f companies on national life brought about in pre-war days, and especially in the 1920’s, an era o f exploitation and speculation which was not properly controlled in this country or in other countries, and where the public was inadequately protected. In that defect was one important cause o f the prolonged depression when all suffered, and particularly the workers suffered. Long lines o f unemployed walked angrily through our streets and through the streets o f almost every land, and the fault was not with the unemployed.

n8

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

No one measures the gravity, yes, and the difficulty, o f this problem more seriously than I do, and no one can be more resolved than I am that those lines of workless men and women, those days when oppor­ tunity disappeared from their lives, shall not return. To wish and demand is one thing; to think out practical remedies is another. How many confine themselves to wishes and demands! More than one reform will be needed. I believe, for example, that there should be an authoritative body brought into being to whose jurisdiction all companies must submit. It should be a body vested with powers similar to those exercised by the Securities and Exchange Commission of the United States— a body which will control [stock] promotions, re-organizations, mergers and the like, to the full extent that the public interest demands; which can and will prevent exploi­ tation and ruthless fmancialism in whatever sphere. . . . I am convinced there must be more thoroughgoing supervision of corporation activities all along the line. . . . In general I favor all reasonable and useful social reforms. Then, after quoting Wendell W illkie, the liberal Republican leader in the United States, to the effect that capitalism could “be made to function for the greater, not the lesser, good,” Meighen repeated a statement he had made before in numerous speeches, including the one to the Federation for Community Service: “The moment it can be shown that any proposed legislation is designed to distribute more equitably the good things o f life among those who toil therefor, that moment a case for such legislation is made.” He now turned to the question o f business taxation. Extravagance is burdensome and makes for inefficiency. Economy should always be the watchword. Perhaps it cannot be the first, but it should be an ever-present consideration even in time of war. Our expenditures, we know, must be tremendous, and our taxation must be high, and our taxation must be levied on those able to pay, and on an accelerating scale. For everything necessary in the way of taxes or other sacrifice to win this war, no rights of property or income can be allowed to stand in the way. Our material resources must be placed at the disposal of the State, as well as our manpower. All our posses­ sions cannot even weigh in the balance against the lives of our men. There are those who say that I have opposed excess profits taxes. This statement is wholly untrue, and I fear I must add, knowingly untrue. . . . My faith in Canada and its future is still unshaken. After we emerge in honor and triumph from the climactic clash of all ages,

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

up

we can wrestle with our “isms” and our opposing views. I give my opponents and all o f you the assurance that no one in that happy hour will toil harder than I will for better laws and brighter days.60

Meighen’s individualistic view that liberty and private property were inextricably connected was out o f harmony with the popular music o f that day, as he was well aware. So was his unqualified identification, in the Community Service speech, o f socialism with “ the sword, the hangman, the axe.” His denial that some form o f constitutional, democratic socialism was compatible with liberty and with what he called “ the fundamental instinct o f the human race to gain, to acquire, to have, to reach somewhere,” was hardly calculated to appeal to the many people, probably the majority, who thought otherwise. Certainly it was not to be expected that the C.C.F, which believed that the eradication o f capitalism would allow more o f the human race to gain, acquire, have and reach somewhere, would treat him gently once the battle o f Souda York was joined. It might have been expected, though, that a party which made no secret o f its virtue and its high ideals would stay somewhat closer to the truth in dealing with what he had said and done and have shown less fondness for personal vilification and scurrility. T he spirit and substance o f the C.C.F. campaign are preserved in the pages o f the N ew Commonwealth, organ o f the Ontario section o f the party, and the Canadian Forum, the voice o f the intellectual left wing. The Forum evidently regarded Meighen as one o f those whom it termed “ the bigots and the gangsters” o f Ontario “ who see in this war only an opportunity for seizing power.”61 In a long editorial entitled “Meighen Redivivus” it remarked that some people might think “ that the bitter intolerant spirit which is what the name o f Meighen connotes to most Canadians is just the bad Ulster inheritance becoming more dominant in him each year as he grows older.” But what had really put its mark on him was “his Toronto environment.” Although he had lived there for only fifteen years, this “ Belfast o f Canada has always been his spiritual home. . . . He symbolizes and fanatically believes in everything that makes Toronto detested by the rest o f Canada.” A “ few Toronto magnates” had “ foisted” him “ on the Tory party again as leader. The cabal which carried out the coup was led and directed by a little group o f northern Ontario mining m il­ lionaires, with the Globe and Mail, the organ o f this gang, supplying the publicity build-up.” Meighen, “ like all these frustrated Toronto

120

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

megalomaniacs, . . . is itching to coerce somebody, to impose on the rest o f Canada the Toronto way o f running a war.” N o evidence was adduced to support these alarming assertions, which sounded sus­ piciously as though the editorialist had been reading the Financial Post and the W innipeg Free Press, but readers o f the Forum would not demand anything so pedestrian as evidence before accepting all this as the pure essence o f distilled truth. However, in order to dem­ onstrate “how unfitted he is to be a leader o f Canada in our present situation,” the Forum was considerate enough to supply a highly selective and largely inaccurate résumé o f Meighen’s career, which made him out to be a cross between an ogre and a fool.62 Because the Forum had a very limited circulation its proprietors could only hope that their message would filter down to the rank and file through the minds o f the intelligentsia. The N ew Common­ wealth, in contrast, spoke more directly to the general body o f C.C.F. supporters in Ontario and its treatment o f Meighen was somewhat cruder, lacking the gloss o f sophistication that usually distinguished comment on current politics in the Forum. Certainly there was no­ thing very sophisticated about the following excerpt from its column, “ Youth Today,” written by Harry Young, secretary o f the Ontario C.C.F The Excess Profits Tax brought forth a bitter denunciation from Meighen, who sided with big business when they said, “We might just as well take it a little easier now, for we are only working for taxes anyway.” He voiced the opinion o f his “oar-leaning” friends in criti­ cizing the war aims o f Ernest Bevin, the leader [he] o f the British Labor Party, who did so much to save Britain from defeat after the fall o f France. The Nazis too could lean on their oars if we had a few more men like the ex-Senator in Canada.63

Nor did one o f the advertisements inserted by Noseworthy’s election committee appeal to anything more elevated than prejudice. Meighen opposed the Excess Profits Tax. Meighen stands for a restricted war effort— an effort restricted by the claims o f financial interests. Noseworthy stands for an all-out effort and a People’s War. Meighen was chosen by a few financiers and politicians (mosdy Senators) meeting at Ottawa. They did not consult the rank-and-file. They went to the Senate— graveyard o f has-been politicians— and they resurrected Meighen.64

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

121

Practically the whole last issue o f the N ew Commonwealth to appear before the by-election was devoted to denunciations o f Meighen. It contained a highly inaccurate, i f not libellous, account o f the Ontario Power Service bond transaction o f 1932. In another article he was accused o f being responsible for the deaths o f Canadian soldiers in the defence o f H ong Kong, because what was called one o f “his” companies, “ Canada Mines Limited,” owned shares in Inter­ national Nickel, the Alum inum Company o f Canada, Asbestos Corpo­ ration Limited and Consolidated Smelters, all o f which had exported their products to Japan in the 1930’s, thus assisting that country’s preparations for war. “ As a shareholder in these four industries,” said the N ew Commonwealth, “his company plays a part in deter­ mining that policy that meant Canadian lives shattered at H ong K ong with Canadian metal, a policy that armed Japan to strike confidently at the British Empire. H igh stakes Big Business plays!”65 A charge o f this seriousness was not one to be lightly made but what were the facts o f the matter? As far as can be ascertained there was no com­ pany called “ Canada Mines Limited” ; in any event Meighen was connected with none o f that name. There was, however, a small concern known as Northern Canada M ining Corporation Limited, o f which he was a director and one o f the principal shareholders. Because it was engaged in mineral exploration and was not an invest­ ment company, it is unlikely that its slight available capital— probably never more than $250,000 during the 1930’s— was used to purchase the stocks o f the four giant corporations.68 But i f it was, Northern Can­ ada M ining’s holdings in those four would be so tiny a proportion o f their total outstanding shares that it would have no voice in deter­ mining their policies. Therefore, even i f “his” company possessed some o f their stock, to charge that through it the blood o f the Hong K on g dead was on Meighen’s hands was utterly ridiculous, rather like m aking every subscriber to the N ew Commonwealth morally re­ sponsible for its contents. There was one especially noteworthy item in this pre-election issue o f the paper. On the left-hand side o f the page was a photograph o f the eighty-five-year-old collaborator, Marshal Pétain, chief o f state o f the puppet Vichy regime in France. On the right-hand side there was a photograph o f Meighen. The captions under the two pictures were identical, save for one word : “Long associated with the most re­ actionary interests in France [Canada], who in his old age was recalled

122

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

to a position o f leadership at a time o f national crisis.” Presumably in order to give point to the comparison o f Meighen to a man who was regarded as a traitor, the following tissue o f half-truths and whole falsehoods appeared between the photographs : Senator Meighen has been in politics a long, long time. What is his record? 1. He was one of the Government which sent our soldiers overseas in 1914 with Ross rifles and other defective weapons. 2. That Government let profiteers make millions out of the war effort while Canadian boys died by the thousands in France. 3. He was in the same Government when it turned a cold shoulder to war veterans and their dependents. 4. He and his friends put Section 98 on the statute books— to sup­ press labor organizations. 5. He went to the Senate (graveyard of has-been politicians) after the Conservative party kicked him out of the leadership for his Hamilton speech of 1925. 6. H e opposed old age pensions for the poor, but in his own old age he accepted $4,000 per year as Senator and almost $10,000 as a Hydro Commissioner— part-time “jobs.” 7. H e opposed the Excess Profits T ax in this war. The would-be pro­ fiteers oppose it too. 8. He said of Ernest Bevin’s war aims. . .— “I f that is the sphere of happiness for which we are struggling, I for one do not feel we have anything worth fighting for at all.” This is the man the Senators chose to lead the Conservative Party. This is the man Big Business wants at Ottawa! S O U T H Y O R K W A N T S A B E T T E R M A N !67 In still another article the purpose o f all this attention being paid to Meighen was explained. T he “C C F is going so thoroughly into Senator Meighen’s record, past and present, not as a personal attack — the C C F is not interested in bandying personalities— but to point out what are and have been the stands that a public man has taken regarding matters o f vital public importance, thus to indicate what, i f any, service he can perform for Canada now.”68 One shudders to think what m ight have come forth had the C.C.F. decided to attack him personally! A personal factor accounting in part for the vindictiveness o f the C.C.F.’s treatment o f him may have been a desire for revenge for an action he had taken in the summer o f 1940. After reading in the

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

123

press a report o f a speech at a meeting o f the Canadian Institute on Economics and Politics by Frank Underhill, one o f the leading intel­ lectuals o f the C.C.F. and a mainstay among contributors to the Canadian Forum, Meighen wrote to the Minister o f Justice the fol­ lowing letter, to which there was no response save an acknowledg­ ment by a secretary. Dear Mr. Lapointe: I hope you will not misunderstand my writing you on the sub­ ject of statements very recently made by Professor Frank Underhill, of the University of Toronto, at Geneva Park, Ontario. The words to which I refer are given below and quoted from the Press. They appeared in many papers. “Down to May this year Canada was dominated by the prestige of British policy. Nothing that Britain could do was wrong. But doubt came after Munich. And then came the over-running o f France— and then all had doubts. We now have two loyalties — one to Britain, the other to North America. . . . North America is going to be supreme now. The relative importance of Britain is going to sink no matter what happens.” I cannot imagine anything intended to discourage recruiting that could be directed with more deadly effect than just those words. It is one thing to be free to criticize Great Britain in Times of peace; it is quite another thing to indulge in this practice so debilitating to the strength and unity of the British Commonwealth in time of war. I have been very pleased indeed, and am happy to report my pleasure, at the language you have used over the radio with reference to Britain’s position in the world today and our intimate dependence upon her success. Professor Underhill’s utterances, for years back, have been gross and infamous whenever he speaks of Britain and our British con­ nection. To permit him to continue this practice now is, I most respect­ fully submit, to be disloyal to our Cause. When Mayor Houde called on the people of his Province to defy the law of Canada in respect of Registration, it was perfectly proper and, indeed, in my opinion, necessary that he be interned. The words of Professor Underhill, in their effect on the Canadian war spirit, are infinitely more dangerous and disintegrating than were any words uttered by Mayor Houde. I urge, in the strongest terms, that an ex­ ample be made of this man and that he and all of his ilk be given to understand that this Country is at war and that they must behave ac­ cordingly. Yours truly, (sgd.) Arthur Meighen69

I24

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

That this letter had been written soon became known at the uni­ versity. It involved Meighen in a fierce row with his old friends Malcolm Wallace, Principal o f University College, and Stanley McLean, who sprang to the defence o f academic freedom. They took issue most strenuously with the indefensible contention that the ex­ pression o f those opinions by Underhill (who presendy denied that he had been reported with entire accuracy) put him in the same class with Mayor Camillien Houde o f Montreal, who had openly counselled the people o f Quebec to flout the law o f the land. Underhill was neither interned nor dismissed from the university faculty, as some circles in Toronto demanded he be ; but the letter to Lapointe may have accounted in part for the vicious quality o f the C.C.E propaganda in the South "York campaign, and especially for the tenor o f “ Meighen Redivivus” o f which Underhill was reputed to be the author. That propaganda was sharply reminiscent in spirit o f the attacks levelled against Meighen in Quebec in the old days o f the 1920’s, o f which, in fact, there was a distinct echo early in 1942. Louis St. Laurent, seeking election to the Commons in a Quebec city by-election following his appointment as Minister o f Justice, declared in a radio address: “I know that the word ‘conscription’ takes you back to 1917. Let us not put ourselves in the position where a Meighen Government would come to impose it on us with bayonets and machine guns.”™ This remark led to an exchange o f letters between him and Meighen a year later. In January 1943 the latter was invited to attend the annual dinner o f the Toronto Board o f Trade, at which St. Laurent was to be the guest speaker. He replied : “ I f Mr. St. Laurent will un­ dertake to repeat this statement, I w ill not only be certain to be present, but, with the permission o f the members present, might add to the interest o f the evening.”71 A copy o f this reply was sent to St. Laurent, w ho undertook to explain to Meighen the circumstances which had caused him to make the statement in question. At that time you were the Leader of the Conservative Party, and you were seeking election to the House of Commons. I thought you would be elected and I thought a Government led by you was then the only alternative to the King Government. I was being opposed by an out-and-out anti-conscription candidate, and far from trying to capitalize on anti-conscription feeling I was trying to impress on the population that this was a war in which the very existence of Canada was at stake, and that they would soon be called upon to determine by their vote whether or not the King Government should be relieved

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

125

of the undertaking it would not under any circumstances resort to conscription for overseas service. I was beseeching them to retain their composure, and pointing out that each one in giving his vote on that question would be responsible to his own conscience and to his fellowcitizens, and should be prepared to take the responsibility o f a vote which he could defend as being in the interests of his fellow-citizens and o f Canada. . . . We both know that in 1917 there were unfortunate riots in Quebec and that bayonets and machine guns were used to quell them. I still think that it was a fair assumption that if you had become the head of the Canadian Government at that time, you would have caused con­ scription for overseas service to be enacted at once; had that taken place there was reason to fear a repetition of 1917. I still feel that an appeal for composure and calm deliberation, and for a conscientious consideration o f the real interests of Canada and Canadian citizens, was in order. O f course, now all this may be of little interest to the public, but if you will take the trouble o f reading my whole speech I trust you will yourself come to the conclusion that I did not in fact strike below the belt.72 Meighen read the speech, a copy o f which was enclosed with St. Laurent’s letter, and answered: You decline to repeat these words on the occasion of your speech in this City . . . on the ground that you are attending a social func­ tion. . . . True, it is not an occasion when the language you used at Quebec would be appropriate; nor, indeed, could there be such an occasion. . . . What you said in your speech very plainly and inescapably meant one of two things. You were either saying, in the middle of a war, to the people of your Province, that if conscription were made the law o f Canada, their resistance to it would be such as only machine guns and bayonets could overcome; or you were saying that I, as head of the Government, would authorize the use of machine guns and bayo­ nets when there was no necessity fbr their use. If you meant the first, it was reprehensible. I f you meant the se­ cond, it was contemptible.73 In the 1940 general election Allan Cockeram had carried South York with less than h a lf the total vote, a litde more than forty-five per cent. T he Liberal candidate, running second, had received about thirty-eight per cent. Where this Liberal vote would go was obviously

X2Ô

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

o f crucial importance in the by-election and the Conservatives were confident that Meighen would get enough o f it to assure his victory. A Liberal Citizens’ Committee o f South York was organized and was working vigorously on his behalf. More than that, late in January Premier Mitchell Hepburn o f Ontario requested Meighen’s permis­ sion to speak in his support, a request that was promptly granted. Hepburn had been feuding with Mackenzie K in g since early in the war, partly over the latter’s war policies which Hepburn attacked as weak and wavering. The reason he gave for joining in the by-election on Meighen’s side was K in g’s decision to hold the conscription plebis­ cite, a move which he denounced as “ cowardly” and smacking o f “rank deception.” 74 Meighen agreed with him about that, o f course, but Hepburn was not the Liberal ally he would have chosen had the choice been his. The attempt to destroy his reputation over the Ontario Power Service matter was still fresh in Meighen’s memory and he had little respect for Hepburn’s character, political methods or public policies. Still, he was in no position to spurn the help o f those who apparently wanted to be helpful and Hepburn’s influence in Ontario, coupled with that o f some o f his colleagues and followers who approved o f his action, appeared to promise substantial dividends when the voters o f South York went to the polls. A t the same time there were elements in the Liberal party working powerfully against Meighen in the by-election. “ . . . the Liberal workers,” he told Eugene Forsey in mid-January, “— that is those usually known as ward-heelers— (though perhaps they do not deserve the title) are out in force against me. That is w hy a Liberal was kept out o f the field. There is far more chance to defeat me with him out o f the field and they are leaving no stone unturned to do so. M y own organization advises me that 180 o f such workers have already been counted.”75 H e detected the fine Italian hand o f Mackenzie K in g in this. “K in g et al have moved heaven and earth to defeat me,” he wrote as the campaign drew to a close, adding that the C.C.F. had “heaps o f money— supplied without a doubt by K in g’s fond.”78 It has been said that Meighen brought on this intervention from Ottawa, i f such it was, by his vitriolic and “destructive” attacks on the Government, that had he devoted less energy to censuring K ing and more to debating against the C.C.F., which after all was his ad­ versary in South York, he would not have had to fight a war on two fronts. As it was, according to this view, his strictures on the regime

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

Ï27

at Ottawa not only made it impossible for many Liberals to support him but aroused their active antipathy, rendering even a passive neu­ trality on their part out o f the question. W hile he may have un­ necessarily alienated some Liberal electors, his purpose was to lead public opinion to demand a more forceful war effort and to appeal especially to those Liberals who shared his impatience in that regard. As head o f a national party which formed the official Opposition, he believed it was incumbent on him to make known his stand on cur­ rent national issues in no uncertain terms, to foreshadow the line he would follow in Parliament. To concentrate his fire on the C.C.F. instead o f on the Government, he thought, would be to obscure the real issues o f the moment with others which, for all their fundamental importance, were not the ones before the country at that time. In any event, i f the activities o f the “ ward-heelers” were inspired by Mackenzie K ing, as Meighen believed (a belief for which there is no proof in the portions o f K in g’s diary so far published), it seems unlikely that Meighen’s speeches in South York were to blame. K in g was well aware before the campaign started o f his opinions on public questions and most fearful o f his reappearance in the House o f Com ­ mons. The Prime Minister regarded any criticism o f him self as destructive and malevolent, not to say diabolical. However “con­ structive” and innocuous Meighen m ight have made his criticisms on the hustings, however much he m ight have attacked the C.C.F. instead o f the Government, K ing knew that once they faced one another again in the House he would be subjected to a much more searching and effective opposition than he had had to contend with for many a year, or than he wanted to contend with. H e had every reason for wanting to bring about Meighen’s defeat, quite apart from anything the latter said about the Government during the campaign. N or does it appear that Hepburn’s entrance into the struggle pre­ cipitated the massive retaliation by the national Liberal organization. It has sometimes been suggested that K in g could not remain aloof once the Premier o f Ontario launched this new challenge to his leader­ ship and that Hepburn’s help was therefore the kiss o f death for Meighen. But i f the reports Meighen received were correct, Liberal organizers and canvassers were active in the C.C.F. interest long before Hepburn made his move. O f all the campaigns he had fought since that day in 1908 when he had accepted his first nomination in Portage la Prairie, Meighen found

128

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

the one in South York by far the most distasteful. It was partly that he had lost his liking for this kind o f warfare and had been projected into the leadership against his w ill, partly the odiousness o f the C.C.F.’s propaganda, partly the hypocrisy o f the Liberals, as he regarded it, in first announcing that they would not oppose him and then combining with the C.C.F. “This has been my worst week in years,” he exclaimed in a letter to Ted in the middle o f January. “Driven like a galley slave, vilified like a low criminal and all for a seat in the House o f Commons that I do not want.”77 A very heavy schedule o f speaking engagements was arranged for him by his cam­ paign managers. Day after day he was conducted on an exhausting round o f personal appearances, to small neighbourhood gatherings in private homes, to larger public meetings in school auditoria, to social functions where the rank and file o f his supporters assembled to grasp his hand and engage him in wearisome small talk. His voice grew hoarse, his nerves grew taut in this endless, enervating pro­ gress from one crowd o f people to another. He was, he told Ted, speaking an average of about 4 times a day. It does not hurt me but the longing for rest persists and intensifies. Nannie [Mrs. Meighen] is with me nearly everywhere. As far as I can tell we will win, but it is an ugly and despicable affair. A big majority is tremendously im­ portant and I don’t think there will be any big majority. You know of course of King’s last sharp turn— a plebiscite sometime soon on re­ leasing him from his commitments as to conscription. Truly an awful and shameful thing. The uproar throughout the country is really quite encouraging. One can never be sure but to me it looks bad for him. He is floundering. Needless to add his troubles are all selfcreated. He purchased power through 3 general elections by one vicious and utterly false manifesto, and nemesis now is upon him. “Oh what a tangled web we weave When first our practice [sic] to deceive.” Soon the new life with its trials and tests will come again— i.e. in the House o f Commons. My one inner resolve is to be sure and care­ ful. But to be aggressive and effective as well as careful is a work of genius— and few are in that category.78 A week later, on the eve o f polling day, he wrote another letter to Ted, a gloomy one. This has been the last week of the election and I have been driven off my feet. The main thing is troubles— shocking scandalous things being done. These have consisted principally of fictitious statements

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

I29

as to what I have said or done in the past— just unbelievable lying. . . . No one has ever seen election methods on so low a level and on such an intensified scale. I do not feel at all optimistic but many think I am wrong. One thing sure is— this country under King who himself has no character is steadily disintegrating and if my senses are still with me it is as bad as France ever was. Under direct [military] attack I would hate to be responsible for what might happen. Our Commons is just a political committee room as far as King’s party are concerned. The debates are so far below what I read of in the British Commons that one just hangs his head. There the critics are in all parties but the discussion is on the conduct of the war in all its manifold phases; and what excellent discussion it is. Ours is putrid. . . . For 3 weeks the whole purpose and effort has been to paint me as a scoundrel & a calamity. An organized campaign is on. Quite clearly they would rather welcome Satan than me. I have pursued a steady course toward real & limitless war and have never except in a brief dignified way answered anything. Well dear son this is a tale of woe. Do not worry the least Ted if I am defeated. I have served this country honesdy and unselfishly and offered— indeed struggled for the chance to do so again. If King’s crowd and the C.C.F. defeat me I suppose I can stand it. If only it can end in an honourable release I will be happy. As a country we are sliding— not a doubt of it!79 W hen the ballots were counted on the evening o f February the ninth Meighen’s apprehension o f defeat was proved to have been all too justified. Noseworthy was the winner by a margin o f nearly 4,500. Only about forty-two per cent o f the votes went to Meighen, a slightly smaller proportion than Cockeram had received two years earlier. That he had been rejected was deeply humiliating to him, that the rejection was so decisive made it all the worse. He had toiled unendingly for weeks to put his case as clearly and as forcefully as he could before the public; he had gone here, there and everywhere to meet the voters, to rouse them out o f apathy into action; he had ex­ pended over seven thousand dollars o f his own money in the cause.80 But all his effort, his eloquence, his past services to the country, his prestige as national leader o f the party, his high-minded devotion to the national interest as he saw it— all this, to say nothing o f the devoted support o f two o f the three Toronto daily newspapers and o f the many people working on his behalf, had not been enough to prevail over the raucous din o f slander and vituperation. W hat was the explanation o f this disaster? Some said that he had run in the wrong riding, that he should have gone after a really

130

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

safe seat like Carleton. Even though in the ten general elections since its creation South York had never before returned anyone but a Con­ servative, they argued, the complexion o f the constituency had changed greatly with the influx o f workers in war industries who could be ex­ pected to support the C.C.E Perhaps that was so, but Cockeram re­ covered the seat in 1945 in a straight two-way fight with Noseworthy, thus showing that a Conservative could still win there. W as this verdict, then, a repudiation o f Meighen personally, or possibly o f the forces behind him, represented by George Drew, Mitchell Hepburn and George McCullagh, publisher o f the Globe and Mail ? Or had voters merely registered their dislike o f conscription for overseas ser­ vice and their general satisfaction with the policies o f the K in g gov­ ernment, by supporting Noseworthy in the absence o f a Liberal can­ didate instead o f Meighen, the Government’s strongest critic? Was Noseworthy’s victory to be attributed, as one report reaching Meighen claimed, to the tireless door-to-door canvassing by C.C.E workers and by Noseworthy himself, in contrast to the Conservatives’ greater re­ liance on more impersonal public meetings, radio talks, billboard and newspaper advertising and mailed literature ?81 N o one can read the minds o f the voters or say with certainty w hy elections are won and lost. Meighen blamed his defeat on the alliance between the C.C.E and the Liberal organization, as well as on the shrill mendacity o f the C.C.F.’s charges against him. “I was beaten and badly beaten in S. York,” he informed Ted. “M y own analysis o f the situation before the vote was the most pessimistic o f any but even I rather expected to win. The K in g Govt had their association here decline to name a can­ didate. N ow we know this was only to enable them to drive the Lib­ eral vote to the C.C.E and thus defeat m e . . . . A ll Govt agents & con­ tractors here moved heaven & earth against me. But the worst was the foul debased campaign. It was worse than terrible and it is most dis­ heartening to know that such a thing can be successful in an AngloSaxon riding.”82 Undoubtedly the bulk o f the normally Liberal vote had gone to Noseworthy and, assuming that this was largely due to the efforts o f the Liberal “ward-heelers” acting on instructions from Ottawa, the reason for the concerted drive to prevent Meighen’s election is perhaps not far to seek. Just as no other conceivable leader o f the Conservative party at that time would have been attacked by the C.C.F. in quite such a grotesquely dishonest fashion as Meighen, the

T H E B A T T L E OF S O U T H Y O R K

I3 I

most articulate opponent in public life o f socialism and the welfare state, so the possible appearance in the Commons o f no other man would have excited such fear and misery in the breast o f Mackenzie K ing. K in g refused to believe the reports reaching him before the ninth o f February that there was a good chance that Meighen would lose, so the result was all the sweeter to him for being unexpected. Commenting on Meighen’s defeat and the rebuff given the treacherous Hepburn, K in g wrote in his diary on election night: “I felt tonight that public life in Canada had been cleansed, as though we had gone through a storm and got rid o f something that was truly vile and bad, and which, had it been successful at this time, m ight have helped to destroy the effectiveness o f our war effort.” W ith his customary complacency he credited this triumph over the forces o f evil to that divine power with which he was ever in holy alliance. “ I felt most grateful to Providence for what Canada has been spared o f division and strife.”83 As always K in g’s sentiments and those o f Meighen were poles apart. In the eyes o f the latter it was K in g who personified every­ thing that was vile, bad and morally unclean. “ K in g is meanness in its harshest, sourest form,” he wrote early in the South York struggle, “and politics in his company is contemptible.”84 Neither in the un­ folding course o f the battle nor in the gloating statement K ing gave to the press on the morrow o f the election— “as coarse and vulgar a thing as ever man was guilty o f”85— could Meighen find cause to re­ vise that long-held, ineradicable belief.

CHAPTER

FIVE

IN S E A R C H O F A N E X IT is defeat in South York put Meighen in a quandary. W hat was he to do now? His personal inclination, which, how­ ever, he felt compelled to put aside, was to resign the leader­ ship o f the party at once and retire absolutely from public life. “ Oh I wish I could step out,” he confided to Ted. “ I am tired— very weary and just have to whip m yself to stay but to go would please King, the Toronto Star and what is far worse would I know lose me the regard o f very very many good people.” But, while recognizing that he would have to stay on as leader for the time being, he decided against making another try to enter the Commons. Several Conserv­ atives offered to give up their seats so that he might have a chance in a second by-election but, Meighen pointed out, “ the session would be nearly over before I could get in and besides no seat is safe against the kind o f ganging up that was employed here.” 1 The South York campaign had disillusioned him all over again with democratic politics, just as his downfall in 1926 had, and he wanted to have nothing more to do with it. “I did not go back into public life,” he remarked to Eugene Forsey, “ [for] the sake o f wading through silly claptrap, and i f that has to be done, it only adds to my resolve to attend to my own affairs.”2 “ Perhaps I may be taking a somewhat jaundiced view, but it has been borne in upon me so much lately that politics has become the art o f capitalizing on ignorance rather than o f seeking to enlighten by reason.”3 This “jaundiced view,” though not first planted in his mind by the experience o f South York, was strongly reinforced by it, especially by the fact that he had been able to “detect very little evidence o f inter­ est in the war at all, and could arouse no appreciable anxieties on the subject.”4 H e had tried hard in attacking the Government to expound the truth “ that isolationism in the various countries o f Europe, in America, and in Canada, had proved the parent o f ruin across the

H

132

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

133

Atlantic and was the fountain source o f our peril on this Continent today. I usually ended by pressing the history o f the doctrine in this Dominion, and quoted from its exponents. A ll, apparently, was to no effect. Nevertheless, in that history one gets the true measure o f Canadian public men better than by any other line o f study I know of.”6 The majority o f South York voters had not been in the mood to listen to this message. There was, Meighen wrote to Ted, a rather ugly state of mind abroad fostered into ugliness for political purposes, originally by King et al, now mainly by the C.C.F.— directed against those who succeed or have something. That was the prevailing sentiment o f South York. They would not be roused to interest in or at least anxiety about the war. What they wanted done was a rob­ bing of those who have— the big shots as they call them. One fears we are in for a period of wreckage. Then the enemy is at the gate as well. These last demonstrations of the power of Japan are fearsome. . . . In the face of this we are to have a plebiscite in May or June! Truly one can understand there being a challenge to Democracy [when] one observes how it conducts itself in Canada!6 This was followed a few weeks later by another letter breathing black despair. All that means much is news from our sons. The years are passing and with each, other interests diminish in importance. The world is becoming inundated with fatuous doctrines and hopes— new orders, social security for everyone, freedom from want and freedom from fear (as Roosevelt expresses it), in a word there is to be a nurse-maid state spoonfeeding us all. What worries me is the certainty o f a cruel dis­ illusionment which can hardly fail to be accompanied by violence and bloodshed. Public men are taking the line o f least resistance now but the price yet to be paid will stagger the world. There is only one thing I can do— speak the truth as I see it and take all the stones and curses. But there is no party one can lead that way. Therefore I think I must move into private life and move soon. Am waiting though for events — they will soon be upon us and will make my path clearer or at least more understandable. Meantime my deepest love to my splendid son. My heart aches that he should have to endure hardships and perils that never fell to my lot and that wastrels may take by thuggery and violence what I have labored to get together for my deserving children.1 A ll Meighen’s letters written during the spring and summer o f 1942 were mined from this same vein o f gloom. N othing was right, nothing hopeful. T he Conservatives in Parliament were too few and

134

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

too dispirited, too unsure o f themselves and o f their party, to perform the proper function o f an Opposition. Attending a caucus, Meighen “denounced their tendency to be listening at the ground and reading Gallup polls— told them their job was to teach national common sense and not be lazily hoping to escape oblivion by outbidding the C.C.F.”8 The unfortunate Hanson was still leading the party in the House and the lack o f mettle in the man irked Meighen intensely. “ I am having a most unpleasant time with Hanson acting as House leader,” he informed Ted. “It would not be safe to tell you much because I know that Government agents would have no compunction about opening m y letters or for that matter your letters. We have a cowardly form o f Gestapo in Canada just as we have a cowardly form o f conscription.”9 The form o f conscription did not become less “ cowardly” after the plebiscite in April, when by a large majority the voters o f every province but one, Quebec dissenting strongly, released the Government from its pledge not to enforce compulsory overseas service. N ot that Meighen had expected the plebiscite to produce a change o f policy ; he knew it was a political gambit and nothing more. Before the vote was taken he wrote to one o f his closest French-Canadian friends, Gustave Monette : What passes my comprehension is the absolute refusal of so many in your Province, as, indeed, in our Province, to get into their heads the position we are in. It is not a matter of what we want now, in the least degree; it is a matter of what we have to do. There are a great many in the Dominion who are likely to learn a lot in the next few months, but events only will teach. There is certainly no use in my trying to do so. . . . in the present Plebiscite . . . the verdict no matter how it is given can be interpreted just whatever way Mr. King likes. The war is still to him a political difficulty and nothing more, to be handled to the best advantage possible. In Canada we are making a lot better suc­ cess of our propaganda than we are of the fighting and of the war. To my mind it does not matter a particle what the Plebiscite result is, this country has to fight to live, and fight as it never fought before and certainly is not fighting now.10 “Well what do you think K ing w ill do now ?” two days after the plebiscite.

Meighen asked Ted

He has exposed to the world and therefore solidified, the worst cleavage ever known in Canada, and he is in a jam himself from which he

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

135

cannot honourably emerge as head o f a party Government. His Que­ bec followers can’t support a conscription measure after that vote and a party Gov’t should not at any time enforce such a measure and cer­ tainly cannot when passed against the votes o f all Quebec members. Such a thing as carrying on that way as a party is grotesque. Nor can he I think fail to pass such a measure— because every day last Monday’s score by provinces would face him and expose his Gov’t as Quebec and not Canadian. I have no confidence in his enforcing conscription any­ way but his trouble is to pass such a law— or indeed not to pass such a law. He will try some evasion likely but his stock is falling.11

Evasions there were aplenty but where were the signs Meighen thought there ought to be o f a strong public reaction against the weak-kneed shilly-shallyings o f the Prime Minister? H e could not find those signs no matter where he looked, in his own party, among the English-speaking members and supporters o f the Government, or in the press. “The conduct o f the Government now and especially o f the English-speaking ministers,” he wrote angrily in June, “has reached a new low in chicanery and turpitude. I cannot but be dis­ appointed at the lack o f fighting red blood in the Eng. language press. They are opposed but seem incapable o f lightning and thunder. Meantime the war goes steadily bad in all corners o f the world. Canada says ‘i f necessary’ we w ill do more. I am ashamed o f Can­ ada.” 12 Even the physical condition o f Canadian soldiers was not what it should be, he thought. “ Certainly our average soldier is not the man he was 25 or 30 years ago. His army endurance tests show a considerable deterioration. I attribute it to the automobile— result less strenuous work and less general and strenuous play. Then our system leaves rich men’s sons at home & almost all to their own caprices. This itself results in an unmanly and indifferent attitude and such continues right up to the precipice— and that is where we are now. We still keep complimenting ourselves. N o compliment is tolerable in the midst o f a losing war.” 13 Speaking o f compliments, one thing that especially annoyed Meighen during the early 1940’s was that the endless self-laudation o f the Canadian Government over the virility and magnitude o f the country’s war effort was so fiilsomely echoed by British politicians and officials and by the British press. As early as November 1940 he found it necessary to protest to Sir Gerald Campbell, the British H igh Commissioner to Canada, against a statement Campbell had made in his contribution to the series o f radio talks, “Let’s Face the

136

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

Facts,” produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. In the course o f his remarks Sir Gerald intimated that Canada’s performance as a munitions supplier was better in this war than it had been in the last, a comparison which, Meighen told him bluntly, was “both un­ called for and untrue.” “ Even i f such an unfavourable comparison had been justified by the facts, it would not seem to me to be an ani­ madversion appropriate to the British Minister in Canada.”14 But far worse than Campbell’s well-meant, though ill-informed, excursion into Canadian history, Meighen thought, was the perform­ ance by Winston Churchill during a visit to Ottawa late in December 1941. Churchill had been in Washington conferring with President Roosevelt following the attack on Pearl Harbor and a trip to the Canadian capital was obviously an expedient courtesy, i f less than a strategic necessity. Mackenzie K in g and some o f his ministers went to Washington to take part in the discussions there and accompanied Churchill to Ottawa, where the British Prime Minister was to give an address in the House o f Commons. Meighen was indisposed with intestinal flu and unable to go to Ottawa as leader o f the Conservative party to meet and hear Churchill. However, he wrote to him, wel­ coming him to Canada and expressing admiration o f his leadership. “ I am justified,” Meighen added, “by the task to which I have been called in making this observation:— W hat Canada needs is not praise for past performance. O n this point there is profound and everdeepening difference o f view. A n unreserved exposition o f the needs o f the present, in men and material, and a ringing challenge to the manhood o f this nation would be definitely o f greater value.” 1® Parts o f Churchill’s speeches shocked Meighen deeply and he vented his fury in a letter to Ted. “ They brought him here,” he charged, “ just to get his political blessing and he fell for their game 100 per cent. His speeches were mapped out for him. A t least i f they had been they could not have been worse. He praised them to the skies— talked o f what he could not possibly have knowledge. The result is a slap in my face— from the first word to the last. . . . It was none o f his business to pronounce on an issue that divides Canadian politics. It was impertinence.”18 Probably this outburst was provoked by reports o f what Churchill had said in smaller gatherings outside the Commons chamber. As for as his main address was concerned— it was the one that contained the famous exclamation “ Some chicken ! Some neck!”— there was really only one sentence to which Meigh-

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

I 37

en could take exception: “ The contribution o f Canada to the Im­ perial war effort, in troops, in ships, in aircraft, in food and in finance has been magnificent.”17 N o doubt this put the best possible colour on things and certainly it expressed a judgment with which Meighen profoundly disagreed but it m ight have been meant as no more than a courtesy. However, Meighen’s claim that K in g had been interested mainly in getting Churchill’s “ political blessing” is largely borne out by K in g ’s own diary, which indicates that he worked hard to prejudice the distinguished visitor in his own favour and against the Canadian Conservative party, Meighen in particular. Referring to the latter, Churchill at one point remarked, to K ing’s huge satisfaction, “ ‘yon Cassius hath a lean and hungry look’— which o f course,” K in g added smugly in his diary, “is an adequate descrip­ tion o f Meighen.”18 Churchill’s acknowledgment o f Meighen’s welcoming letter ended on a conventional note that rubbed salt into Meighen’s wound: “ I need hardly tell you how great has been my pleasure in renewing my friendship with the people o f your great Dominion, which is playing so fine a part in the common struggle.”19 So fine a part indeed ! The whole sum and substance o f the message Meighen was trying to put across in South York at that very moment was that Canada was not doing enough. So enraged was he that for a time he actually con­ sidered denouncing Churchill publicly for his Ottawa statements. But he quickly realized how foolish that would be from every stand­ point and contented him self with an expostulation to R. B. Bennett, who was now quite close to the centre o f things in England and might be able to pass along the word in the right places. I confess that I have been utterly unable to comprehend the reason­ ing by which British public men justify their monotonous eulogies o f Canada’s war effort. In the first place, eulogies o f a war effort are rather gruesome in the midst o f defeat, and so far we have ex­ perienced little but reverses and humiliations. I f British public men are satisfied that Canada has done all she should have done, or indeed, has approached what she should have done, in the face o f these reverses and humiliations leading us to the present peril, then one must truly be seized with despair. The truth is Canada is today, speaking by and large, complacent, self-satisfied, content to default i f only others will save us. The very presence o f a Party Government, playing day by day the Party game, convinces the vast mass o f people that the war cannot mean life or

j 38

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

death for us. It is an anaesthetic. Britain has to do more than she is doing and Canada has to do immeasurably more than she is doing, or we are going to lose this war. You know and every intelligent man knows, upon whom in this country Britain and the other Dominions must rely to force the issue, and, (using your own expression) “blast” this conglomerate people into a sense of danger and duty. We have failed and we are still failing. The reason of our failure is in very great degree the utterly fatuous conduct of British public men and of the Prime Minister himself. Churchill says he is not satisfied with Britain’s production and Britain’s military organization. Smuts says he is not satisfied with South Africa; Menzies that he is not satisfied with Australia. King says he is satisfied with Canada, and Churchill says “Amen.” Every time we point to the need of greater things, every time we show gaps in our ranks, Amery or Kingsley Wood or Churchill hits us across the face and says everything in Canada is “magnificent.” One, of course, expects British leaders to be courteous and to recog­ nize the Canadian Government as speaking for Canada, and con­ duct themselves accordingly. This they always do. One expects them to be grateful for our effort whatever it is and to express that gratitude on all fitting occasions. That is one thing. But when the issue here between the forward, vigorous element of Canada and a Government which, though representing many of the same character, represent vastly more who are not so vigorous and not so forward, is clearly drawn on the whole question of our war effort, it is indefensible and calamitous that British Ministers and the British Prime Minister should intervene as they have done and make their superlative and sometimes grotesque tributes the text books of Mr. Mackenzie King.20 This remonstrance had no effect whatever and Meighen’s grievance remained very much alive throughout the duration o f the war.21 In this mood o f dark despair and renewed disenchantment with public life Meighen cast about for some means o f extricating himself from the party leadership. By the middle o f the summer, as he in­ formed Ted, he had made up his mind to call a national convention for the autumn— that is, i f the election he thought K in g was hinting at did not intervene. K ing, he wrote, never gives warning when he really intends to act. O f course he may; but I incline to the view that he will not. If he does I must lead; there would be no justification for failing to do so. But I certainly do not want office in the awful state we are in now. It is anyway so un-

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

139

likely as not to be even a bugbear. One cannot retreat with credit in the face o f a battle— but i f an election is not in sight my purpose is to call a convention for this fall. . . . Truly Canada is in an awful state . . . but all the shallows and miseries that bind us are the product o f that 20 years o f treasonable politics in the Province o f Quebec.22

In deciding that there must be a convention Meighen did not intend that the gathering should be left alone to name a new leader with­ out guidance from him. In fact he was determined to make every effort to have it select the man o f his choice, and his choice was still John Bracken. But this time he would lay the groundwork and pre­ pare the way more thoroughly dian he had had time to do before the party conference at Ottawa which had drafted him. So he set about, working behind the scenes, to persuade influential Conservatives that Bracken was the man o f the hour. It was uphill, discouraging work for the name o f Bracken did not ring resoundingly in Conserv­ ative ears or tingle Conservative spines. But Meighen stuck to it, summoning all his argumentative powers to show that only the Mani­ toba Premier could attract sufficient support among anti-Mackenzie K in g Liberals to bring about the downfall o f the Government, that he alone could mobilize the Conservative party to withstand the antici­ pated post-war surge o f the C.C.F. The opening phase o f Meighen’s leadership more than twenty years earlier had been devoted to an effort to maintain some semblance o f the wartime coalition, to retain a measure o f Liberal support. The closing phase, as his second retire­ ment impended in 1942, was devoted to preparing the ground for a successor who m ight be able to effect a new wartime coalition which would survive the coming o f peace. In both cases Meighen encoun­ tered strong opposition within his own party, in both he persisted, in neither did the result turn out to be all that he had hoped for. His first overt move in 1942 came in September when he announced that he was calling a national convention and had appointed an in­ terim committee to commence making the arrangements. The com­ mitteemen he selected were Hanson and C. C. Ballantyne (now Con­ servative leader in the Senate), Senator Louis Côté and Gustave Monette o f Quebec, Joseph Harris and Gordon Graydon, both mem­ bers o f Parliament from Ontario, Ardiur Ross o f Manitoba and H . R. Milner o f Alberta. His plan, he explained to Ted, was “ to put Ray Milner in charge o f all preparations for the Convention. Have had a mild protest from John R. McNicol [rfo] about m y ‘dictator’ con­

I40

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

duct in selecting the committee m yself and ignoring what he calls the Dominion Association o f which he says he is President. I had abundant reasons and John R. is a very good reason himself. A m going right ahead and think I can reach an objective worth the effort & find the most creditable way o f obtaining a release.”23 Party or­ ganization had never been Meighen’s long suit and, in the tradition o f many parliamentarians, he thought it perfectly natural and proper for the leader to act independently o f the extra-parliamentary or­ ganization i f need be, instead o f consulting it at every turn. MacN icol’s objection to his doing so in this instance was only the first o f several charges o f high-handedness and undemocratic dictation that were to be levelled at Meighen and his friends before the convention finally assembled at Winnipeg in December and did what Meighen wished it to do. There were numerous good reasons for his wanting to put Milner in charge, quite apart from the latter’s exceptional abilities. Milner was one o f his close friends on whose assistance he knew he could count but at the same time, having opposed the drafting o f Meighen at Ottawa in 1941, could not be shrugged off as a puppet dancing on a string. As a westerner Milner might be able to organize a proBracken sentiment in that region where most o f the other prospective candidates lived and had followings o f their own. Futhermore, he had been chairman o f a conference o f Conservative “laymen,” men outside Parliament, which met at Trinity College School, Port Hope, just before Meighen issued his call for the convention. The Port Hope conference, which amounted to an effort to modernize the party, had drawn up a suggested programme, including, in addition to immedi­ ate conscription for overseas service, such policies as a scheme o f agri­ cultural credits, compulsory collective bargaining in industry, lowcost housing, slum clearance, federal aid to education and larger old-age pensions payable at an earlier age. Meighen could not find it in his heart to be enthusiastic about all this. The Port Hope affair, he told Ted, “ was an idea o f Jim Macdonnell. . . . Jim is one o f those Institute o f International Relations men— intelligent, somewhat aca­ demic. . . . He got good men with him— for plausible reasons. He informed me only after some A 1 men refused to take part unless it had my approval. I told him simply that I would raise no objection. It had been under organization for 6 weeks & more then. It did no harm or very little & it was a demonstration o f interest and activity.”24 Milner’s prominence in the Port Hope proceedings identified him

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

I4 I

clearly with the “progressive” w ing o f the party. G iving him a similar prominence in the preparations for the convention, o f which, in fact, he was to act as chairman, would be a sign to Bracken that the spirit o f Port Hope was very much to the fore and not just a peculiar aber­ ration from the Conservative norm, that it was, indeed, a progressive Conservative party he was being asked to lead. One o f the early meetings o f the convention committee, now en­ larged from the original group appointed by Meighen, was attended by R. B. Bennett, who was visiting North America. “ Hanson & I had all to luncheon,” Meighen wrote to Ted, “& I got Viscount Bennett there. I introduced him. He spoke nearly an hour. . . . R. B. has not even yet the power o f controlling and ordering his speech as he pro­ ceeds. H e is discursive— & dangerously careless and says more than he intends to say— as well as less.. . . But R. B. has been very friendly to me and very helpful.”25 The day after this meeting Bennett, en route to N ew York, jotted down for Meighen’s benefit some thoughts about the leadership. He had been discussing the subject with John A . Stevenson and they had canvassed the field province by province. Bennett thought there were no prospects in the Maritimes, Quebec or Alberta. He ruled out for various reasons George Drew and J. M. Macdonnell o f Ontario, M. A . MacPherson and John Diefenbaker o f Saskatchewan, Howard Green and R. L. Maitland o f British Colum­ bia. That left Manitoba and, Bennett’s letter went on, there is just one man there. I think that your views are the same : and I am convinced he must be secured, for the sake o f Canada & the Empire altogether apart from the party. If not you must again sacri­ fice yourself. I write this with hesitation but . . . I know of no one but that man who can come near securing the necessary support of outraged Liberals to enable us to defeat King. Party loyalty will keep the dissatisfied cabinet members from organizing a rebellion. So King can only be defeated by a party securing more supporters than he can secure. That means we must secure Liberal support and no other man (including yourself) can secure diat necessary support. Please pardon my frankness but I know you expect me to be as frank to you as I have always found you to me.26 The indispensable man in Manitoba was, o f course, Bracken but it was one thing for Bennett and Meighen to believe that he was in­ dispensable and quite another for Conservatives generally, to say noth­ ing o f Bracken himself, to become converted to that belief. As Meighen worked away quietly to influence Conservative opinion,

I 42

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

encountering here scepticism, there opposition and hardly anywhere unqualified enthusiasm, he was beset by doubts that the boom for Bracken he was trying to promote would ever materialize. “ I am meeting with cruel disappointments in my plans for the Convention,” he told Ted in the middle o f November. “Likely i f I felt like touring Canada and exposing my w ill more directly I could succeed— even then maybe not. This is an increasingly purblind country. Anyw ay I do not feel the obligation to overcome all my own inclinations and take a big chance o f failure after an exhausting and expensive effort. Frankly it does not look to me now as i f the door o f hope is going to be opened at Winnipeg. Perhaps I am too blue today. . . . Oh how I wish that event was over!”27 The next day, however, he put gloom aside and wrote much more optimistically to Bracken himself, in the first direct approach he had made since their conversations in Winnipeg in the autumn o f 1941. I think it is time that I wrote you to let you know how my thoughts are running. Well, to start with, I am still, and more resolutely than ever, o f the mind I was when I saw you a year ago. The reason I am more re­ solute is that the crisis now is very much closer and it is much plainer than it was then that the crisis points to you and to you only. In saying this I am expressing as sincere a conviction as I ever had in my life. For some litde time back I have been using quite outspoken lan­ guage— o f course, entirely in private conversation— outspoken language designating definitely the one man whom the march o f events and the juncture o f fate point to, and that man is yourself. The important fact that emerges is encouraging. I can say definitely that I have not met one single man in Eastern Canada with whom I have talked— and they have been very many— with whom I had to use one single argument to produce conviction. It is only the fact that I do not feel free to make the matter a subject o f public discussion that prevents me from saying it is unanimous so far as Canada east o f your own Prov­ ince is concerned. Speaking for a moment o f the West, I am sure in my own mind that the general enthusiasm there will be quite equal to what it is in the more Eastern Provinces. Nevertheless, in the West . . . a quite under­ standable ambition has grown up in perhaps more breasts than one.. . . There is no doubt— and I confess it frankly— that there is a feeling in the West that you will not accept, and as a result o f that feeling, follow­ ings tend to gather behind other favourites, and the favourites them­ selves no doubt begin to generate views o f great things to come. What

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

143

I do want to impress, though, in the strongest terms I can use is that these factors are in no sense detracting factors. It would really not be a healthy situation if some, at least, of the usual competitive features of Conventions did not appear. I think it far better if they do appear, providing, of course, the favourable trend is overwhelming. . . . I do not think I over-estimate my abilities at all, and I will guarantee to you that the support will be overwhelming. I cannot believe that you could ever justify to yourself in the future standing out against this national demand. It rarely comes to a man to be the object of such a demand. Never in this country has it fallen to anyone to serve a dis­ tracted and distressed nation as it now falls to you. There is no one else who can meet this crisis, and believe me, it is a crisis. I do not know what is going to happen to our country if you fail us, and I can­ not believe for a moment you will fail us. You ask what my alternative is in that event? Really I have none. That an alternative will appear and that a fight for the honour will ensue is, of course, certain, but so sure am I of my judgment that I can use the word “know,” and I say I know that none other than yourself can unite the confused and conflicting elements o f this country as you can unite them. You will get a following and a support that none other can get, and I think you know the press of Canada well enough to know that you will get a press acclaim that no other can get. More important than all this, you can do a job that no one else can do, be­ cause you can command the confidence and the help that will get big things done and big perils avoided. It is with the fullest sense of re­ sponsibility that I make these statements. If I could do the job myself, I would never feel free to decline, but events and associations over a long life have made success for me impossible. The events and as­ sociations which have brought you to your present unique position make success manifestly within your power. If you will only give the word, we will do the rest in loyal associa­ tion with you, and when this world travail is over, you will always know that you heeded the call of duty in its sternest tones.28 A few days after posting this letter Meighen followed it to W in­ nipeg. He wanted to talk to some o f Bracken’s friends and to Bracken himself, hoping by a fàce-to-fâce encounter to persuade him to allow his name to go before the convention. Ted received a brief progress report from his father, written just before the latter returned to Tor­ onto. “ . . . have worked (with others) hard and tenaciously on a pro­ ject, (what it is perhaps you can guess). Indeed for months I have directed my efforts to the same goal. Oh the discouragements and

144

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

reverses! But things do look more— much more hopeful now. I f I can succeed it w ill be one o f the biggest things I have done. Others (some) have helped much particularly lately. But I was alone for so long.”29 Hopefulness there was in Meighen’s heart after this visit to Winnipeg but he still could not be certain, with the opening o f the convention less than a fortnight away, that Bracken would be a can­ didate. “W ith Mr. Bracken him self we had the greatest difficulty, Meighen wrote to Bennett after the convention was over. “ He was anything but available. On two or three occasions we were almost disposed to give up.”30 But Bracken’s refusal to commit himself, to say either yes or no before the convention assembled, was only one o f the irritating and unsettling features o f the situation. As Meighen’s efforts in that direction became more widely known, there was a swelling chorus o f complaint that he and a small group o f fellow con­ spirators were out to hamstring the convention and impose their will upon it. “ A n agitation got afoot,” he told Bennett, “ that I was the head o f a cabal and determined to choose my own successor, etc., etc. The head o f the agitation was in Toronto, but it spread itself pretty well through the country.”31 The charge was not without foundation, o f course; Meighen had his candidate, or at least a man he hoped would be a candidate. But there was no more reason w hy he should not attempt to organize support for Bracken than there was why others should not do the same for their favourites. With Bracken’s position as yet uncertain and with a good deal o f restiveness among the delegates over the activities o f the “ cabal,” the convention opened in W innipeg’s Civic Auditorium on the morn­ ing o f December the ninth. Meighen gave the major speech at the opening session. “Was tired— very tired,” he remarked in a letter to Ted. “ Had been pitched and jerked about and agreed only the night before to cover what I did. M y preparation was in bed in the dark between n & 3.30 when I should have been asleep!”32 W hat he pre­ pared turned out to be, first, a stinging attack on the Canadian Broad­ casting Corporation and, secondly, an exhortation to the country to rouse itself from apathy towards the war.33 His impalement o f the C.B.C. and its chairman, J. S. Thomson, was provoked by the refusal o f the Corporation to permit the opening session o f the convention to be broadcast across the country. T he con­ vention committee, said Meighen, “were not only refused free use o f this radio, which is granted to every Cabinet minister on demand, but,

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

145

after offering to pay regular charges for time, they were again refused.” Thomson based his refusal on a W hite Paper issued earlier by the C.B.C. which announced that political controversy would not be per­ mitted over the radio in time o f war. Since the proceedings o f a Conservative convention could not be other than controversial, since the Liberal government was bound to be attacked, those proceedings, it appeared, must be kept off the air. Meighen waxed ironic about this puerile and discriminatory type o f censorship. No political controversy in time of war? They would not coun­ tenance such a heinous thing! True, they did not countenance it on this occasion; they did not allow it; and the method by which they prevented it has at least the merit of simplicity; they prevented it by allowing one party on the radio, and one alone. But has anyone lis­ tened since the war began, or for years before, to a radio address by the Prime Minister, or by any of his ministers, which was not charged and replete with political appeal; whose purpose was not from first to last to boost the stock of the King Government, to show the people what wonderful things it was doing, what a grand success it was making, how beloved it was by the whole country, and what great and immortal men were at the head o f our affairs; which was not designed especially to demonstrate their conspicuous superiority over those bun­ gling incompetents who had led us to victory in the last war ? These men, month after month, week after week, day after day, have gone on delivering messages to the people o f Canada, the central purpose of which was to build themselves up, to popularize themselves and thus to be ready for a trial o f strength when an appeal to the electors comes. And the Radio Commission says that is all right; that is in the national interest; that only contributes to loving harmony which must prevail in time o f war! That, according to Chairman Thomson, is a great patriotic purpose; but if we who think differendy seek to upset those contentions, if we seek to show the other point of view, he tells us that to do so is to inject political discord into a happy atmosphere, and he turns the button against millions of people whom we want to reach, and who are waiting to hear. The button never seemed to be turned against those prepared to praise the Government over the C.B.C., Meighen added, citing a few recent instances; indeed they were paid to do so out o f public funds. But “we o f the Conservative Convention o f this Dominion cannot be heard and we cannot pay to be heard.” Thomson admittedly had made one concession. “ . . . as i f to expose the grossness o f his dis­ crimination, [he] announced that while he w ill not permit Canadians

146

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

to listen to your leader o f today, he w ill under certain conditions per­ mit them to listen to your leader o f tomorrow, and then dares to tell us that in order to be heard, our future leader must not attack and must not abuse— in other words, he must speak under the direction o f the Chairman o f the Radio Commission!” W hat did all this mean ? It meant, Meighen charged, that the “radio o f Canada has been for years, is today, and Mr. K in g intends it w ill continue to be, the effec­ tive monopoly, tool and instrument o f a partisan Government headed by himself.” Meighen’s references to the war covered ground familiar to those who had heard or read his views on this subject before. The burden o f his argument was the uselessness and wastefulness o f the “ Zombie” army, the army o f fifty thousand conscripts for home defence. “ I never could,” he said, “nor can anyone else, logically justify two classes o f armies; one with a right to keep itself geographically in a defined area at home, and the other obliged to fight where the enemy is and where alone a war can be won. Are we not all citizens o f the same country? H ow then can we have two standards o f obligation?” O f course no logic could account for this situation; it could only be ac­ counted for in terms o f political expediency. It was a consequence o f a generation o f political dishonesty in the Province o f Quebec. After twenty-five years, after the harvests o f those twenty-five years, the harvests o f Mr. K ing and his confederates in election after election, boasted o f by themselves and by their organs far and wide— and by none more loudly than by one right in this city o f Winnipeg— they now find themselves in a position where, having so long falsified facts for their own political advantage, they dare not tell their people the truth; they dare not tell them that the true, logical obligations o f war compel service wherever the nation decides that the nation can best be saved. They dare not tell them that truth. So they build up a home army o f draftees. . . . The numbers o f that fossilized army fill the speeches o f ministers o f the Crown and clutter the radio week after w eek .. . . We, at home, are implored to look with pride at the scores of thousands being equipped and mobilized, gathered for an imaginary defence in the interior o f Canada, and to forget about reinforcements overseas. In other words, the Government o f our country shelters itself behind a deceitful paper facade. This is an illuminating indication o f the country’s manpower war effort under Mr. King; and the reason we are in this condition, the reason we are bound in these shallows, is that the party now in office

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

I47

is the heir of its own discreditable past. Its leading members and its first minister are entangled in the meshes of a sorry history. N ow , having fired off for the last time in public his broadsides against Mackenzie K ing, Meighen took his leave o f public life. There were those present who had heard his earlier valedictory at the 1927 convention in this same city o f Winnipeg, when he had finished his defence o f the Hamilton speech by saying: “ . . . I can look in the face o f the Conservative party, o f the whole Canadian people, and all the world who care to listen, and say there was no falsity or faltering, no act, no deed, no episode over which the pen o f history need be shaded, no period or place into which the keenest enquirer may not go. There was no matter over which now I want to make petition. The book can be closed and I am content.” 34 Unexpectedly that book had had some chapters added to it after 1927 and in this, his second and final valedictory fifteen years later, he closed it once again with lan­ guage reminiscent o f that earlier occasion. Gentlemen, I am through. It is just thirty-five years ago this month that I was honoured with nomination in Portage la Prairie for the House of Commons. The intervening three decades and a half have been crowded with events, including two wars, and they have been strenuously lived. . . . For about twenty-eight years I have served as a member of parliament in one House or the other. For something over twelve I was a minister of the Crown; for more than sixteen I have been honoured with the position of leader in either House, and at different times have led both sides of both Houses. Please do not think I am relating this by way of boasting; it is recalled only to indicate that I have worked hard and done my best. It has fallen to me to lead this party through three general elections, and that in pre-radio days. Fortune came and fortune fled; but, believe in my sincerity when I say that this is no reason for sympathy. It is only the lot of all o f us, at least of all who strive— the joy of the upward struggle, the successes, disappointments and defeats. Perhaps it has been my fate to have had more than the average on both sides of the account, but I promise you there is going to be nothing of bitterness carried forward after the page is turned. As a matter of truth, health and happiness have been better in adversity and no man need feel that he has failed unless, in look­ ing back, the retrospect is blank, or unless time and events have proved that he was wrong. Whether now judged right or wrong, whatever I have said, whatever I have done, is going to remain unrevised and unre­ pented. As it is, it will await whatever verdict may come. The future can assess it or forget it, and it will be all right with me.

148

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

Shortly after Meighen finished speaking Bracken issued a letter to the convention, stating the terms under which he would seek the leadership. He could not, he wrote, desert those whose confidence he had enjoyed for twenty years as the leader o f a progressive group. “ If, however, the Conservative party is becoming in fact the progres­ sive party that is indicated by the spirit o f the Port Hope report, there w ill be but little separating our respective views. . . . If, therefore, the convention were prepared to give visible evidence o f its progressive intent by association o f these two names, Progressive and Conservative, I would be w illing to become a candidate for the leadership.” 35 The effect o f Bracken’s demand that the party change its name in advance o f his entering the lists could be compared, as Grant Dexter put it in the W innipeg Free Press, “ only to the throwing o f a stick o f dyna­ mite into a crowded Sunday school picnic.”36 Resentment boiled up on the floor o f the convention, perhaps not so much over the proposed name itself, for to be “progressive” was to be on the side o f the angels, as over the gall o f an outsider in laying down conditions before seek­ ing the privilege o f leading the party. A motion presented on the afternoon o f the second day that the name be changed to “Progressive Conservative” ran into stormy weather and an amendment carried that the matter be left in abeyance until after a leader was chosen. “ . . . one would have thought on Thursday afternoon,” Meighen wrote, “ that there would have been bloodshed before the prefix ‘Progressive’ could be affixed to the name o f the Party.”37 The question was, would Bracken run i f the prefix were not added beforehand ? Would he let his name stand in the expectation that, i f he were elected, the desired change o f name would be made? The minutes ticked steadily by after supper on Thursday, the deadline for nominations as steadily approached, and still there was no sign o f Bracken at the Auditorium. Murdoch MacPherson, John Diefenbaker, Howard Green and H . H . Stevens had all been nominated and President Sidney Smith o f the University o f Manitoba was said to be standing by, w illing to accept nomination i f Bracken decided not to. The latter’s nomination paper had been drawn up and signed by his mover and seconder, Arthur L . Smith o f Calgary and Gordon Graydon; all that was needed was his own signature but where was the man ? Suddenly, just forty-five seconds before the deadline for nominations, he appeared. With only seven seconds to go before the deadline bell would be rung, his paper was thrust into the hand o f the chairman o f the nominations committee.38

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

I49

Bracken was the first o f the five candidates to address the con­ vention. It was, Meighen reported to Bennett, “ a rather poor speech — in fact, I have never heard so poor a speech make so good an impres­ sion.”39 Whether Bracken had made a sufficiently good impression to be elected would not be known until the balloting took place on the afternoon o f the next day. Then it would be learned whether the display o f temper over his request that the party’s name be changed reflected a prevailing opposition to Bracken himself. Reporting in the W innipeg Free Press on the controversy about the name, and on the proceedings o f the convention as a whole, Grant Dexter each day pictured an antithesis between the “ old guard” and the rank and file o f the party. Just who constituted the “old guard” he did not specify, though Meighen was obviously its leading figure, but as he saw the situation, the efforts o f that group to swing the convention in Bracken’s favour had aroused a lot o f angry resistance among the delegates as a whole. The “ old guard,” one would gather, were at­ tempting to impose Bracken on the party just as, according to the Free Press and others, a few mining tycoons had imposed Meighen on it a year earlier. Bracken was the choice o f a small faction, just as Meighen had been, not o f the party at large. This line o f argument was transparently an attempt to discredit Bracken, both in the con­ vention and in the country. “ Old guard” was a term with pejorative connotations, conjuring up an image o f a group o f elderly, mossbacked, ultra-Tories, sitting in a smoke-filled room and plotting ways in which they could continue to control the party against its younger, more advanced and more enlightened element. It suggested a struggle between democracy and autocracy o f the sort so dear to the imagin­ ings o f Mackenzie K ing, between the generality o f the party and those few who were accustomed to direct its affairs. It is not easy to make this image o f things accord with reality. To be sure, there were those at the convention who complained about the activities o f Meighen and the rest o f the “cabal” but their chief grievance seemed to be against the notion that it was necessary to go outside the party to find a suitable leader who could gain substantial Liberal support. T he leader, said David J. Walker o f Toronto in nominating Diefenbaker, “ should be a Conservative; a Conservative, not an outsider. We don’t want someone who is going to sell out our birthright for a mess o f pottage. . . .”40 Many a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative from all parts o f Canada shared that opinion, which was

150

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

far more an expression o f “old guard” Conservatism than were the efforts o f those who wanted to identify the party with the kind o f moderate rural progressivism represented by Bracken. The latter’s willingness to contest the leadership was based on the supposition that the party would henceforth be inspired by the spirit o f Port Hope. Meighen was not enamoured o f all the pronouncements o f that con­ ference but he did believe that the party must re-orient itself and be given a new look. His attempts to persuade Bracken to stand, his labours to enlist the aid o f prominent Conservatives, all stemmed from his view that this was the way the party could be prepared for the future. Those whom he tried to line up behind Bracken were in large part men he had known and worked with in days gone by, men whose influence he thought was great. In the sense that they had been associated with him in the past they were o f the “old guard” but many old, true-blue Conservatives were convinced that they were betraying the party. In any event i f there was an antithesis o f the sort that Dexter wrote about, it all but disappeared on the afternoon o f the convention’s third day when the election o f the leader took place. Bracken had a sub­ stantial plurality o f votes on the first ballot but lacked the necessary absolute majority. On the second ballot, however, he won with 538 votes out o f 872. He then gave an acceptance address much better, Meighen thought, than his speech after being nominated the night before. It was “a very good speech,” wrote Meighen, “mostly read, but exceedingly well thought out. The impression it created was quite remarkable. During the ovation, Ray Milner, the Chairman, put a motion to change the name to ‘Progressive Conservative’ and, at least according to the Chair, it carried unanimously.”41 Meighen, o f course, was immensely pleased with the outcome. “ It was really a wonderful Convention,” he assured Bennett, “— I think probably the best we have had yet.”42 For once in his long career every­ thing had turned out as he had wished and worked for. To Ted he wrote: You would have no trouble in comprehending the news from Winnipeg. My own plans were for 3 months well known. Friends o f John Bracken, i.e. if they had will-power had been enlisted. The long history o f our struggle will never be known. I took very big risks and might well have overthrown what good will existed toward me in the Conserv­ ative party. Up to within 2 hours o f Bracken’s appearance there were

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

*5 *

organized campaigns against the so-called “cabal.” Needless to say I did nothing that was not perfectly within my right, and nothing not definitely necessary to success across all kinds o f pitfalls. We finally did succeed and with an acclaim far far greater than I had ever thought possible. . . . It is all over now and the last year’s leadership has been fruitful and the long desired release creditable. So I am satisfied— well, well satisfied. The Winnipeg papers were particularly generous to me. The Free Press always is after I am safely out. Indeed all papers used me well. It will be the only honourable thing that I help Bracken quietly. He deserves it and will be worthy. As a speaker he does not shine and probably never will. But his personality and sagac­ ity inspire confidence. Very many who had opposed me bitterly came around after and said I had been right from the beginning.43

With great relief, now that Bracken was installed as leader, Meighen retreated once again to the sidelines, prepared to assist his successor when and as he could but profoundly thankful to have the burden o f leadership removed from his own shoulders. “ I intend to give Bracken such help as might properly come from a retired leader,” he explained to Bennett. “ I do hope he will not expect me to do more.”44 To Bracken him self he wrote a few days after the convention: “ You are in charge, and no important step must be taken without your ap­ proval.”45 But taking important steps quickly and in a decisive man­ ner did not seem to be Bracken’s way o f doing things. Seldom has any party leader been succeeded by another as different in tempera­ ment and manner as he was from Meighen. H e preferred to wait and see how things would develop rather than seize time by the fore­ lock ; his utterances were marked more by caution than by forthright­ ness or eloquence. He had made his mark in Manitoba, not by brilliance in controversy, but by careful, thorough organization, sound administration and an unerring instinct for saying and doing things that pleased the farmers o f the province. Never having been in op­ position before but always in office, he was understandably less con­ versant than Meighen with how a forceful opposition ought to be conducted. N ot being a strong debater, he was in no hurry to find a seat in Parliament and was afraid, he told Mackenzie K ing early in 1943, that he “would find the House o f Commons difficult.” 46 K ing offered to call a by-election in Selkirk, Manitoba, which was then vacant, and to refrain from putting up a Government candidate but Bracken was too prudent not to see that this was a Trojan horse. He

152

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

knew that Selkirk, where the Conservative had run a very poor third in 1940, m ight present too acid a test o f his ability to attract dissident Liberal votes. The C.C.F. would certainly run someone against him and i f that someone received unofficial Liberal support, Selkirk might become another South York. So Bracken bided his time and Graydon became Conservative House leader in place o f Hanson, whose long­ standing wish to be relieved o f that post was at last granted. As the early weeks o f 1943 went by, as Parliament resumed its sittings after the Christmas recess without any sign o f Bracken even wanting to enter the House, disquiet spread in Conservative circles. “ I wish he were in the House,” Bennett wrote to Meighen from Eng­ land, “for it does seem to me that with Hanson giving up the bridge the Party is in a pretty bad way i f Graydon is responsible for leader­ ship in the House.” Bennett also mentioned his disappointment in reading Bracken’s speeches. “ He does not sound a loud, clear note o f Empire, although possibly his convictions may be strong. I should have liked him to be a little more explicit on Empire relations as well as on compulsory military service.” Still, he realized that Bracken must be backed up by the party. “ I trust our Eastern friends will give him some measure o f support, but I am told they do not view his election with any enthusiasm. The main thing is to see that the Party presents a solid front to the country, which can only be done I suppose after Bracken gets a seat in the House.”47 Replying to this, Meighen conceded “ that the conduct o f the leadership at Ottawa is not o f the nature you would give, and cer­ tainly not o f the nature I would give.” However, he defended Bracken’s judgment in staying out o f Parliament for the time being.48 Bracken could do more good outside than in the Commons “ under the conditions to which Mr. K in g has reduced that Assembly. He has used an overwhelming majority to convert the Chamber into anything at all but a deliberative body. The roar o f vast numbers o f partisans takes the place o f debate. A man who dares to advance real criticism is thundered down and a brute majority seeks to make a pariah o f him at once. Better service can be rendered this country by going to the people direct, telling them the truth and presenting remedies."49 Bracken m ight be a little too cautious and quiet to suit more out­ spoken, vigorous men like Bennett or Meighen but, wrote the latter in one o f his letters to Ted, he “ makes no positive mistakes” and had the common touch needed in this age o f mass democracy.

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

153

. . . it must be admitted that people like what they call a common man— especially do farmers like him. Note how Churchill had to wait till he was over 65 and for a great crisis to get the great call, while for 25 years he had been very plainly the outstanding man in Britain with all the talents— distrusted just because he was brilliant, extra­ ordinary. . . . But oh I do wish he [Bracken] would say something and at least indicate that he is leader o f the opposition. Most certainly though I will support him, and will not embarrass him under any conditions. He is honest, K ing is not and the latter no more than Bracken ever specified anything— always thundered about the paradise in this or that field that he favoured and was cheered as i f to picture an Elysium was to reach it. I f Bracken had only K ’s thunder power he certainly would beat him, because he has personality and character which K ing has not. . . . After almost a year’s work I dragged him from his diggings and made him leader. So you can imagine the stake I have in him.60

W hen the Conservatives under George Drew won a provincial election in Ontario in the summer o f 1943, after nearly a decade in opposition, Meighen thought his predictions o f the political future and his faith in Bracken were both proving to be well founded. He expected to see the Liberal party decline and the C.C.F. make great gains in the urban ridings. I f Ontario was at all a barometer for the country, the election there certainly indicated that this was the shape o f things to come. The Liberal regime established by Mitchell Hep­ burn collapsed, losing all but fifteen o f the sixty-three seats it had won the last time. The C.C.F. came from nowhere to win thirty-four seats, most o f them predominantly urban, while the Conservatives increased their strength from twenty-three to thirty-eight, the majority in rural areas. These results gave credence to Meighen’s opinion that the Conservative party would have to rely increasingly on the country people, which lay back o f his determination to make Bracken leader, and he was convinced that Bracken’s influence had aided enormously in the rural ridings. “The C.C.F.,” he wrote, commenting on the election, “is a menace to this country and w ill be the ‘left’ party o f the future. It has all the fakes and fanatics now within its compass, and their number is legion; modern life diminishes reading and lowers the level o f serious thought and this is all to their advantage.” However, some comfort could be derived from the Conservative recovery. “ . . . the result puts the Conservative Party back on the map and probably ensures its survival which must, one would think, mean

154

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

the ultimate extinction o f the Liberal party as a major force. It will o f course all depend on leadership but all here [Toronto] agree that Bracken’s name helped Drew tremendously in rural Ontario. . . .”51 Meighen had had too much political experience to regard one provincial election as clear evidence o f the way things were tending nationally. However, he grew steadily more optimistic after Drew’s victory in Ontario. “ The feeling is good,” he assured Bracken, “ and the reliance o f the great mass o f sensible Canadians is on the Pro­ gressive Conservative Party.” 52 A t the end o f 1943 he wrote confi­ dently to Bennett: “Unless all signs fail, the K in g Government is in for a certain defeat. Even the super-cautious Mr. Bracken is very definite that the K in g Party cannot come near winning and w ill in­ deed be last. . . . The Party Mr. Bracken has to defeat is the C.C.F.”53 T he hazards o f such prophesying were obscured by the results o f elections in a number o f other provinces, in all o f which the Liberals lost ground. The two most spectacular o f these contests occurred in the summer o f 1944, when the Liberal government o f Saskatche­ wan was overwhelmingly routed by the C.C.F., and the Union Nation­ ale overthrew the Liberal government in Quebec. Then in June 1945 Drew consolidated his position in Ontario at the expense o f both Liberals and C.C.F., this time winning all but twenty-four o f the ninety seats. Indeed the Liberal party did seem to be on the skids. Just one week after D rew ’s latest victory, though, these hopeful provincial portents were shown to be more or less meaningless nationally and Meighen’s confidence in K ing’s imminent collapse, so long hoped for, was proved unjustified. In the Dominion general election o f June the eleventh the K in g government received a fresh mandate. True, its strength in the Commons was very substantially reduced, while the Conservatives won more seats— sixty-seven— than they had since 1930. But o f these, forty-nine were in Ontario and only five in the prairies where Bracken’s unobtrusive magic had been ex­ pected to work such wonders. In none o f the three prairie provinces did the Conservatives receive as much as one-quarter o f the popular vote and they outpolled the Liberals only in British Columbia and Ontario. Evidently the Liberal party was not ready yet to go the way o f its British namesake. The outcome o f this election seriously undermined what power Bracken had been able to establish for him self as Conservative chief­ tain and marked the beginning o f the end o f his leadership. It also

I N S E A R C H OF A N E X I T

155

marked in effect the end o f Meighen’s great and long-lived influence in the party, for Bracken’s failure reflected inevitably on the judgment o f the man w ho had been instrumental in bringing him and the party together. Although Bracken now had a seat in the House o f Com ­ mons, he was not in his element there and dissatisfaction with his leadership mounted as members o f the party once again took up their search for a Moses. In the summer o f 1948 Bracken resigned as leader and another convention chose D rew in his stead. A n election the next year gave the Liberals the largest majority ever won up until that time and brought personal defeat to Bracken, who had been pre­ pared to serve under Drew in the Commons. Acknowledging a letter from Meighen expressing regret over his defeat and admiration o f his services to Canada, Bracken wrote: It was very thoughtful o f you to write. Whatever the political con­ sequences o f the last half dozen years I am pleased they gave me an opportunity to see something o f you occasionally and to learn to admire your sterling Canadianism. We in western Canada from the four decades I have known it were taught to think o f all Conservatives, and particularly some o f the Party’s outstanding leaders as being among the nation’s worst enemies. M y experience in public life has shown me how narrow and prejudiced those views are. I leave the active field with no personal disappoint­ ment but with a deep sense o f the injustice heaped upon the heads o f the nation’s leaders by party propaganda to which certain sections of the press lend their powerful and prejudiced support. In this comment I am thinking not o f myself but o f other leaders, including yourself It is greatly to be regretted that democracy is forced to function under circumstances where its best public men are so pilloried that only those who have a deep sense o f patriotism are willing to make the necessary sacrifices to serve the state. It has always been a matter o f regret to me that you were denied the opportunity to serve during the many years in which your services would have been invaluable to Canada. The last few years have un­ done some o f the harm o f earlier propaganda and as a result I leave the field o f politics with a very great admiration for Arthur Meighen, the man.84

CHAPTER

SIX

L O O K IN G B A C K t is t h e h a b i t o f men as they grow older to look back more and more, serenely or in anger, proudly or not, upon the life they have lived. So it was with Meighen after he handed over the leadership o f the party to John Bracken at the end o f 1942. He was then approaching his seventieth birthday and, as he reminded the convention, the thirty-five years since he had engaged him self to politics had been crowded with events and strenuously lived. “ The chords o f memory unite us with the past,” he had said at the earlier Winnipeg convention in 1927. H ow much there was for him to think back upon since that distant night in Portage la Prairie when the cheers and joyous marchings o f his followers greeted his first election to the House o f Commons! The chords o f his own memory vibrated with the richly textured tones o f the past, with the words and deeds o f many men, with comic scenes and moments o f despair, with vin­ dications and humiliations, and battles won and lost. He had ridden both on the crests o f waves and in the troughs between. N ow , back to stay on the safe, dry shore o f private life, he gazed out over the tumultuous sea o f his public career and thought about the long and troubled voyage he had made. O f course his thoughts were by no means entirely directed to the past after 1942. O n the contrary he continued to take an active in­ terest in politics, especially as long as Bracken remained Progressive Conservative leader; he still spoke out from time to time on the issues o f the war, and o f the peace when peace at last returned in 1945. The affairs o f Canadian General Securities and its various subsidiaries, as well as, to a lesser degree, o f the numerous other companies o f which he was a director, made demands upon his time and his atten­ tion, keeping him much occupied with the workaday world o f the present. Also, he interested him self a great deal in the affairs o f the Salvation Arm y, an organization he warmly admired for its

I

156

i

LOOKING BACK

157

practical Christianity even though its rather exuberant form o f re­ ligious expression contrasted with the more restrained, decorous Pres­ byterian variety in which he had been reared. His connection with the Arm y began shortly after the outbreak o f war in 1939, when he assumed the chairmanship o f its newly formed Toronto Advisory Board. W hen a National Advisory Board was established a few months later he became its chairman as well, a position he continued to hold until his death. Under his direction the Arm y conducted its first National War and Home Service campaign for funds in 1940, exceeding its objective by nearly one-third. As organizer and coun­ sellor, and as a generous though unostentatious contributor to its funds, Meighen gained the great esteem o f the men and women o f the Arm y and was proud to have some part in the success o f their devoted and selfless labours. Finally, there was another interest that kept him from becoming immersed too much in the past. T he welfare o f his children and grandchildren, their future, was a consideration never absent from his mind. He set very great store by the bond o f the family and deeply cherished his loved ones, who were to some extent projections o f him self and in a way his immortality. A nd yet his own future, he knew, must in the nature o f things be relatively short and barren o f great new undertakings or achievements. So in his leisure moments, which lengthened with the passing o f the years, his mind turned increasingly to the retrospect rather than the prospect. The prospect o f Canadian politics he did not find pleasing to con­ template in any case. “We are drifting . . . into involuntary servitude,” he wrote morosely to Bennett. “K in g ’s tactics have been, and are, to attract the C.C.F. into his orbit by Socialist instalments under a series o f disguises. These instalments are not only substantial but portentous and we are quite a distance down the slope.”1 A propos o f what the state could and ought to do to ensure the conservation o f natural resources, he remarked : “We are neglecting the great, gigantic tasks o f government and spending our money buying votes with handouts.” Unfortunately no one in public life, no one with political ambition, seemed any longer to have the courage to speak out against this tendency. Certainly the Conservative party had not, Meighen decided, judging by the platform it adopted in 1948. There “ was so much nonsense in it,” he remarked, “ that I nearly collapsed on reading the document.”2

158

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

The retrospect was not altogether pleasing either but it contained the record o f his own career, o f a time when he had been a force to be reckoned with. O f all that met his eye in looking backward, o f all the public aspect o f his life, the one subject with which he was “more concerned than with any other this side o f Jordan,” as he phrased it, was the constitutional crisis o f 1926. One could therefore understand the unbounded delight with which he welcomed the ap­ pearance in the spring o f 1943 o f his friend Eugene Forsey’s book on the royal power o f the dissolution o f Parliament. Meighen had known for some time that the book was coming; indeed he and Forsey had corresponded voluminously about it and he had read the manuscript, making suggestions and jotting down lively marginal notes as he went along. But he insisted that there should be no ac­ knowledgment o f his help or any reference to him in the preface. If there were, he thought, the effect o f the book might be lessened and the credit owing to Forsey not be given. The chief victim o f Forsey’s analysis, apart from Mackenzie K ing himself, was Arthur Berriedale Keith, the principal academic defender o f the position K ing had taken in 1926. Opposite a quotation from one pronouncement o f his Meighen wrote: “ Just a noisy chatterbox. He mistook prejudice for conviction.” And again: “ Keith is a mud­ dle-head— his mind is taken captive by one platitude today and another tomorrow.” W here Forsey quoted K eith’s airy dismissal o f Asquith’s view that the Crown could and must refuse a dissolution under cer­ tain circumstances as showing “ the statesman’s obvious and regret­ table decline in mental power and sense o f political realities,” Meighen exploded in the margin: “ Contemptible! Asquith in decline would be an intellectual giant beside Keith.” 3 As for J. S. Ewart, a wellknown Canadian Liberal writer on the constitution, whose opinions about 1926 were also refuted by Forsey, Meighen commented acidly: “ He never was considered an authority on Constitutional matters and I always regarded him as just a common nuisance.”4 W hat Meighen liked most about Forsey’s book was that it showed conclusively that K in g’s whole case in 1926 had been so much con­ stitutional flim-flam. A nd was it not fine that K in g was still alive to read it, i f he would? “M y chief satisfaction is the exposure o f K ing,” Meighen wrote to Ted. “ His reputation as a strategist arose from this crisis o f ’26. In truth his conduct was shameful. But our constitution (or the British) can only operate among gentlemen.”5 So that the exposure o f K in g m ight be widely disseminated Meighen

LOOKING BACK

159

ordered a large number o f copies o f the book as gifts for his friends and acquaintances. One recipient was Dafoe o f the W innipeg Free Press, and how Meighen must have chuckled to him self as he put that name on the list! The Free Press, he told Forsey, “has developed the habit o f considering itself a sort o f local Vatican . . . and has become intoxicated with a sense o f self-importance.” 6 “Dafoe’s treat­ ment o f m yself personally in the Free Press,” he conceded, “ was never ungenerous; in fact, at various times it was quite the contrary.” But his “ treatment o f m y public conduct, especially in the election o f 1926, was violent, and, one might almost say, vicious. H aving once misstated his opponent’s position (usually with considerable skill) he was a master in pounding home his conclusions. I always considered him the most effective Editor, from a party point o f view, the country had.”7 The import o f Forsey’s work was not lost on Dafoe. The Free Press published a review o f it, unsigned but written by him, which filled up altogether about seven columns in two succes­ sive issues o f the paper. It was a bitter partisan diatribe, the gist o f which was that Forsey was guilty o f “ thorough intellectual dishonesty” in having written, so as to assist in discrediting K in g ’s leadership dur­ ing the war, a campaign document, apparently planned to appear at the moment when Mr. Meighen, re-emerging from the shades into which the electors o f Canada at the instance o f Mr. K ing cast him in 1926, would take belated vengeance upon the victor. If in the presentation o f his case Mr. Forsey’s skill had matched his venom, this would have been one o f the greatest political pamphlets in the English language. As it is, it is a pretentious “ dud”.8

As it happened Dafoe was hardly in a position to accuse anyone o f intellectual dishonesty in the matter, since he himself, a few months before the constitutional crisis, had stated that the K in g government, as then composed, would not be entitled to a second dissolution o f Parliament i f defeated in the House o f Commons. In order to lessen the possibility o f such a defeat, and to legitimize a request for a dis­ solution should defeat occur, he was attempting to persuade the Pro­ gressives to form an outright coalition with the Liberals. In February 1926 he explained to Robert Forke, the Progressive leader, what would happen were K in g to meet with an adverse vote in the House. If Meighen can get in and demand a dissolution, he is safe; other­ wise he may have serious trouble on his hands. One of my reasons for wanting to see a coalition was that if a new deal o f this kind were

i6 o

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

made, the Government, in the event o f a defeat, might reasonably ask the Governor General for a dissolution; whereas a purely party gov­ ernment, already in a minority, would probably be obliged without question to turn over the reigns [r«V] o f office to Meighen.9

Yet only four and a h alf months later Dafoe in the Free Press was intemperately denouncing the refusal o f a dissolution to K in g and his minority government, arguing that according to British precedent he had a right to it, and the granting o f one to Meighen, who, like all Tories in Dafoe’s eyes, stood for the two greatest o f evils, “extreme economic nationalism and abject political colonialism.”10 Either he had told Forke what he really did not believe to be true or had forsaken his belief when the crisis came. In any event Dafoe’s reputation for intellectual honesty was not improved by the controversy which followed the publication in the spring o f 1943 o f his attack on Forsey. The latter, upon reading the long two-part outburst in the Free Press, retorted in a letter to the editor that the review was “ compounded o f about equal parts o f mis­ representation and abuse” and proceeded to correct a few o f Dafoe’s grosser misrepresentations.11 Aside from a brief editorial note at the bottom o f this letter there was no immediate rejoinder from the inner sanctum o f the Free Press building. Forsey intended to let the matter rest there. However, when two men o f such different political opin­ ions as Meighen and T. C. Douglas o f the C.C.E urged him not to let Dafoe off so lightly, he wrote a three-thousand-word letter to the Free Press, refuting Dafoe’s criticisms point by point. There ensued for the next three months a lively three-cornered controversy in the Free Press, the Canadian Forum (which printed an article by Forsey that Dafoe savagely denounced) and Saturday Night, with B. K . Sandwell, to Meighen’s great surprise and pleasure, firmly on Forsey’s side. The climax came when Dafoe accused Forsey o f dishonesty in not having quoted in his book from a speech by W illiam Pitt— which Pitt had never made! From start to finish Dafoe failed to disprove a single statement o f fact in the book or to discredit a single argument. Just when Meighen was rejoicing over Forsey’s vindication o f him self and o f Lord Byng, he was reminded o f another episode from the past, this time the much more recent past. In April 1943 Forsey, happening to be in Montreal, went to call on C. H . Cahan, as he sometimes did when he was in the city. In the course o f their con­ versation Cahan mentioned having heard, as Forsey caught his mean­

LOOKING BACK

l6 l

ing, that a fund o f $200,000 had been raised for Meighen after he became Conservative leader in 1941. Forsey remembered that Meighen had already vehemently denied a similar tale, to the effect that he had been paid $150,000 to give up his seat in the Senate and take the leadership. However, Forsey understood Cahan to say that he knew his version to be correct and could name some o f the contributors. Shortly afterwards Forsey had occasion to be in Toronto. W hile there he dropped in to see Meighen and told him what he had heard from Cahan. Meighen denied it categorically. “ There was never two hundred thousand dollars,” Forsey quoted him, “nor two hun­ dred thousand cents, nor twenty cents. Nothing o f the sort was even suggested. I f I had done a thing like that I ought to be put in jail.” The only fond was one made up o f small contributions for the South York by-election, the major expenses o f which, as a matter o f fact, had been paid for by Meighen out o f his own pocket. “ He is very anxious to find out who your informant was,” Forsey wrote to Cahan, “so that he can confront him and thrash the whole thing out. Indeed he said he was ‘resolved’ to go to Montreal and take me with him, ask­ ing you to produce your informant then and there.”12 Cahan replied : “ I don’t clearly understand just why I should be interrogated by Mr. M. regarding a passing private conversation with you. The story, as told to me, was that 200 persons subscribed one thousand each; but I must decline to discuss the details, as I have no responsibility in the matter.” 13 Evidently the origins o f what Meighen regarded as mali­ cious gossip would remain shrouded in obscurity as far as Cahan was concerned. Meighen, however, was determined to get at those origins i f he could. H e wrote a letter to Cahan which showed how incensed he was that his integrity should be held up to doubt and his honour stained by the circulation o f such stories. Regarding the alleged fond o f $200,000 he wrote: I . . . received no money and no securities to that value or to any other value, nor have any money or securities been given me for myself, or . . . remained with me at all, o f any value whatsoever. Further, during my Leadership no fond for the Conservative Party was raised or obtained in any way. The only political subscriptions given for any Federal use were certain small subscriptions to help in the South York election. I hope this is sweeping enough, and i f there is any form in which you think it could be made more sweeping, and will advise me, I will immediately reply in that most sweeping form. . . .

IÔ 2

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

With your experience you will know that I cannot permit the circulation to any extent whatever o f statements or rumours to the above effect, and I cannot suffer them to go uninvestigated and un­ challenged. I, therefore, have a right to demand o f you, and now demand, that you produce the man or men in your presence and at a time when I can be present, so that I can confront him or them with the denial and require from him or them at once either substantiation or a complete retraction and apology. Where the man or men may be I do not know. I f he or they should be in Montreal, you will be able to reach him or them immediately and have him or them present at your home or elsewhere at a time which you can fix. The earlier the better. I will then undertake to be present. I f he or they should be in Toronto or elsewhere, I expect you to communicate with him or them and arrange to be at a place named by him or them at a date fixed by him or them, and the earlier the better; and whenever or wher­ ever it is, I will be there. If this should mean expense to you, I am ready to pay the expense, and hereby undertake to do so. As Dr. Forsey has heard these rumours from more sources than one, and particularly has heard the statement as a statement o f fact from yourself, I am going to make every effort to have him present as well, and I feel sure that he owes it to me to be present i f it is within his power at all. I cannot accept, nor can I be expected to accept, anything but com­ pliance with the above demand, and I feel you certainly owe it to me to see that compliance is prompt and unequivocal.14

Instead o f complying, however, Cahan responded with a denial that he had said $200,000 had been presented to Meighen. He then gave the substance o f his conversation with Forsey as he recalled it. I said that I now regretted that I had been so active in securing your appointment to the leadership o f the party in December [ffc], 1941, inasmuch as to you it had meant the loss o f leadership o f the party in the Senate and your Senate stipend o f $4,000 a year; but that at the time you were the only one o f the prospective candidates whom I regarded as qualified and competent. I regretted your defeat in South York, as that left you leader o f the party without a seat in the House and without the financial income which appertains to the office o f the leader o f the opposition. I also expressed regret that you had resigned at Winnipeg, as I had hoped that you would carry on for a time without a seat in Parlia­ ment, as Bracken evidently intended to do. It was then mentioned by Forsey, or by me, that in so doing you would have assumed a financial burden which you might not have

LOOKING BACK

163

felt able to bear. I said that it had been currently reported that, after your election to the leadership . . . a political fund, to the amount of $200,000 had been subscribed to defray the prospective expenses of the re-organization of the party. The report which I heard was that 200 persons had subscribed $1,000 each fbr this purpose, but I had no per­ sonal knowledge, and never claimed to have, of the fact. There was nothing said in this intimate conversation between old friends that was derogatory to you in the slightest degree.15 Meighen, Forsey reported to Cahan, seemed quite satisfied with this explanation18 and there the matter was closed. In a final note to Forsey on the subject Cahan remarked: “M. was never a friend o f mine and is not now a friend. One reason w hy I have never written my memoirs is that it would be difficult to leave out references to M .”17 With the first o f those two sentences Meighen would have whole­ heartedly agreed. Meighen was often urged to write his own memoirs after he finally removed him self from public life but he refused. He had not the time, he said, and doubted whether, in any case, very many people would be interested in his story. He was content, as he put it in his farewell remarks to the convention, to let the future assess it or forget it. Even with more time at his disposal in the post-war years when Max, having left the army and joined Canadian General Securities in a senior position, was assuming more and more responsibility for administering the investment trusts which had been his father’s special concern, Meighen remained disinclined to start the laborious task o f preparing his reminiscences. W ho would read what he wrote, he wondered, and how could he write without more documentary mate­ rial to work with ? His memory was still good but the written records in his possession were scanty and quite inadequate to provide the substance and verification that would be required. Unlike Mackenzie K in g he had never kept a diary nor had he, as K in g had done, care­ fully hoarded all the papers, however trivial, that held the story o f his life. Upon moving to Toronto from Ottawa in 1926 he had left behind practically all the correspondence and other papers accumu­ lated during his years as a private member o f Parliament, minister o f the Crown, Prime Minister and leader o f the Opposition. N ow , twenty years later, he had no idea where they were or, indeed, whether they were anywhere to be found.

1 64

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

H e did, however, accept the suggestion o f W. H . Clarke, head o f the publishing house o f Clarke, Irwin & Company Limited, that he assemble a collection o f his speeches for publication. Even that was a job formidable enough, to select from the many hundreds he had delivered in his long career those most worthy o f inclusion. This problem was simplified, o f course, by the fact that he had hardly ever prepared a manuscript, having spoken almost always without even notes. There was therefore no text o f the vast majority o f speeches presented outside Parliament; they were lost for all time except insofar as they had been reported in the newspapers. But even those that had survived intact, whether in the Debates o f Parliament or in steno­ graphic transcriptions made at the time o f delivery, were so nümerous that to choose only enough to fill a single volume o f average size was not easy. Delving into the past, Meighen finally made a selection o f thirty-eight, spanning the years from 1911 to 1949. Many o f them were debating speeches recalling some o f his great moments in Com ­ mons or Senate; others dealing with current public questions had been made outside Parliament, such as his discourse to the electors o f Cobourg on the constitutional crisis in 1926, or his defence o f the Hamilton speech which had rocked the first party convention the following year. To leaven the hard, controversial quality o f such material quite a few non-political speeches were included as samples o f his thought and eloquence, including, for instance, the tribute to the dead at Vim y Ridge in 1921, the address on Shakespeare, two speeches about education and a number o f eulogies o f eminent men, long or recently deceased. The collection, adorned with a glowing Foreword contributed by his old and dear friend, Grattan O ’Leary, was issued late in 1949 under the title Unrevised and Unrepented, which Meighen had assured the 1942 convention everything he had said and done was going to remain. N ot long after the book appeared his small grand-daughter, Priscilla Wright, picked up a copy from a table. “Un-re-vised and Un-re-pent-ed,” she said, spelling out its name with some hesitation, “ and, I think, uninteresting.” The reviewers did not find it uninteresting, however. Never be­ fore had Meighen received so uniformly favourable a press. From all ends o f the country, from newspapers and other periodicals o f almost every political stripe, came expressions o f admiration for the speeches and o f regret that a man o f his stature had not fared better in the public life o f his country. He was not only greatly pleased by this

LOOKING BACK

l65

but genuinely surprised and grateful that newspapers which had so hotly opposed him in other days should print such favourable notices o f his book. More than one reviewer and editor received a kindly letter from him, expressing his appreciation o f their generous praise. A ll their praise, though, did not make Unrevised and Unrepented a runaway best seller by any means. In June 1950, commencing an address at a joint meeting o f the L aw Society o f British Columbia and that province’s section o f the Canadian Bar Association, Meighen said, acknowledging the introductory remarks o f the chairman: “ I thank him particularly for the valuable advertisement he has given my recently published book, especially because— though I do not like confessing it— the book needs advertisement.” 18 As his presence in Victoria on that occasion indicated, Meighen continued to speak publicly in the later years o f his life, though less often than formerly. The appearance o f his book, by placing him once more in the public gaze for a time and reminding people o f his eloquence, brought him a good many invitations, some o f which he accepted. H e still possessed, as he neared the end o f his eighth decade, that striking ability to express him self with felicitous grace and clarity and, i f need be, without premeditation. One o f his last short, ex­ temporaneous utterances was made in the autumn o f 1952 and it, also, was to an audience o f lawyers in British Columbia. General J. A . Clark was President o f the Canadian Bar Association that year. He heard that Meighen was going to arrive in Vancouver on the last day o f its annual convention and invited him to attend the final luncheon. A t this meeting, which was to be held on a C.P.R. coastal steamer, Prin­ cess Patricia, en route to Victoria, Clark would relinquish office to André Taschereau o f Quebec. Unfortunately Meighen’s train, which was supposed to make connections with the ship, was delayed and the Patricia was entering the First Narrows when the train belatedly pulled into the station. It was thirty years since Meighen had last missed the boat to Victoria; happily less inconvenience resulted this time. Clark had tried in vain to delay the ship’s departure. Shordy after it sailed he discovered that the one official who had the power to order the boat to return to the pier happened to be on board and prevailed on him to give the necessary command, pointing to the train entering the station area just at that moment. So with much ringing o f bells and hooting o f whistles Princess Patricia was guided back alongside the dock, a gangway was lowered and Meighen, rather out o f breath but not greatly perturbed, walked aboard.

166

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

A t the luncheon Meighen tried hard, but failed, to persuade Clark not to call on him to speak. Though unprepared and somewhat em­ barrassed, he rose to his feet and, rather hesitantly at first, then with greater assurance as the few thoughts he wanted to express took form in his mind, he offered these remarks: It is difficult for me to understand why I should have any tide to the honours o f the Canadian Bar Association. First o f all, I am only alleged to be a lawyer. True, I had a short and, in point o f success, a very modest career at the Bar in the long ago, but other and more dominant voices lured me away and I tried another profession with a measure o f success about which there are two opinions. (Laughter). To avoid entering the lists on either side, I content myself by saying that there can be for me a sense o f triumph only in this, that I have oudived most o f my foes. After many years in public affairs there was a feeling that what command o f law I once possessed had dis­ appeared, amidst the vapors and the smoke o f politics. So I deter­ mined to try still another avocation, and for twenty-six years have devoted myself with assiduity, if with nothing else, to a third sphere o f effort in an attempt at having something in the nature o f success to hand down for the contemplation o f my descendants. But it is an honour, it is a pleasure, to be here. I like to be with lawyers still, and am proud o f the success this organization has attained. Standing without, as I do, it is defensible to give expression to a truth which all indeed must realize, that the Bar Association o f Canada has attained a prestige in our Dominion which is itself a tremendous asset to the profession and a definite advantage to our country. This it owes to a long line o f distinguished Presidents and as well to others who have given valued service without preeminent recognition. W hile I am on my feet it may be pardonable to make special re­ ference to the Chairman. He and I have walked life’s path for more than three decades pretty much together. We have had a close friend­ ship over long, long years. It really is a matter for rejoicing that I can be present at the Annual Meeting o f the Canadian Bar Association at a time when General Clark is its President and presiding officer. There comes on the scene now a very outstanding man from the Province o f Quebec. There are for me no horrors o f memory in mentioning the Province o f Quebec, although my friends there weren’t as numerous as they should have been. (Laughter). They were highly valued; they were loyal and true. They toiled and fought through many battles much more trying for them than for their leader who hailed from Western Canada. There isn’t a body o f men and women in any part o f this country for whom I have kindlier feelings than for those who, in Lower Canada, stood gallantly and courageously for our

LOOKING BACK

167

cause through four mighty struggles now near thirty years gone by. Today there ascends to your leadership a man o f historic associations. The name o f your incoming President is linked in honoured memory through much o f our Canadian story. The family o f Taschereau is as old as any in this Dominion; and notable men o f their number, one after the other, generation after generation, have not only served in our public life but adorned the profession o f law. We all remember that Sir Elzéar Taschereau long was a Judge o f the Supreme Court o f Canada. I recall particularly another o f his kin because he and I had something in the nature o f a clash— the uncle o f the incoming President, the Honourable L. A . Taschereau, for many years Prime Minister o f Quebec. I have a memory o f one meeting at which we both were speakers. It wasn’t a political meeting; it was held some­ where outside the Capital city. My dimensions then, physically, were much more like his lean and graceful form than they are now. We both together would probably weigh as much as one man should. After speeches were over, we found there had been some gambling going on in the audience, and a group o f farmers from the rear ap­ proached us and said they had a bet as to which was the heavier, Mr. Taschereau or myself. I won by half a pound. (Laughter). N ow his nephew comes to you as the new President o f the Bar Association. I have heard o f him throughout most o f my life. For some years I had a son practising at the Bar in the City o f Quebec, and i f ever I had any feeling o f hostility toward the Taschereau family, he did all he could to dissipate it, because his language was entirely friendly— not only friendly, but rooted in a feeling o f genuine admira­ tion for the whole line o f Taschereau, and especially for him who today assumes the Presidency o f this Bar Association. So as the honour passes from a very dear friend, it falls upon the shoulders o f one who bears with credit a distinguished name, a name which students in days to come will find woven into the texture o f our law and our public life right back to the morning o f our history.19

Although his responsibilities in the management o f the business were considerably fewer by 1950 than formerly, Meighen continued to take a close interest in its conduct and its fortunes. Dreading in­ activity, he still walked downtown each day to his office on the six­ teenth floor o f the Bank o f Montreal Building at the corner o f K ing and Bay streets to consult with his colleagues, study market reports and business trends and to keep a watchful eye on operations. There was something about him in that setting that struck one as just a little incongruous, as he sat in his spacious office overlooking Lake Ontario behind a large and richly gleaming walnut desk. With his

i6 8

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

simple tastes and unpretentious manner, in his somewhat rumpled, heavy dark grey suit and smoking a loosely packed home-made cig­ arette, oblivious o f the ashes cascading onto his vest as he talked, he did not have that fashionable air o f sartorial elegance and impeccable grooming to go with the unmistakable though correctly subdued opulence o f his surroundings. He seemed a bit sensitive about the splendidness o f these quarters, in fact, believing as he always had that “ wilful waste makes woefill want” and that something less hand­ some would have served just as well. “This is a far cry from the Millar Block,” said a visitor from Portage la Prairie, taking in with a gesture the whole extensive and well-appointed premises o f Canadian General Securities. “Well,” Meighen replied defensively, being re­ minded o f the two bare little rooms in which he had set up his law practice h alf a century before, “ this was none o f my choosing.” Visitors to his office there were aplenty and now he had time to talk to them, especially about the past. These conversations almost invariably came around to Mackenzie K in g and his many sins, parti­ cularly in 1926. Lucidly, in pithy sentences eloquent with irony, Meighen would rehearse for the enlightenment o f his listener the events o f his struggle with K ing, the significance o f the issues over which they had contended. A nd he would end his bill o f particulars against K in g by exclaiming “Gosh!” in a long exhalation redolent o f his monumental contempt for the man. Some o f those who came to question him he felt were unsympathetic; they were apt to be treated with a certain irascibility. But in general he enjoyed re­ miniscing in the company o f those he knew to be genuinely interested and receptive. Sometimes he would invite the caller to lunch at the Albany Club and the discussion would continue as they walked east along K in g Street, their progress and Meighen’s train o f thought being frequently interrupted as he acknowledged salutations from passersby. He would stop to pass the time o f day with an elderly gentle­ man in a bank messenger’s uniform, perhaps, or a well-turned-out broker with a briefcase. Once a barber in a K in g Street shop came bounding out in his white coat to greet him warmly in broken Eng­ lish. “ That man,” Meighen explained as he moved on towards the Club, “asked me a few years ago to give him the name o f a stock in which to invest some money. I suggested Teck-Hughes. H e bought some and shortly afterwards its market price began to climb. Ever since he has been grateful to me for mentioning ‘Teck-Hooey,’ as he calls it.”

LOOKING BACK

169

Those who came in to see Meighen in the early 1950’s were im­ pressed by his physical vigour and mental acuteness. For a man nearing eighty years o f age he appeared to be in remarkably good health. True, age was beginning to take its toll in some ways. Minor physical complaints were starting to plague him and, becoming alarmed as he quickly did about his health in his later years, he would call the doctor, only to ignore the instructions he was given and the medicine prescribed. He thought his memory was beginning to fail, too, because he sometimes had difficulty in calling by name the many people who greeted him on the sidewalk or in remembering details o f his affairs. “W ho is that m an?” he would ask after being hailed by someone on the street. “ I should know his name. My memory is going back on me.” But except for the fact that he no longer drove a car or played golf, his range o f activities was not greatly curtailed and in neither o f those limitations was age or infirmity actually to blame. He had always regarded the automobile, despite its usefulness on occasion, as more or less an instrument o f the devil. There was little or no mechanical aptitude in his makeup and some who observed him in action behind the wheel thought he never really had learned to drive. Deep in conversation with a companion or in concentration on some matter, he would forget in his absent-mindedness to watch the traffic and the traffic signs— with considerable hazard to him self and those who crossed his path. His crony H ugh Clark was with him one day when he went through three red lights in the course o f a three-mile drive, the last o f them at the corner o f Yonge and Bloor streets, where a policeman flagged him down and gave him a stern lecture. This greatly amused Clark, who never before had known Meighen to get the worst o f an argument. Policemen on point duty at intersections annoyed Meighen, who thought they were more o f a hindrance to the flow o f traffic than a help, especially i f the cars going his way had to stop when he got to the corner. “ Arthur,” Clark said to him once after an eloquent discourse on this subject by Meighen, “ you Irish aspire to make, administer and enforce laws but you hate like hell to obey them.” Another day Clark was with him when they got into a traffic jam at Avenue Road and St. Clair. Im­ patiently Meighen kept ordering the driver o f the stationary car in front to “G o on! G o on!” A t last Clark could stand it no longer. “ H e’s going as fast as you are,” he remarked quietly. Meighen’s family finally prevailed on him to admit that driving a car was not

170

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

his forte and he gave it up. Although he sometimes regretted this, he preferred in any case to w alk wherever he could and was content to take the streetcar i f need be. Taxicabs and their drivers he ab­ ominated as lawless, arrogant anti-pedestrians, but i f an automobile had to be used Mrs. Meighen could drive him in their Ford or, failing that, someone would see that he had a ride. As for golf, which had been the one form o f physical recreation he enjoyed aside from plain walking and, in his earlier days, horse­ back-riding, his abandonment o f it was voluntary. His last game was played with H ugh Clark at the g o lf and country club in K in ­ cardine, Ontario, where Clark lived. Meighen was playing badly and became more and more disgusted with each hole. A t the end he said: “ That’s the last game o f g o lf I’m ever going to play.” “W h y?” asked Clark. “ Because I can’t play it well and I don’t like doing anything I can’t do well.” “ But,” Clark shot back, “you’re not being consistent. You’re still playing bridge, aren’t you?” Indeed he was still playing bridge and he enjoyed nothing better than to get wrapped up in a session around the card table with three other enthusiasts. H e especially relished a game with the same H ugh Clark, one o f the reasons he liked visiting Kincardine on occasion and having Clark come to stay at the Meighen house in Toronto for a time. Clark, short and stalky with a slightly owlish look, was seven years Meighen’s senior, a remarkably lively octogenarian. Their long association, coupled with Clark’s sharp wit, exceptional talent for mimicry and the fact that he seemed to have heard and remembered more funny stories than anyone else in Canada, made him one o f Meighen’s favourite companions. Usually they played for stakes, though not high ones, and after one game in which he lost three dol­ lars Meighen found himself, as he frequently did, with neither cash nor cheque book in his pockets. A day or two later Clark received a cheque for the amount, along with a note written on the letterhead o f the Salvation A rm y’s Red Shield Appeal: Dear H ugh Sorry to be late— & sorry to have to pay. (sgd.) A . M.20

LOOKING BACK

I7 I

When the two men sat at the card table together the play was serious enough, not because o f the money, o f course, but because bridge was a game o f skill. Meighen, all intensity and concentration, would plan his strategy and then play out his cards deliberately, smiling with satisfaction i f the strategy worked, exclaiming “ Gosh!” or “ The great United States!” i f something went wrong. Clark, more relaxed and also more cunning with his cards, delighted to foil that strategy and, i f he did, would josh Meighen good-naturedly about his lack o f skill. Then there m ight be an earnest post-mortem after the hand was over or, i f none was called for, Clark might ask while the next hand was being dealt, “ Say, Arthur, do you remember the time that . . .” and away they would go on some reminiscence, usually hilarious. Once Clark said: “Arthur, did I ever tell you about the time that Lord Shaughnessy paid you a high compliment in my presence?” O f course Meighen had heard about it but he played along, loving any joke at his own expense. “ H uh,” he grunted, “ I certainly wouldn’t expect to receive any compliments from him !’ “ I was w alking along the street in Ottawa one day,” continued Clark. “ I met his Lordship, who bowed to me and said : ‘Good morn­ ing, Mr. Meighen.’ ” “T hat’s pretty good,” was Meighen’s reply, “but everybody knows that Shaughnessy was practically blind in his old age.” Unfortunately Meighen was not to be permitted to end his days in this relatively peaceful, pleasant round of congenial, not-too-demanding work, ruminative talk about the past and convivial occasions with old friends. A final humiliation awaited him. One day in the spring of 1953 he was w alking along the street when he met an acquaintance, who said to him : “ I hear you’re running for Chancellor of the Univer­ sity o f Toronto. Haven’t you had enough defeats?” Utterly taken aback, Meighen denied that he was running for anything. “ But I happen to know that you have been nominated,” the other assured him. Pressing for an explanation, Meighen was told, quite erroneously as it turned out, that he had been nominated for the position which had become vacant at the conclusion o f Vincent Massey’s second three-year term o f office, and was also told that one o f his sponsors was W. H. Clarke, publisher o f Unrevised and Unrepented and a mem­ ber o f the Board o f Governors. Meighen asked Clarke to let him know

172

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

what was going on. Clarke explained that he and a number o f other alumni o f die University wanted to propose Meighen, desiring to honour him, and had been soliciting signatures o f distinguished alumni across Canada for the nomination paper. They had received a large number, many more than the required ten. A t first Meighen did not consider very seriously the proposal that he should allow his name to be put in nomination. He was nearing his seventy-nindi birdiday and did not relish the thought o f even slight additional responsibilities. He had had no connection with the Univer­ sity since graduating from it nearly sixty years before and, truth to tell, was inclined to suspect all universities now as purveyors o f false ideas and breeding-grounds o f radicalism. W hen he learned, though, that his acceptance of nomination was strongly favoured by a number of his friends, Meighen began to have second thoughts. Discussions with other friends and colleagues led him to the con­ clusion that the duties o f Chancellor were not onerous and that he had an excellent chance of getting elected. In the end, after much con­ sideration and discussion, he gave his consent to have his nomination entered. Contrary to the expectations o f Meighen’s sponsors, who had looked forward to his being appointed by acclamation, there turned out to be other nominees, among them two retired academics. One surmises that their appearance in the field was due in the main, quite apart from their personal qualifications for the position, to three re­ lated factors. One was the unfavourable, i f less than warranted, reputa­ tion Meighen had in academic circles as a reactionary Bay Street tycoon, a reputation his letter to Ernest Lapointe about Frank Underhill in 1940 had doubtless done nothing to diminish. Another was his con­ nection with the Conservative party, which to say the least attracted less devoted support in the university community than its Liberal and C.C.F. rivals. Finally the desire o f faculty members to have a greater voice in the selection o f the Chancellor than on previous occasions and to have the position filled by one o f their own instead o f, as often in the past, an outsider however distinguished, may have had a good deal to do with the nomination. In accordance with the prescribed procedure for nominating a Chancellor, a Committee o f Nomination o f twenty members was established, representing the Board of Governors, the University Senate and the Alum ni Federation. The members of the Committee were pledged to secrecy and no account o f the proceedings was published

LOOKING BACK

173

then or later. It is possible to surmise, however, that they were pro­ tracted and dramatic. A t their conclusion the name o f Dr. Samuel W. Beatty, former Dean o f Arts, was submitted to the Senate and the Board. W h y was Meighen defeated ? It is impossible to say, but the decisive factor was, in all likelihood, the desire o f the faculty members, expressed through their representatives on the Committee, to honour one o f their own. Whatever the cause, Meighen, understandably, was sad­ dened and depressed by having had inflicted on him still another defeat. Several weeks after his failure to be appointed Chancellor o f the University, Meighen was overtaken by a much more serious disaster. The month o f June 1953 had been looked forward to with anticipation because he and Mrs. Meighen had made arrangements to attend the wedding o f his niece, the daughter o f his brother Edward, in Portage la Prairie. His brother having died some time before, Meighen had agreed to give the bride in marriage and was eagerly awaiting, not only the joy o f the wedding, but seeing his old Portage friends again. But the night before the scheduled departure for the West he was stricken by the first grave illness o f his long life. It came without warning, a piercing headache, a loud ringing in his ears, severe diz­ ziness and nausea, and an attack o f uncontrollable hiccoughing. His doctor was hastily summoned and the malady was diagnosed as Ménière’s disease, an affliction o f the middle ear, neither the cause o f which nor the cure for which was really known. For two weeks or more Meighen lay in his bedroom, hovering precariously between life and death. The hiccoughs continued without ceasing for twelve days and nights, leaving him when they finally stopped, as he told H ugh Clark, “ sorely wounded and weakened. The battle back was difficult but I was quite confident.” However, confidence was some­ what dissipated when the hiccoughs started again two weeks later. For “2 days & nights they raged as wickedly as ever,” but then stopped as suddenly as they had returned. “M y sense o f relief,” he wrote afier this second departure, “is beyond expression. N ow I feel more con­ fident than ever o f recovery. I fed that the crisis is past.”21 The crisis was indeed over but the road back to good health was a long one which Meighen was never fully to traverse. I f w ill power counted for anything, though, he would travel much o f its distance.

174

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

He was absolutely determined to recover so as to resume as far as possible his normal round o f activities and he fought back indomi­ tably, refusing to concede victory just yet to the last o f his foes. Mar­ garet Reid, the Meighens’ housekeeper, who had served them for a great many years and felt an almost proprietary concern for her em­ ployer’s welfare, gave it as her considered, i f unprofessional, opinion that he could thank, not his doctors, but his own stubbornness for being alive. W hile this did less than justice to the skill o f the physi­ cians, whose directives Meighen, according to his habit, was inclined to dispute, his w ill to live was perhaps one o f the strongest things in his favour. By the end o f July he was able to be downstairs and out on the lawn, sufficiently recovered to show some impatience at the slowness o f recovery. “ This is somewhat o f a lonesome life,” he wrote to Clark, “ and certainly a most wearisome one, the rate o f progress being so slow— at least it seems to me to be inexplicably slow. Nevertheless I can w alk up and down the lawn about as often as I want, without help or company. It is a pretty weak and wobbling walk, and sleeping as yet is not very satisfactory.”22 N ot long after­ ward he reported that he was walking back and forth on the lawn in the shade o f the trees about two miles each day and he urged Clark to pay a visit to Castle Frank Crescent to see for him self how well he was doing. “N ow be sure to come. You w ill be surprised to be as­ sured that I can play as good a game o f bridge as before the crash in mid-June.”23 There was an enticement bound to bring Clark to Toronto! By the autumn Meighen was able to be back at his office again and before long was taking his accustomed w alk along K in g Street to have lunch at the Albany Club. He sat always at the same table for four with the same three companions, Allan McFee, a retired civil servant, J. W. Thompson, a lawyer, and G . A . Gordon, an insurance broker. The important thing about lunch to him was not the food but the company o f these men and o f others who might stop by his table to pass the time o f day. His was not a gourmet’s palate and he ate sparingly, for necessary sustenance only, ordering the same things almost invariably without heed to the menu: clear, dark onion soup, prepared especially for him and put before him in a silver tureen; two slices o f dark brown bread; ice cream and coffee. His friends at the Club rejoiced to have him back, o f course, and to find that he had made such a good recovery but they could not help noticing that he

LOOKING BACK

175

was not quite the same man as before. The illness had left his sense o f balance permanently impaired, with the result that he tended to lurch and stagger slightly as he walked. He was growing deafer and his memory, which had begun to desert him occasionally even before the sickness, now grew less and less dependable as time went by. This became especially noticeable when he tried to recall something that had happened very recently, an exasperating annoyance for one whose memory had always been one o f his most enviable faculties. But when he delved back into the more remote past there was still not much difficulty in calling up names and events. Asked the right question or reminded by a chance remark, he would launch out on a cogent exposition, a droll reminiscence or an ironic commentary, on Mackenzie K in g and the Constitution, perhaps, or Robert Rogers and the Union Government, or Lord Atholstan and the railway prob­ lem. In this way one picture after another in the great crowded gallery o f his mind was lit up briefly, some o f them sombre, some gay, but almost all vivid and arresting. On occasion he lunched, not with his fellow Conservatives at the Albany, but with another group o f friends, one o f whom was E. J. Pratt. The meal over, their custom was to go to a lounge and talk. “ By common consent,” Pratt recalled shortly after Meighen’s death, “we steered clear o f politics; we preferred reminiscence, telling tall tales o f long ago. Mr. Meighen out o f his prodigious memory could ransack stories out o f the past from the time he was five years o f age. His favourite human subject was Sir John A . Some o f die rest o f us had to rely on our memories for our jokes and on our imaginations for our facts but everything that Mr. Meighen said had an air o f authenticity which we couldn’t dispute.” 24 After his illness Meighen had to adjust him self to a gradually encroaching physical frailty. The most irksome feature o f his con­ dition was the trouble he had in maintaining his proper balance. “M y sense o f balance,” he wrote to H ugh Clark in November, “ is far from normal yet. In fact, I am not sure that at times at least it is not worse than it was months ago. In other aspects I am fine. But old Meniere [sic] hangs on desperately and quite outstrips my patience. A t times I get very discouraged.”25 One o f the most dis­ couraging consequences o f this was that he was no longer able to walk to work or home again, a part o f his routine to which he had attached special value. Instead he had to be driven, although in time

176

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

he was able to go on foot part o f the way. Driving home in the evening he would ask to have the car stop at the corner o f Bloor and Sherbourne streets, where he had a little game to play with the jolly, rotund newsie who kept a stand there. “ I’ll have a Telegram,” Meighen would call out the window. “ Sorry, Sir,” the reply would come, “ I have only the Star.” “ You don’t expect me to read thatV Then, after some more banter on both sides the newsie would produce a copy o f the Telegram and Meighen would take it on heme to study the late market reports. I f for some reason he could not be driven home he would ride the streetcar, rushing, heedless o f the traffic lights, across the road to catch it, competing with all the others homeward bound to squeeze in through the door, then fumbling in his pockets for a ticket or some money. Once he could find neither, not even ten cents for a cash fare. He explained his predicament to the operator, assured him the fare would be forwarded in the morning and took his num­ ber. Convinced, the motorman extracted a dime from his changer and gave it to Meighen to put in the fare box. First thing the next day Meighen instructed his secretary to send ten cents to the Toronto Transportation Commission, along with an explanation. In due course she received an acknowledgment. Thank you for your letter o f December 4th reimbursing operator #1473 for a fare loaned to the Rt. Hon. Arthur Meighen. The 10 cents has been forwarded to the operator who has asked that we express his thanks. I understand he intends to keep it as a souvenir o f the statesman he was privileged to accommodate.28

One o f the penalties o f a long life is that so many o f one’s friends disappear and Meighen reached the point where he seemed to be almost the last leaf on the tree o f his generation. W hile he never became too old to make new friendships, the ones o f long standing were naturally the most cherished. He had an unusually strong feeling o f attachment to old friends, compounded o f loyalty and affection. Without effusive displays o f his regard he conveyed the impression that he somehow identified him self with them, that he cared genuinely about them, about their affairs, their families and their general welfare. N o one could have been more devoted than

LOOKING BACK

177

he in bringing comfort to them in their adversity, in visiting them in sickness and, at last, in paying silent tribute to them when they died. “I think I must have attended more funerals than any man in Can­ ada outside the undertaking business,” he remarked once, and it was true that he would go to any amount o f trouble to perform this final duty to a friend. His regular Sunday afternoon custom was to go calling on the aged and infirm, men and women o f all classes, notables and unknowns, rich and poor alike. It was not easy to realize that this kindly, affectionate, considerate old gentleman with his lovable charm had once been the scourge o f his enemies, the great warrior o f Parliament, the master o f controversy, even though at times the old stubborn, argumentative fire would still flare up. There was a remarkable breadth to the range o f his friendships, which did not depend at all on community o f opinion or wealth or social position. He detested nothing more than snobbery or the ex­ clusiveness o f class. His friends were in all walks o f life, men o f diverse political views and various faiths. In his later years, for ex­ ample, he took W illiam Irvine, the very embodiment o f the old farmer-labour-social gospel western radicalism, to lunch at the Albany Club. He had seldom seen eye to eye with Irvine about anything but had warm regard for him as a person, a regard fully reciprocated. So, as friends, what more natural than that they should lunch together, on Irvine’s visit to Toronto, at the place where Meighen habitually lunched, the citadel o f Conservatism? Once at a birthday dinner for Malcolm Wallace, Meighen said: “ I have known Mac Wallace for h alf a century and we are just as good friends as ever we were. Some o f you may consider that a commonplace. But I consider it a triumph. For I know o f no subject on heaven or earth— religious, philosophical, literary, political, economic, social or anything else— on which Mac Wallace and I agree.” W hen during his illness in 1953 Meighen thought he was about to die, he sent for Max, and told him there were just three people he wanted to have say anything about him : Grattan O ’Leary, Max Freedman and Eugene Forsey. “ Well, D ad!” laughed his son. “D o you realize what you’ve just said ?” “ O f course I realize it.” “ But look at the people you’ve picked, "ibu’ve always been a

I78

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

Protestant and a Conservative; and you pick Grattan O ’Leary, a Conservative but a Roman Catholic; M ax Freedman, a Liberal and a Jew; and Eugene Forsey, a Protestant but a C.C.F.er.” “ I never thought o f that!” O f course not all his friends were in Toronto by any means; they were scattered all over the country and many o f them he could not hope ever to see again. But he was not entirely confined to the city, although his days o f extensive travelling were over. He liked to go, and did go almost every summer, to St. Marys, the place o f his boyhood, to gather up those o f his friends who still remained and take them out to lunch. He wanted diem to be sure that he remem­ bered them, and he wanted to be remembered too. On one o f these journeys he insisted he must go by way o f Preston so that he could see one o f his oldest friends, Billy Dickson, a St. Marys boy like him­ self, who was in a large rest home there. “Well, Billy, how are you?” he asked cheerfully as they shook hands, only to be somewhat disconcerted by the reply. “Oh, I’m quite comfortable, Arthur,” said Dickson in a sepulchral tone, “ but you know all o f us in this place are just here waiting to die.” “Poor Billy,” Meighen remarked as he got back into the car a little later, “ I’m afraid he’s given up.” The place Meighen most liked to visit in the summer was K in­ cardine and his pleasure was unbounded when he could find some­ one to take him there. H ugh Clark was always a great tonic, any­ thing but sepulchral in spirit, and Meighen was attracted as well by the town itself, with its pleasant site overlooking Lake Huron and its quiet, old Ontario atmosphere. One o f his last trips to Kincardine was in the summer o f 1957. He had no sooner arrived than Clark put a drink o f whisky in his hand. “ Oh, H ugh,” Meighen protested, “ I don’t need this.” “Need it, hell!” Clark shot back. “ You Puritans! The question is, do you want it?” After lunch Clark, who by now had attained the age o f ninety, announced casually that he would like to go to the g o lf course to play a few holes. “W ill you join me ?” he asked Meighen. “ I’ll come along,” was the reply, “but I’ll leave the playing to youngsters like you.” So they drove out to the country club and Clark teed off at the

LOOKING BACK

179

first hole, hitting the ball in business-like fashion about one hundred yards down the middle o f the fairway, then slinging his bag over his shoulder and setting off at a smart pace to hit it again. Instead o f accompanying him, Meighen started out on a w alk o f his own, his rather unsteady gait taking him on a zig-zag path over the fairways and into the roughs without regard to the players whose direct line o f fire he was crossing. To watch this was like watching him cross the street in downtown Toronto: one held one’s breath. During supper Clark was inspired to give one o f his impromptu virtuoso performances. It was a long, hilarious story, consisting o f a dialogue between three politicians o f the old days, with Clark acting out the different parts to perfection, suiting his voice and gestures to each o f the characters. Meighen, a very amusing mimic himself, had heard it all before, more than once perhaps. He still found it funny and cackled gleefully at the choicest bits, but at the same time seemed to get more pleasure from watching the others around the table fall into paroxysms o f mirth. It was decided that Meighen would return to Toronto after lunch the next day and that Clark would go with him to spend a little time in the city. The morning would be devoted to calling on some friends around the town. The last o f these calls took the two men some dis­ tance out into the country. After it was made their car headed up a side road towards the highway leading into Kincardine. As soon as the highway was reached Meighen said suddenly: “Just stop the car here for a moment.” “ W hat for?” Clark asked. “ So that I can get out.” “W h y do you want out?” “ Because I’m going to walk back to your place.” “ But that’s a mile and a h alf from here.” “ I know it is,” said Meighen. “ That’s w hy I want to walk it.” For much o f the way to Toronto that afternoon Clark perched him self well forward in the centre o f the rear seat, rested his arms on the back o f the front seat, thrust his head between Meighen’s and the driver’s and kept up a running fire o f jokes, anecdotes, conun­ drums and jingles. As these became increasingly scatalogical Meighen grew more and more uncomfortable, not on his own account so much as on that o f the driver, a tender youth o f thirty-eight. “ Now, H ugh,” he would say every few minutes, “ that’s enough o f that.” But Clark

i8o

ARTHUR MEIGHEN

kept right on and Meighen had to laugh in spite o f himself. Finally he remarked by way o f a diversion: “ My, this part o f DufFerin County is flat.” “ This isn’t DufFerin County,” Clark retorted instantly, “ it’s Wel­ lington.” “Nonsense! O f course it’s DufFerin. I should know. I’ve been all through this country countless times on speaking tours.” “W hen did they change the boundaries then?” “ They haven’t changed them.” “ They must have i f we’re in DufFerin County. We just passed the town o f Arthur and it always used to be in Wellington.” This went on for several miles and although, as it happened, Clark was right, Meighen obstinately refused to admit that he did not know Wellington County when he saw it. In any case, by the time the argument subsided they were in DufFerin. Several months before that visit to Kincardine Meighen had writ­ ten the following letter to Clark: Age is creeping on me. N o doubt o f that. I think I wrote you a letter about a week ago but have to admit I am not sure whether I did or not. A m only sure that such a letter was due you and that I think I wrote it and mailed it. Also I have anxious enquiries every day at our noon table [at the Albany Club] and would like to have your judg­ ment as to when you might join us, because every day they want to know. You saw that Isaac Pitblado had a very big dinner in his honour at Winnipeg a week ago on the occasion o f his 90th birthday. . . . I sent a telegram. So Isaac is about two weeks older than you. Would certainly like to think that I would reach the age o f either o f you but I won’t. Meniere’s [r/c] came upon me and darkened much i f not blackened, my prospects— and it is here yet. A m sorry you have not seen more o f Isaac than you have. He is true as steel and certainly is worth knowing. . . . I do wish I could still drive the car so that I could go around on my own and see some very prized friends. . . . There are some who think we have a chance in the next federal [election] ; my convictions consist entirely o f hopes. It is hard for me to be confident at all o f the Canadian people since 1926. . . . no one who can think straight can feel any other way on the subject. Well now you at least know I have not forgotten you 27

Little did Meighen think that before the year was out there would be a great banquet in his own honour and that the ch ief address would be delivered by a Conservative Prime Minister.

LOOKING BACK

l8 l

To mark the sixtieth anniversary o f the Canadian Club o f Toronto a testimonial dinner to Meighen, one o f its past presidents, was ar­ ranged for December the third, 1957. H e was extremely gratified that the officers o f the club should want to do honour in this splendid fashion to an old man forgotten by the mass o f his countrymen but he looked forward to the occasion with considerable trepidation. He would have to make a few remarks, he knew, and no longer had con­ fidence in him self as a speaker, fearing that his memory might desert him, his mind become befuddled, and the words fail to issue forth in proper orderly array. It was unthinkable, o f course, that he should read a prepared speech ; he had never done diat and was not going to start now. H e would simply have to summon up his remaining resources and clear die hurdle as he had always done before. This particular hurdle loomed larger and larger, however, as the date o f the dinner approached. He worried much about it and his family and friends had to keep assuring him that it would go well, that no one expected him to make a long speech, that once he got on his feet the thoughts would form and the words be found. There were about five hundred men present in the Royal York Hotel when the time arrived, too many for the one banquet hall to accommodate. The overflow had to be served elsewhere and then move into the main room for the speeches. T he address by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker was a glowing tribute to the guest o f honour, studded with quotations from Meighen’s own speeches. W hen the hearty applause at its end had ceased Meighen rose some­ what unsteadily to his feet. A ll those who knew what mental anguish had been caused him by anticipation o f this moment waited in anxiety while he stood there for some seconds, silent. And then, just when it seemed that he could not think o f what to say, he began to speak in a low voice.I I have had in my long life some difficulties to face, some seemingly impossible situations to encompass but I frankly admit that the chal­ lenge now is more threatening than anything I can remember through this long stretch o f decades. I am quite conscious that by no effort o f mine could I for a moment hope to give an example to you o f the virtues o f speech, that would meet your expectations after the most eloquent, exceedingly kind and overwhelmingly generous words that have just fallen from Mr. Diefenbaker. I f I say no further on the sub­ ject, I hope he won’t think that I immodesdy accept the over-generous

182

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

language he has passed upon me. It may possibly be not unkind to say that nobody and, least o f thousands, myself could be worthy o f them.

The Prime Minister had referred to Meighen’s prowess in Parliament. On this subject Meighen said : There is only one boast I can ever make. N ot a boast in any triumphant success— not at all— but I think I can say this, which not all could say, that I never rose there and sat down without having done the best that was in me. A nd what is more important, I cannot let you go away without acknowledging that I had much o f the adventitious by way o f example to help me; in many ways I was fortunate. Indeed I was almost incredibly fortunate in the fine men who stood around me, against me and in the fine men who stood with me. I tried to take advantage o f what they had to give and o f their abundance they gave me much.

There followed a few words in praise o f Sir Robert Borden, o f his common sense, fairness in debate and respect for the facts. “ I acknowl­ edge what I owe to his great and surpassing care in all matters o f fact and reason.” A nd o f course he could not fail to mention Laurier. “ There never was a man— not in my lifetime— from whom one could learn so much o f the art o f leadership as from Sir Wilfrid Laurier. One o f the lamentations that I still indulge in is that I did not learn more from him.” He then turned to the Prime Minister, thanked him again for his kind words and wished him “ a life just as happy, more triumphant and a life in every way more worthy than was my own.” He ended by expressing his gratitude to the Canadian Club and to all those present. “ The ravages o f years play dieir mischief on myself as on most odiers. In fact it is difficult to feel that I can now thank you in graceful terms and pass on as it were with courtesy on m y lips and grace in my heart. Such a close after your great meeting tonight, is the very utmost I can hope for.” 28 A hush descended for a long moment as he sat down and then as one man the audience rose in a prolonged standing ovation. One can­ not help but sense when one is in the presence o f greatness and it was so on that night o f poignant memory when at the last o f his exciting, stirring public occasions Meighen received this moving dem­ onstration o f affection and respect. There was to be another occasion at which he was the central figure, however, one less grand and dazzling than the Canadian

LOOKING BACK

l83

Club dinner but no less satisfying to him. Early in 1958 the Salva­ tion Arm y opened a fine new home for the aged on Davisville Ave­ nue and named it “The Isabel and Arthur Meighen Lodge.” The building was officially opened and dedicated on February the nine­ teenth. There were several speeches o f congratulation to the Arm y and in praise o f Mr. and Mrs. Meighen, the main one being deliv­ ered by Premier Leslie Frost o f Ontario. Between speeches the congregation sang hymns and a delightful rendition o f “N ow in a Song o f Grateful Praise” was given by the women cadets o f the A rm y’s “ Courageous” session, their voices untrained but soaring sweetly in praise o f the Lord, their faces showing forth their u n af­ fected joy in the life they had undertaken to live, while Meighen sat smiling benignly at them from the platform. After his friend J. Keiller Mackay, who had recently become Lieutenant-Governor o f Ontario, declared the building opened, Meighen said a few words, acknowledging the many kind references to Mrs. Meighen and him ­ self and saying why he admired so much the Salvation A rm y’s dis­ tinctive form o f Christian witness. It was one o f his happiest moments, to see this handsome building which his own effort and generosity had done so much to make possible. Naturally Meighen was pleased when the Conservative party re­ gained power in 1957 after twenty-two years continuously in opposi­ tion but his pleasure was by no means unqualified. He thought that all parties were now pandering far too much to popular fallacies and mass emotions, that elections had become little more than gigantic exercises in cynically calculated bribery, and that the prevalent prac­ tice o f catering to the obsession with social security was debasing the politics and weakening the moral fibre o f the nation. He did not exempt the Conservative party from these criticisms at all. “ I really would like to witness a return or sign o f return to sense and still more o f honesty before I see the last o f our elections,” he wrote to Hugh Clark not long before the great Conservative sweep o f 1958,29 but he was not to live long enough for that. He was especially annoyed by Diefenbaker’s pledge in the 1957 campaign to abolish closure. Meighen had been gready exercised during the famous pipeline de­ bate o f 1956 over the St. Laurent government’s misuse o f closure to prevent discussion altogether in the House o f Commons. That had not been the purpose in view when he framed the closure rule in 1913 and he was indignant that the rule should be so grossly misapplied.

184

ARTHUR M EIGHEN

The fault, though, was not in closure itself but in the arrogant deter­ mination o f C. D. Howe, St. Laurent’s Minister o f Trade and Com ­ merce, to ram his measure through the House by any available means and Meighen thought Diefenbaker’s repudiation o f closure “was just as childish as Manion’s repudiation o f conscription. . . .”30 Still, though not entirely happy with the shape o f the modern Conservative party or the tactics o f its leader, Meighen was glad that it had become again at long last a formidable force in Canadian politics. One incidental benefit o f the 1957 victory was that Con­ servatives would now be appointed to those high places so long re­ served for supporters o f the Liberal party and none o f the appoint­ ments made by the new government caused Meighen more rejoicing than that o f Keiller Mackay as Lieutenant-Governor. For several years Mr. Justice Mackay (as he had been) and Mrs. Mackay had given him a birthday dinner party each June, a custom they continued after Mackay became the Queen’s representative in 1958. The party that year was held in their home in the Kingsway district. As the guests arrived they were piped into the house by one o f the small Mackay sons, resplendent in Highland dress. Inside a short head table had been set up, with smaller tables spaced around the room for the guests. A ll the Meighen family were there: Ted and his wife and their son Michael from Montreal; M ax and his w ife; Lillian and her husband, Don Wright, with their three children, Tim othy, Pris­ cilla and Patrick. H ow proud Meighen was o f his four handsome grandchildren! H e was not given to excessive displays o f affection, nor was it his way to show his love with effusive praise or extravagant gifts. But nothing seemed as important to him in his old age as the future o f these young people, his own flesh and blood, nothing brought him so much joy as to have them all around him, as they were now at this birthday celebration. In addition to the family several Toronto friends were on hand. So were Clark o f Kincardine, at ninety-one almost as spry as ever, and C h ief Justice Albert Sévigny and Madame Sévigny, who, along with their daughter, had come all the way from Quebec for the party. The presence o f the C h ief Justice, the eclipse o f whose political career in 1917 Meighen had never ceased to deplore, was particularly gratifying to the latter, who knew that in all likelihood they would not meet again. In a real sense they had both been casualties o f the crisis over

LOOKING BACK

185

conscription and each had always felt a special respect for the other which each retained to his dying day. After dinner the host gracefully expressed his welcome to the guests, then called upon Sévigny and Clark in turn to say a few words, to which Meighen made a brief response. But the high moment o f the evening was still to come. Don Wright seated him self at the piano and Priscilla, charming in her beautiful white bouffant dress, stood up to sing. She was no novice at this. She had been trained by her father, well known as founder and conductor o f the Don W right Chorus, and by this time had made a considerable reputation for herself as a singer o f popular ballads. Indeed, one o f her record­ ings, “The Man in a Raincoat,” had become a “hit.” Meighen never got over his amazement that one o f his progeny should excel musi­ cally, since aptitude along that line was wholly absent from him, but he got a great deal o f quiet satisfaction out o f her success. “ I f I am remembered at all,” he once observed, “ it w ill in all probability be as the grandfather o f Priscilla W right!” N ow, after her father had played a few bars on the piano, she began to sing the soulful song, “ Say It Isn’t So.” She sang it directly to the old gentleman, who sat beaming at her from behind the flowers on the table, on his face an expression o f adoration o f this lovely, winsome girl, mingled with incredulity that one o f his own was singing a song like that, and to him ! W hen the song was finished the singer leaned over and kissed him on the cheek in a perfect gesture o f affection. Never had any­ one looked more radiantly happy than Meighen did at that moment. During the last two years o f his life Meighen’s physical and men­ tal condition gradually deteriorated. For some time he continued to appear quite regularly at the office, which was now located a short distance north on Bay Street from the Bank o f Montreal Building, the Meighens having severed their connection with Canadian General Securities Limited. However, during 1959 his attendance there be­ came less regular as his body grew more frail and his mind confused. His absence made no difference as far as the conduct o f the business was concerned, the management o f the investment trusts; for some time M ax had been looking after that. But Meighen had liked to be on hand so as not to feel out o f things entirely and also, o f course, so as to be able to get over to the Albany Club. This last pleasure, however, did not have to be forgone altogether even after he ceased

186

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

appearing at the office, thanks to the kindness o f his devoted tablemate, Allan McFee, who frequently drove up to Castle Frank Cres­ cent, took him down to the Club for lunch and then drove him home again. It was pitiable to see the slow, inexorable decline o f Meighen’s powers, to mark the contrast with the brilliant and vigorous man o f other years, but there was also something inspiring about his stubborn refusal to give in completely to advancing infirmity. He did not lie down in resignation and surrender the field, did not shut him self of! from the world or rail in anguish against his plight. O n the con­ trary he wanted still to get around to see his friends and to entertain them in his own comfortable living-room with its bust o f Shakespeare on a pedestal and all the treasured memorabilia o f a long career. It was getting increasingly difficult for him to converse with his friends, so undependable had his memory become, but just to be with them was pleasure enough. He would still gladly sit down, too, at the bridge table even though he had to keep asking what was trump or what his partner had bid or who had taken the last trick. But, fumbling and slow as his play was now, every so often his mind would suddenly become clear and one would be startled to see him play a hand in quite masterly fashion or hear him demonstrate to his partner in a kindly way that i f she had only led a heart at the third trick in­ stead o f a spade she need not have gone down. The year '959 brought Meighen one final honour to cherish. In June, during the royal tour o f Canada, he and Mrs. Meighen were received in audience by Queen Elizabeth aboard the yacht Britannia, moored in Toronto harbour. Meighen was now Her Majesty’s senior Canadian Privy Councillor and the senior Canadian member o f the Imperial Privy Council. He had served both her grandfather and her father in his various capacities and, although he was now past becoming much excited by anything, even a royal audience, at the appointed hour proudly he went, Her Majesty’s loyal and obedient servant, to pay his dutiful respects to the newest holder o f the Crown which symbolized for him all the glory and the grandeur o f the British peoples. After some very pleasant conversation and the pre­ sentation to the Meighens o f signed photographs o f the Queen and Prince Philip in a folding leather case, Her Majesty said, “N ow I mustn’t keep you,” and her guests took their leave. By the spring o f 1960 Meighen’s health was failing more rapidly.

LO O K IN G BACK

187

He had become extremely thin and, though he was still able to be up and about in the house and in the garden, he could do no more than shuffle slowly to and fro. On fine days those who came to see him sat with him just outside the front door o f the house and talked as best they could o f small things which were o f interest to him. They could not help but grieve to see him fading away, but grief was mixed with wonder that his spirits seemed so good, as though in all serenity he knew he was about to lose the battle which sooner or later everyone must lose. In the latter part o f July he became acutely ill. A ll that could be done was to make him as comfortable as possible; there was no real hope o f recovery. This final illness was not publicized, with the result that all those who loved him, and they were very many, were not prepared for the news when it came. But they could take com­ fort in the fact that death came to him at last in a kindly way. On the night o f August the fourth he went to sleep and did not again awake. He was given a state funeral three days later in the church he had attended faithfully, St. Andrew ’s United on Bloor Street East. The Queen was represented by Lieutenant-General Howard D. Graham, and Governor-General Georges Vanier, who was in Europe, by Super­ intendent F. B. Woods-Johnson o f the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Many notables in all levels o f government were in attendance, headed by the Prime Minister o f Canada and the leader o f the Opposition. In the crowded church sat, not only these representatives o f throne and public life, but numerous figures from the business community o f which Meighen had become a member in his middle age. Many others o f humble station were there, those whom he had helped in various ways, some who had known him not but remembered the time when he had stood out as a towering figure in the life o f his country, and others still who had come because they were, simply, his friends. It was a short, simple service, the kind he would have wanted: some readings from Scripture, his two favourite hymns, “Unto the Hills Around” and “The Lord is M y Shepherd,” and a prayer. It was his wish that there should be no eulogy, and there was none, but in his prayer Dr. W illiam Briggs, minister o f St. Andrew ’s, briefly and eloquently summed up the qualities o f the man: his courage and integrity, his abhorrence o f sham, cant and pretentiousness, his strong sense o f duty, his genuine friendliness and concern for the unfortunate. After the benediction the active pallbearers, scarlet-coated members

i8 8

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

o f the Mounted Police, lifted the casket into the hearse and a cortège o f twelve cars moved off slowly on the drive to St. Marys, the town he had left so long ago to seek his fortune. There on the afternoon o f that sunny summer day, as a large group o f townsfolk joined the circle o f mourners about his grave, he reached his last resting-place, like those other warriors he had saluted at Vim y Ridge nearly forty years before, “in the quiet o f G od’s acre with the brave o f all the world.”

N O T E S A N D IN D E X

I

K E Y T O ABBREVIATIONS USED IN T H E N OTES AM T.

Arthur Meighen Papers.

CAT.

The Canadian Annual Review of Public Affairs, J. Castell Hop­ kins, ed. Toronto : Annual Review Publishing Co. Ltd.

C.D.

Canada, Debates of the House of Commons.

NM.

Notes and memoranda prepared for the author by the late Rt. Hon. Arthur Meighen.

P A .C .

Public Archives of Canada.

SJD.

Canada, Debates of the Senate.

190

NOTES CHAPTER i: A QUIETER LIFE 1 2 3 4 5

Watson Evans to Meighen, Sept 29 , I 9 2^ (A .M .P ., P.A .C .). C.B.C. broadcast, Aug. II, i 960. . . Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Sept. 27 , I 9 2^ (T- R- Meighen Iapers). Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Jan. 20 , I 9 27 (ibid.). Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Dec. 19 , 1926 ; Feb. 4, 1938 ; March 18 , I9 3 °> Ju ly 30, 1930 ; Sept. 1 1 , 1930 ; Aug. 18 , I93°> April 22 , 1930 ; Dec. 24 , 1934 (ibid.).

6 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 19 , I 9 29 (ibid.).

7 Ibid. 8 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Dec. 3, I 9 29 (ibid.). 9 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 19 , 1929 (ibid.). 10 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 5, 193° (ibid.). 11 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Dec. 5, 1 93° (ibid.). 12 Meighen to Esther Mackie, Sept. 15 , I 9 29 ( A .M .P ., P.A .C.). 13 Meighen to B. A. Urban, Jan. I I , 1936 (ibid.). 14 Harry Leader to Meighen, Sept. 18 , 19 3 1 (ibid). 15 Meighen to Leader, Sept. 24 , 1931 (ibid.). 16 Meighen to Barbara Ann Scott, Sept. 2 , 193 2 (ibid.). 17 M . M cD. Sinclair to Meighen, Nov. 8, I9 29 (ibid.). 18 Meighen to Sinclair, Nov. 12 , 1929 (ibid.). 19 R. B. Haley to Meighen, June 22 , 1931 (ibid.). 20 Meighen to J . W. E. Armstrong, Dec. 9, 1929 (ibid.). 21 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 30, 1928 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 22 Meighen to L. B. Pearson, Feb. 26, 1931 (A .M .P . , P.A .C .). 23 Meighen to G. L. Hudson, Dec. 12 , 1932 (ibid.). 24 Meighen to T . A. Crerar, Oct. 9, 19 31 . personal (ibid.). 25 Meighen to M . W. Wallace, Jan. 5, 1933 (ibid.). 26 Robert Johnston to Meighen, March 4, 19 32 ; Meighen to Johnston, March 5, 1932 (ibid.). 27 Telegram, Henry Osborne to Meighen, June 27 , 1931 (ibid.). 28 Meighen to W. F. O ’Connor, March 15 , 1926 (ibid.). 29 Meighen to Christie, Dec. 9, 1925 (Christie Papers). 30 Christie to Meighen, Dec. 23 , 19 25 ; Feb. 27 , 1926 (A.M .P., P.A.C.) ; Christie to Meighen, March 17 , 1926 (Christie Papers). 31 Meighen to Christie, April 5 , 1926 (Christie Papers). 32 This speech was published in Interdependence, the quarterly journal of the League of Nations Society in Canada, vol. VIII, No. 1 (Jan. 19 3 1 ) , and also in the Canadian D efence Quarterly, vol. VIII, No. 1 (April, 19 3 1 ) .

V 192

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

CHAPTER II : IN THE RED CHAMBER 1 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, April 22 , 1930 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 2 Bennett to Meighen, Oct. 20, 1926 , personal (A .M .P., P.A .C .). 3 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, July 18 , 1930 ( T . R. Meighen Papers). 4 T . E. Kaiser to Meighen, April 2 1 , 1931 ( A .M .P . , P.A .C .). 5 Wm. Ferguson to Meighen, Aug. 13 , 1 9 3 1 ; Meighen to Ferguson, Aug. 17 , 1931 (ibid.). 6 L. J . Pepper et al. to Meighen, Feb. 16 , 19 3 1 ; Meighen to Pepper, Feb. 20, 1931 (ibid.). 7 Clyde Scott to Meighen, Feb. 25 , 1 931 (ibid.). 8 Hector Mclnnes to Meighen, Jan. 5, I 9 3 1 (ibid.). This portion o f the letter is marked “ Very Private.” 9 J . C. Webster to Meighen, Jan. 18 , 1931 (ibid.). 10 Meighen to Webster, Jan. 23 , 1931 (ibid.). 11 Meighen to Borden, Feb. 5, 1931 (ibid.). 12 Hanson to Meighen, March 6, 1 9 3 1 (ibid.). 13 Meighen to Hanson, March 9, I 9 3 1 (ibid.). 14 T . A. Hunt to Meighen, June 5, 1931 (ibid.). 15 Meighen to Hunt, June I I , 19 31 (ibid.). 16 Meighen to Gérard Ruel, Jan. 8, 1932 (ibid.). 17 Manion to Meighen, Jan. 23 , 1932 , private (ibid.). 18 Sharpe to Meighen, Jan. 15 , 193 2 (ibid.). 19 Meighen to Sharpe, Jan. 19 , 1932 (ibid.). 20 Meighen to Thomas Vien, April 27 , 1932 (ibid.). 21 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 9, 1932 ( T . R. Meighen Papers). 22 Tree Press, (W innipeg), Feb. 4, 1932 . 23 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 18 , 1933 ( T . R. Meighen Papers). 24 “ The Canadian Senate,” Arthur Meighen, Queen’s Quarterly, vol. XLIV , No. 2 (Summer, 1937 ) , pp. 16 1 - 2 . 28 Unrevised and Unrepented: Debating Speeches and Others, Arthur Meighen (Toronto: Clarke, Irwin & Co. Ltd., 1949 )) PP- 4 I 9-2028 C.B.C. broadcast, Aug. 1 1 , i 960. 27 S.D. ( 1932 ) , pp. 6, i o - n . 28 C.D . ( 1932 ) , vol. I, p. 7 . 29 C.A.R . ( 1932 ) , p. 82 . 39 “ Meighen Resuscitates the Red Chamber,” Grant Dexter, Free Press Magazine Section (W innipeg), June 18 , 1932 . 31 Unrevised and Unrepented, pp. 243 -4. 32 Sharpe to Meighen, June 22 , 1932 (A .M .P ., P.A.C.). 33 Meighen to Sharpe, June 25 , 1932 (ibid.). 34 Meighen to J . C. M iller, Aug. 22 , 1932 (ibid.). 38 J . C. Webster to Meighen, Nov. 20, 1932 , confidential (ibid.). Dr. Web­ ster was also a member o f the Duff Commission. 38 Meighen to Webster, Nov. 25 , 1932 (ibid.). 37 See Arthur Meighen, a Biography, vol. II: And Fortune Fled, 1920-1927, Roger Graham (Toronto: Clarke, Irwin & Co. Ltd., 1963 ) , pp. 48- 50. 38 Stenographic report o f address to the Investment Dealers Association of Canada, Toronto, Jan. 28, 1933 (A.M .P . P .A .C .).

39 Ibid. 40 Meighen to J . C. Webster, Nov. 25 , I9 3 2 (ibid.).

NOTES

193

41 Meighen to Watson Griffin, Feb. 7 , 1933 {ibid.). 42 S.D. ( 1932 - 33 ) , p. 297 . 43 Ibid. ( 1939 ) , p. 54 44 Beatty to Meighen, May 29, 1939 , personal {A.M .P., P.A .C .). 45 Meighen to Beatty, May 30, 1939 , personal {ibid.). 46 S.D. ( 1939 ), pp. 474 ff.; Unrevised and Unrefented, pp. 322 ff.

CHAPTER III : ISSUES OF THE THIRTIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

S.D. ( 1932 - 33 ) , p. 404. Ibid., p. 405. Saturday Night, April 29 , 1933 . Ibid., May 6, 1933 . Ibid., May 13 , 1933 . N .M ., pp. 62- 3 . Ibid., p. 64 .

Meighen to Bennett, Jan. 4 , 1933 . Quoted in S.D. ( 1935 )» P- 4-

N .M ., p. 68. 10 C .A.R . ( 1934 ) , p. 189 .

11 For his comments on the report see the letter to Bennett of Jan. 4, 1935 referred to in Note 8. 12 S.D. ( 1935)4 P- 513 Evening Telegram (Toronto), Dec. 4, 1936 . 14 N .M ., p. 7 1 . 15 Meighen to John Morrison, March 2 , 1937 {A.M .P., P.A .C .). 16 This and the following quotations are from N .M ., pp. 96- 102 . 17 M illions (Official organ of the Millions Club o f N .S.W .), Dec. 8, I934> p. 8 {A.M .P., P.A.C.). 18 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Dec. 12 , 1934 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 19 For this speech see Unrevised and Unrefented, pp. 277 ff. It was also published in 1938 and 1947 by the Oxford University Press and, in an attractive special edition containing as well a biographical sketch of Meighen by Louis Blake Duff, by the Review Company o f Fort Erie Ltd. in 1954 . 20 Unrevised and Unrefented, p. 3 17 . 21 Journal (Ottawa), June 27 , 1933 . 22 Meighen to W. S. Bennet, Nov. 1 , 1935 {A.M .P., P.A .C .). 23 S.D. ( 1935 ) , pp. 184 - 5. 24 Meighen to J . A. McGibbon, Jan. II, 1938 {A.M .P., P.A.C.). 25 Meighen to P. J . Montague, Feb. 12 , 1938 {ibid.). 26 Meighen to Mrs. Isabella Scott, May 6, 1936 {ibid.). 27 Unrevised and Unrefented, p. 319 . 28 Meighen to W. R. Givens, Feb. 12 , 1938 {A.M .P., P.A .C .). 29 The speech is in Unrevised and Unrefented, pp. 248 ff., from which the following quotations are taken. 30 W. R. Givens to Meighen, Feb. 14 , 1938 {A.M .P., P.A .C.). 31 Meighen to Givens, Feb. 2 1 , 1938 {ibid.). 32 Ibid. 33 Bennett to Meighen, Feb. 9, 1938 {ibid.). 34 Meighen to W. S. Dingman, June 1 1 , 1938 , personal {ibid.).

\

194

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

85 38 37 38 39 40 41

Meighen to H . R. Milner, April 14., 1938 , private and confidential (ibid.). Gazette (M ontreal), July 4 , 1938 . N .M ., p. 103 . S.D. ( 1938 ) , pp. 492» 5 02 -3Ibid., pp. 508- 10 , 520 - 1 . C .D . ( 1938 ) , vol. IV, pp. 4526 - 7 . The speech is in Unrevised and Unrefented, pp. 306 ff., from which the following quotations are taken. 42 Globe and Mail (Toronto), July 6, 1938 .

43 Ibid.

44 Ibid. 45 46 47 48 49 B0

Ibid.

Meighen to Bennett, July 12 , 1938 ( A .M .P . , P.A .C.). N .M ., p. 104 . Ibid. Ibid. Globe and M ail , July 8, 1938 .

CHAPTER IV : THE BATTLE OF SOUTH YORK 1 Meighen to J . A. Clark, Oct. 26, 1938 ( A .M .P . , P.A .C .). 2 Manion to Meighen, n.d. (Manion Papers, P .A .C .). This letter does not appear in the Meighen Papers. Because o f this and because the document in the Manion Papers is undated and is not on the flimsy paper on which copies of out­ going letters were made, it seems probable that Manion thought better of sending it. 3 George Black to Manion, Jan. 12 , 1940 , personal and confidential; Manion to Black, Jan. 25 , 1940 , personal and private (ibid.).

4 The Incredible Canadian. A Candid Portrait o f Mackenzie King: his works, his times and his nation, Bruce Hutchison (Toronto, New York, London: Long­ mans, Green & Co., 1952 ) , p. 7 . 5 Meighen to Edward Anderson, Nov. 2 , 1938 (A .M .P., P.A .C .).

8 7 8 9

Ibid. Unrevised and Unrefented, pp. 346- 7 .

Meighen to J . A. Clark, Sept. 13 , 1939 (A .M .P ., P.A.C.). The Mackenzie King Record, 1939- 1944, J . W. Pickersgill (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, i 960) , p. 62 . 10 Ibid., p. 64. 11 Unrevised and Unrefented, p. 361 . 12 Meighen to J . A. Clark, Feb. 1 , 1940 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). 13 Memorandum accompanying D. M . Hogarth to Manion, n.d. (Manion Papers, P.A .C.). 14 At this point Manion inserted in longhand, “ O f course, I mean Bennett.” 15 Manion to Hogarth, Feb. 2 , 1940 (ibid.). 18 N M ., p. 108 . 17 “ Minutes of the Proceedings at the Meeting of Conservative Representa­ tives, in the Railway Committee Room o f the House o f Commons on the 7 th and 8th o f November, 19 4 1 ,” p. IO. Hereinafter referred to as “ Minutes.” I am indebted to Hon. R. A. Bell for making this document available to me. 18 Meighen to Bennett, Nov. 22 , 1940 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). 19 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 9, 1943 ( T . R. Meighen Papers).

NOTES

195

20 Meighen to Bennett, Nov. 22 , 1940 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). 21 Meighen to Dandurand, Oct. 25 , 1941 (ibid.). 22 Unrevised and Unrefented, pp. 384 ff. 23 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Oct. 30, 1941 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 24 N .M ., pp. 109- 1 1 . 25 Province (Vancouver), Nov. 4, 19 4 1 . 26 J . W. Pickersgill, o f. cit., p. 276 . 27 Ibid., pp. 277 - 8. 28 “ Minutes,” p. 19 . 29 Ibid., p. 23 . 30 Ibid., pp. 24- 5. 31 Ibid., p. 22 . 32 Ibid,, p. 26. 33 Ibid., p. 53 . 34 Ibid., pp. 59-64. 35 N .M ., p. I I I . 36 Ibid., p. i l 2 . 37 Ibid. 38 Ibid. 39 Meighen to Bennett, Nov. 18 , 1941 (A.M .P., P.A.C.). 40 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 19 , 1941 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 41 Meighen to Bennett, Nov. 18 , 1941 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). 42 Meighen to Mrs. Guy Robinson, Nov. 18 , 1941 ( T . R. Meighen Papers). 43 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, June 10 , 1941 (ibid.). 44 New Commonwealth, Feb. 2 , 1942 . 45 Free Press (London), Jan. 15 , 1942 . 46 Star (Windsor), Jan. 10 , 1942 . 47 Financial Post, Nov. 22 , 19 4 1 . 48 Ibid., Dec. 6, 19 4 1 . 49 Ibid., Dec. 20 , 19 4 1 . 60 Free Press (W innipeg), Jan. 12 , 1942 . 61 Meighen to J . B. Maclean, Jan. 20, 1942 (A M .P ., P.A .C .). 82 Maclean to Meighen, Feb. 19 , 1942 , personal; Meighen to Maclean, Feb. 23 , 1942 (ibid.). 83 S.D. ( 1940-42 ) , p. 57 . Italics added. 84 Ibid. ( 1939 , second session), pp. 46- 7 . 88 Ibid. ( 1940-42 ) , p. 57 . 86 Ibid., pp. 56- 7 . 87 Globe and Mail, Jan. 23 , 1941 . 88 Leader-Post (Regina), Feb. 14 , 19 41 . 89 Ibid., Feb. 24 , 1941 . This letter was replied to in the same issue. On March 9, 1941 a further letter from Meighen and a rejoinder thereto were pub­ lished.

80 81 62 63 64 68 88

Globe and M ail, Jan. 17 , 1942 . Canadian Forum, Jan. 1942 . Ibid. See also Eugene Forsey’s reply to this editorial, ibid., March 1942 . New Commonwealth, Jan. 1 , 1942 . Ibid. Ibid., Feb. 2 , 1942 .

I am indebted to Mr. M . C. G . Meighen for this information.

196

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

67 68 69 70

New Commonwealth, Feb. 2 , 1942 . Ibid.

Meighen to Ernest Lapointe, Aug. 28 , 19 4 ° (A .M .P ., P.A.C.). “ Je sais que le mot ‘conscription’ vous reporte à 19 17 . Ne nous mettons pas dans la position où un gouvernement Meighen viendrait nous l ’imposer à coups de baïonnettes et de mitrailleuses.” From a copy o f the speech in ibid. 71 Meighen to F. D. Tolchard, Jan. 5, 1943 ( ibid.). 72 St. Laurent to Meighen, Jan. 12 , 1943 (ibid.). 73 Meighen to St. Laurent, Jan. 14 , 1943 (ibid.). 74 Evening Telegram (Toronto), Jan. 26, I9 4 2 > Globe and M ail , Jan. 29, Ï942. 76 Meighen to Eugene Forsey, Jan. 16 , 1942 (A .M .P., P.A.C.). 76 Meighen to Mrs. T . R. Meighen, Feb. 7 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 77 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Jan. 16 , 1942 (ibid.). 78 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Jan. 30, 1942 (ibid.). 79 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 8, I9 4 2 (ibid.). 80 C. Frank Moore to Meighen, March 10 , I 9 4 2 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). M r. Moore was Meighen’s Official Agent. 81 Unsigned, undated memorandum (ibid.). 82 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 13 , 1942 ( T . R. Meighen Papers). 83 J . W. Pickersgill, op. cit., pp. 348- 9. 84 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Jan. 1 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 88 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 13 , 1942 (ibid.).

CHAPTER V: IN SEARCH OF AN EXIT 1 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 13 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 2 Meighen to Eugene Forsey, Feb. 25 , 1942 (A .M .P ., P.A .C .). 3 Meighen to Eugene Forsey, March 20, 1942 (ibid.). 4 Meighen to Eugene Forsey, Feb. 25 , 1942 (ibid.). 8 Meighen to Eugene Forsey, March 20, 1942 (ibid!). 6 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Feb. 25 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 7 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, March 23 , 1942 (ibid.). 8 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, June 2, 1942 (ibid!). 9 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, June 17 , 1942 (ibid.). 10 Meighen to Gustave Monette, March 13 , 1942 (A .M .P ., P.A .C .). 11 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, April 29 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 12 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, June 17 , 1942 (ibid!). 13 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Aug. 3, 1942 (ibid.). 14 Meighen to Sir Gerald Campbell, Nov. 4, 1 9 4 ° > Campbell to Meighen, Nov. 1 1 , 1940 ; Meighen to Campbell, Nov. 12 , 1 9 4 ° (A .M .P ., P.A .C .). 18 Meighen to Winston Churchill, Dec. 28, I 9 4 1 (ibid.). 16 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Jan. 1 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 17 Free Press (W innipeg), Dec. 3 1 , 19 4 1 . 18 J . W. Pickersgill, op. cit., p. 329 . 19 Churchill to Meighen, Jan. 4, 1942 (A .M .P., P.A .C.). 20 Meighen to Bennett, Feb. 12 , 1942 (ibid!). 21 See, for example, Meighen to Bennett, Dec. 16 , I9 4 2 anc^ May 2 1 , 1943 (ibid!).

22 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, July 25 , I942 ( T . R. Meighen Papers).

NOTES

197

23 24 25 26

Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Sept. 24, 1942 (ibid.). Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Sept. 12 , 1942 (ibid.). Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Oct. i l , 1942 (ibid.). Bennett to Meighen, dated “ Tuesday” (A.M .P., P .A .C .). T he luncheon meeting Bennett addressed was on a Monday, probably the day before this was written. 27 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 16 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 28 Meighen to Bracken, Nov. 17 , 1942 , private and confidential (A.M .P., P.A.C.). 29 Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Nov. 27 , 1942 ( T . R. Meighen Papers). 30 Meighen to Bennett, Dec. 16 , 1942 (A .M .P., P.A .C .).

31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Ibid.

Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Dec. 16 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). For this speech see Unrevised and Unrepented, pp. 419 - 34. Ibid., pp. 205 -6 . Tree Press (W innipeg), Dec. 10 , 1942 . Ibid.

Meighen to Bennett, Dec. 16 , 1942 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). Ibid. Ibid.

Quoted in The Conservative Party o f Canada, 1920- 1 Q48, John R. Wil­ liams (Durham, N .C .: Duke University Press, 1956 ) , p. 7 1 , n. i l l . 41 Meighen to Bennett, Dec. 16 , 1942 (A .M .P ., P.A .C .).

42 43 44 45 48 47 48 49 50 51 62 53 64

Ibid.

Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Dec. 16 , 1942 (T . R. Meighen Papers). Meighen to Bennett, Dec. 16 , 1942 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). Meighen to Bracken, Dec. 17 , 1942 (ibid.). J . W. Pickersgill, o f. cit., p. 477 . Bennett to Meighen, March 26, 1943 (A.M .P., P.A .C .). Meighen to Bennett, April 26, 1943 (ibid.). Meighen to Bracken, July 7 , 1943 (ibid.). Meighen to T . R. Meighen, June 2 1 , 1943 (T . R. Meighen Papers). Meighen to T . R. Meighen, Aug. 8, 1943 (ibid.). Meighen to Bracken, Oct. 8, 1943 (A .M .P., P.A .C .). Meighen to Bennett, Dec. 30, 1943 (ibid.). Bracken to Meighen, Aug. 20 , 1949 (ibid.).

CHAPTER VI : LOOKING BACK 1 Meighen to Bennett, July 9, 1946 (A.M .P., P.A .C .). 2 Meighen to Forsey, Oct. 15 , 1948 (ibid.). 3 I am indebted to Dr. Forsey for allowing me to look at his manuscript with these and many other comments by Meighen. 4 Meighen to Forsey, Nov. 24 , 1940 . From a letter ir. Dr. Forsey’s pos­ session. B Meighen to T . R. Meighen, May 3 , 1943 (T . R. Meighen Papers). 6 Meighen to Forsey, Oct. 2 , 1942 (A .M .P., P.A.C.). 7 Meighen to Forsey, July 2 1 , 1948 (ibid.). 8 Free Press (W innipeg), May io and 1 1 , 1943 .

198

ARTHUR M EIGH EN

9 Quoted in The Politics o f John W . Dafoe and the Tree Press, Ramsay Cook (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963 ) , p. 158 . 10 Quoted in ibid., p. 160 . 11 Tree Press (W innipeg), May 22 , 1943 . 12 Forsey to C. H . Cahan, May 30, 1943 . This and the following quotations relating to this matter are from correspondence in the possesssion o f Dr. Forsey. 13 Cahan to Forsey, June 3, 1943 , personal. 14 Meighen to Cahan, June 8, 1943 . The following day Meighen sent Cahan a second letter, asking him to substitute it for this one. The construction in the second letter was less cumbersome and the Winnipeg convention o f 1942 was added to the South York election as something for which funds had been raised. 15 Cahan to Meighen, June 1 1 , 1943 , personal. 16 Forsey to Cahan, June 20, 1943 . 17 Cahan to Forsey, June 22 , 1943 . 18 Vital Speeches o f the Day, vol. X V II, No. 3, Nov. 15 , 1950 , p. 86. 19 From a copy o f the stenographic report o f the speech provided by M r. Meighen. I am indebted to General J . A. Clark for his account o f the circum­ stances surrounding the delivery of this speech. 20 Meighen to Hugh Clark, n.d. T his and other letters from Meighen to Clark hereinafter cited were made available to me by their recipient. 21 Meighen to Hugh Clark, n.d. 22 Meighen to Hugh Clark, Aug. 4 , 1953 . 23 Meighen to Hugh Clark, n.d. 24 C.B.C. broadcast, Aug. 1 1 , i 960. 23 Meighen to Hugh Clark, Nov. 12 , 1953 . 26 P. W. Baker to Miss E. M . Edmondson, Dec. 8, 1953 . From a copy pro­ vided by Miss Edmondson. 27 Meighen to Hugh Clark, March 30, 1957 . 23 The speeches at the dinner were recorded. These quotations are from a copy transcribed for Mr. Meighen. 29 Meighen to Hugh Clark, March 14 , 1958 . 30 Meighen to Hugh Clark, May 2 1 , 1957 .

IN D E X Abitibi Canyon, 49, 56 Abitibi Power and Paper Company, 49, 50 Albany Club, 5, 168, 174, 175, 177, 180, 185 Aluminum Company of Canada, 121 Amery, L . S., 138 Asbestos Corporation Limited, 121 Asquith, Herbert, 158 Atholstan, H ugh Graham, Baron, 175

Bruce, Dr. Herbert, 104, 106, 110, 111 Buffalo Chamber of Commerce : Meigh­ en speaks to, 14-15 Byng of Vimy, Baron, 160

Ballantyne, C. C., 139 Beatty, E. W., 13, 39, 40, 42, 43, 45 Beatty, Samuel W., 173 Beauharnois affair, 34-7, 51, 53, 55 Beauharnois Light, Heat and Power Company, 35 Bennett, R. B., 13, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 39, 42, 48, 49, 53, 54, 57, 59, 72, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 93, 94, 97, 100, 141; depression measures, 15, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70; Meighen’s correspondence with, 55, 82, 95, 105, 106, 137, 141, 144, 149, 150, 151, 152, 154, 157 Berriedale Keith, Arthur, 158 Bessborough, Earl of, 31 Bevin, Ernest, 116, 117, 120, 122 Birkenhead, Lord, 28 Black, George, 86 Board of Railway Commissioners, 28, 40, 43 Borah, W. E., 24 Borden, Sir Robert Laird, 28, 64, 106, 107, 182 Bracken, John, 97, 98, 99, 103, 104, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 148, 149, 150, 151-2, 153, 154, 155, 156, 162 Briggs, Dr. William, 187

199

Cahan, C. H ., 104, 160-1,162, 163 Campbell, Sir Gerald, 135-6 Canadian Bar Association, 165, 166 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 136, 144,145, 146 Canadian Club of Toronto, 65; testi­ monial dinner for Meighen, 180-2 Canadian Club of Vancouver, 63 Canadian General Securities Limited, 4-5, 8-9,31,51, 55,156,163,168,185 Canadian Institute on Economics and Politics, 123 Canadian Institute of International Affairs, 13 Canadian National Railway System, 39, 40, 43, 44, 47; and depression, 39; Meighen counsel for, 29-30 Canadian Pacific Railway, 39, 41, 43 Cardin, P. J. A., 90 Cartwright, J. R., 58 C.C .F. {see Co-operative Common­ wealth Federation) Chamberlain, Neville, 87 Christie, Loring, 19 Churchill, Winston, 16-17, 23, 136-7, 138, 153 Clark, H ugh, 105, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 178, 179, 180,183,184,185 Clark, J. A., 104, 165, 166 Closure, 183-4 Cockeram, Lt.-Col. Allan, 107, 125, 129, 130 Coldwell, M. J., 110

200

IN D E X

Conservative party (see Liberal-Con­ servative party) Consolidated Smelters, 121 Constitutional crisis of 1926, 158-60, 164, 168 Co-operative Commonwealth Federa­ tion, 71, 84, 97, 98, 114, 116, 119, 123, 133, 134, 139, 152, 153, 154, 157, 160; in Ontario, 120; Regina Manifesto, 67; and South York byelection, 107, 109, 110, 119, 120-2, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130 Côté, Louis, 139 Currency reform, 13-15 Dafoe, J. W., 17, 29, 31, 159, 160 Dandurand, Raoul, 33, 44-5, 46, 78, 79, 96 Depression, 8-10, 38, 41, 66, 67, 69, 116, 117-18 Dexter, Grant, 33, 36, 148, 149, 150 Dickson, Billy, 178 Diefenbaker, John, 141, 148, 149, 181, 183, 184, 187 Dominion Companies Act, 59 Dominion Conservative Association, 95, 104, 140 Douglas, T . C., 160 Drew, George, 90, 130, 141, 153, 154, 155 Duff, Mr. Justice Lym an P., 39, 54, 57 Duff Commission, 39, 40, 42, 43 Dunning, Charles, 13 Duplessis, Maurice, 90 Durant, Will, 16 Election of 1930, 26, 35; of 1935, 70, 76; of 1945, 154 Elizabeth II, 186 Embassy Club, 11-12 Employment and Social Insurance Act,

68 Evans, Watson, 4-5, 29, 30, 38 Ewart, J. S., 158 Excess profits tax: C.C .F. on, 120, 122; Meighen on, 114-16, 118 Excess Profits T ax Bill, 115 Falconer, Sir Robert, 27 Farm ers’ Creditors Arrangement Act, 66, 70

Federation for Community Service, 116, 118, 119 Ferguson, Howard, 81 Flavelle, Sir Joseph, 39 Floud, Sir Francis, 79 Forke, Robert, 159, 160 Forsey, Eugene, 126, 132, 161, 162, 163, 177-8; and T he Royal Power of Dissolution, 158-9, 160 Freedman, Max, 177-8 Frost, Leslie, 183 Gaby, F . A., 58 Gardiner, Robert, 27 Garson, Stuart, 99 Gloucester, Duke of, 61 Good W ill Congress of the World Al­ liance for International Friendship: Meighen’s speech to, 18-25 Gordon, G. A., 174 Gordon, P. H ., 56 Graham, George P., 36 Graham, Howard D., 187 Grand Trunk Railway, 29 Graydon, Gordon, 139, 148, 152 Green, Howard, 141, 148 Hanna, D . B., 40 Hanson, R. B., 29, 94, 95, 97, 100,102, 104, 134, 139, 141, 152 Harris, Joseph, 77, 139 Haydon, Andrew, 35, 36, 37, 55 Henry, George, 29, 30, 49, 50, 53, 56 Héon, Georges, 82 Hepburn, Mitchell F., 49, 50, 53, 54, 58, 59, 90, 126, 127, 130, 131, 153 Herridge, W . D., 66 Hitler, Adolf, 87, 110 Hogarth, Maj.-Gen. D . M., 92, 93,110,

111 Holt, Sir Herbert, 13 Howe, C. D., 184 Houde, Camillien, 123, 124 Hughes, W illiam Morris, 62 H unt, Theodore, 29 Hydro “ scandal,” 49-59, 121, 126 Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario, 29, 30, 31, 38, 47, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 58

201

IN D E X

Imperial Conference of 1921, 18, 62 Imperial Economic Conference, 38 International Labour Organization, 68, 69 International Nickel, 121 Irvine, W illiam, 177 Isabel and Arthur Meighen Lodge, 183 King, W illiam Lyon Mackenzie, 19, 34, 35, 40, 44, 48, 54, 59, 70, 71, 76, 79-80, 84, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 98, 100, 106, 107, 108, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 145, 146, 147, 149, 151, 152, 153, 154, 157, 163, 168, 175; and constitutional crisis of 1926, 158, 159, 160 Lapointe, Ernest, 89, 90, 123, 124, 172 Latchford, F. R., 54, 55, 56, 57 Latchford-Smith Commission, 54, 55, 56-7, 58 Laurier, Sir W ilfrid, 182 Lawson, Earl, 77, 104 Leader, Harry, 11 League of Nations, 19, 20, 87 Liberal Citizens’ Committee of South York, 126 Liberal-Conservative party: conference of 1941,97,98,99,100-4,105,110-12, 139, 140; convention of 1927, 26, 76, 78, 81, 147, 156, 164; convention of 1938, 76, 80-3; convention of 1942, 139-40, 141, 142, 143, 144-51, 156, 163, 164 (see also Progressive Con­ servative party) Lucas, I. B., 58 Lyon, Stewart, 58 McCullagh, George, 130 Macdonald, Sir John A., 175 Macdonnell, J. M., 103, 104, 140, 141 McDougald, W ilfrid Laurier, 35, 36, 37, 51, 55 McFee, Allan, 174, 186 Mackay, J. Keiller, 183, 184 Mackenzie, Ian, 27 Maclean, Col. J. B., 112, 113 McLean, Stanley, 105, 124

MacNicol, J. R., 104, 106, 139-40 MacPherson, M. A., 78, 82, 83, 104, 141, 148 McRae, Gen. A . D ., 104,106 Maguire, C. A., 58 Maitland, R. L ., 141 Manion, R. J., 29, 48, 77, 78, 82, 83, 84, 85-7, 88, 89, 91, 92-3, 94, 97, 184 Massey, Denton, 77 Massey, Vincent, 171 Meighen, Edw ard, 9, 173 Meighen, Isabel Cox, 7, 11, 59, 61, 105, 128, 170, 173, 183, 186 Meighen, Lillian, 6, 59, 61, 184 Meighen, Michael, 184 Meighen, M. C . G., 65, 105, 163, 1778, 184, 185 Meighen, T . R., 167, 184; Meighen’s correspondence with, 7-8, 30, 32, 63, 97, 105-6, 128-9, 130, 132, 133, 134, 136, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 150, 152, 158 Menzies, Robert, 62, 138 Milner, H . R., 139, 140-1, 150 Mitchell, Humphrey, 107 Monette, Gustave, 134, 139 Montreal H arbour Board, 35 Munich Pact, 87 National Advisory Committee on the St. Lawrence Waterways, 35 National Recovery Act (U .S .A .), 67,

68 National Resources Mobilization Act (1940), 96 Natural Products Marketing Act, 66 N ew Deal, 66, 67, 68 Northern Canada Mining Corporation Limited, 121 Noseworthy, J. W ., 107, 109, 120, 129, 130 O ’Leary, Grattan, 164, 177-8 Ontario Power Service Corporation, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 121, 126 Ottawa Economic Conference of 1932, 62 Railway problem, 38-48, 175; and de­ pression, 38, 41

202

IN D E X

Raymond, Donat, 35, 36, 37 Reconstruction party: and election of 1935, 77 Reid, Margaret, 174 Rideau Club, 30 Roebuck, Arthur, 59 Rogers, Robert, 175 Roosevelt, Franklin D ., 66, 67, 68, 133, 136 Rose, Mr. Justice, 58, 59 Ross, Arthur, 139 Royal Air Force: personnel in Canada, 78-81, 83 St. Laurent, Louis, 107, 124-5, 183 Salvation Army, 156-7, 170, 183; N a­ tional Advisory Board, 157; Toron­ to Advisory Board, 157 Sandwell, B. K ., 51, 52-3, 160 Scott, Barbara Ann, 11 Seigniory Club, 12-13 Senate reform, 31, 44-5 Senate scandal (see Beauharnois affair) Sévigny, Albert, 184, 185 Shakespeare: Meighen’s speech on, 60, 61-2, 63, 64, 65, 66, 164 Sharpe, William H ., 30, 37-8 Shaughnessy, Lord, 39, 40, 171 Shotwell, Prof. J. T ., 15, 16 Slaght, Arthur G., 53, 54 Smith, Arthur L ., 148 Smith, Robert, 54, 55, 56, 57 Smith, R. C., I l l , 113 Smith, Sidney, 77, 148 Smuts, Jan Christian, 138 Social Credit party, 71 South York by-election, 107-31, 132, 133, 152, 161, 162; C.C.F. cam­ paign, 119,120-2,124,126,127, 128; Liberal campaign, 126, 127, 128; Meighen’s campaign, 126-7, 137; re­ sults, 129-31 Stevens, H . H ., 68, 77, 78, 148 Stevenson, John A., 141

Sweezey, R. O., 35 Taschereau, André, 165 Taschereau, L . A., 13, 167 Taschereau, Sir Elzéar, 167 Thompson, J. W ., 174 Thomson, J. S., 144, 145-6 Thornton, Sir Henry, 39, 40, 41 Tilley, W. N ., 58 Toronto Board of Trade, 124 Trade and Industry Commission Act, 68, 70 Traders Finance Corporation Limited, 4, 38 Treaty of Lausanne, 18, 20 Treaty of Locarno, 18, 19, 20, 22 Tweedsmuir, John Buchan, Lord, 64 Underhill, Frank, 123, 124, 172 Union Government, 84, 175 Union Nationale, 154 Unrevised and Unrepented, 164-5, 171 Vanier, Georges, 187 Walker, D avid J., 149 Wall Street crash of 1929, 8-9 Wallace, Malcolm, 15, 124, 177 Washington, George, 23 Washington Conference, 18, 19, 20 Webster, D r. J. C., 28 White, Sir Thomas, 78 Willkie, Wendell, 118 Wood, Kingsley, 138 Woods-Johnson, F. B., 187 Woodsworth, J. S., 27, 94 Wright, Don, 65, 184, 185 Wright, Lillian Meighen (see Meighen, Lillian) Wright, Patrick, 184 Wright, Priscilla, 164, 184, 185 Wright, Timothy, 184 Young, Harry, 120