On Thursday, August 8, 1878, the
Liberal-Conservative party of Hamilton began its federal election campaign with
an open-air gathering of party members on the grounds of the William Baker
residence, Main and Locke streets, in the city’s west end.
Both Hamilton Tory candidates were in
attendance and the major platforms were presented to the party faithful, an
audience which included Hamilton’s venerable political statesman, the Hon.
Issac Buchanan.
The current mayor of Hamilton, Mr. Francis
Edwin Kilvert, nominated to contest the Hamilton West riding, was the first
person chosen to make a speech. His major platform proposals centered on the
policy of protective tariffs for Canadian industry – the National Policy
advocated by party leader, Sir John A. Macdonald.
Mayor Kilvert believed that the protection of
Canadian industry was essential in order to restore prosperity to the nation,
particularly during the then-current state of deep economic depression.
Many of the factories in Hamilton in 1878,
which were either closed or operating well below capacity, could be restored to
full health with the imposition of protective tariffs on imported manufactured
goods, which were undercutting the price of Canadian manufactured goods.
Protection would enable local factories to employ more men and would encourage
the investment of capital into the city to build new plants.
Times had been hard, during the four years of
government of Prime Minister Alexander Mackenzie, Mayor Kilvert claimed. He
said that it was imperative that the Grits be driven from office. In
conclusion, he expressed his hope that the supporters of the
Liberal-Conservatives of Hamilton would spare no effort to ensure the election
of both himself and his fellow candidate Thomas Robertson.
After being introduced to great cheers,
Candidate Robertson began his address by ridiculing the two Grits who then were
representing the two Hamilton ridings, Mr. A. T. Wood and Mr. Irving. In the
previous election campaign of 1873, both Mr. Wood and Mr. Irving had pledged
themselves in favour of protection.
Hundreds of electors had voted for them because of their stand on that
question.
However, their leader chose not to pursue a
policy of protection, and during the Grit administration, the country had
declined from a relatively prosperous state to a low ebb.
Mr. Wood and Mr. Irving had chosen to prefer
party loyalties over the nation’s best interests, and thus were unworthy of
support, according to Candidate Robertson. He later went on to say that he
found, during his door-to-door canvasing, that many houses in the city had ‘to
let’ signs on them, as hundreds of men had left with their families in search
of employment.
After Mr. Robertson’s speech, the Honourable Isaac
Buchanan was called upon for a few words. Buchanan bluntly claimed that the
Grit administration suffered from want of brains, saying “if the present
Government remains in power another five years, the country will be lost. The
country will be in a dreadful state if we elect Messrs. Wood and Irving.”
At this point, some one in the crowd shouted
out : “When you were there we had better times.”
Mr. Buchanan replied to that member of the
crowd, as well to all gathered, by saying: “Yes, we had much better times. You
ought to choose your friends and those in power they are not. But for
protection, society in the United States would have gone to pieces.”
After three cheers for the Queen, followed by
cheers for the candidates, and Isaac Buchanan, the meeting was brought to a
close and the audience dispersed.
On Wednesday evening, August 21, 1878, the first
open-air political meeting of the federal campaign was held at the
newly-constructed Amphitheatre on James street north. As described in the
Spectator : “seating accommodation had been provided for about 2,000, but last
night, many who attended late were compelled to rest themselves standing up.
The utmost harmony and good humour prevailed, and the few interruptions be a
couple of inebriated individuals not being worthy of being characterized as
disturbing elements.”
The meeting was organized by the
Liberal-Conservative Association and, hoping to make matters lively, written
invitations had been sent to the two incumbent Grit candidates
In his response to the invitation, Aemilius
Irving wrote that “having been confined to the house by a cold for three days,
and still unable to raise my voice, I almost fear that I will not be able to
present myself.”
The other Grit candidate declined to attend
the meeting at the Amphitheatre for two reasons. First of all, Mr. Wood felt
that he would not “receive a fair hearing at a meeting, or a series of
meetings, held under the auspices of the Conservative party of this city.”
Secondly, Wood felt that he could “spend the few days which remain between now and the election to
better advantage than by having any programme mapped out by your Association.”
The main speaker of the evening was Mr. N. F.
Davis, who outlined the advantages of the National Policy:
“Thirty thousand young Canadians were going
across the line every year, where there are already 70,000 of Canada’s best
sons. Everyone of these should be heads of families in Canada. The National
Policy will keep the sons and daughters of the Dominion here, and give them
remunerative employment. Why, we are paying $27 a head for emigrants, and yet
pushing a policy which drives 30,000 of our best young men – the bone and sinew
of Canada – out of the country.”
Candidate Thomas Roberston was the only other
speaker. He told the crowd that he would not go over the National Policy again,
as it had been so ably explained by Mr. Davis.
Candidates Wood and Irving, Robertson said,
had been asked time and time again to come forward to discuss the merits of the
Grit free trade policy over the Tory National Policy. Every guarantee had been
given that they would receive a fair hearing.
Mr. Irving had promised to appear upon
recovery of his health, but Mr. Wood was afraid to meet the citizens face to
face:
“If Mr. Wood had done his duty, he shouldn’t
be afraid to come before a fair and generous public, and defend his position. A
meeting would be held in this most comfortable place every week until the
election, and if Mr. Wood declined to face his late constituents, then – “
A voice in the crowd shouted – “Leave him
behind!” (Loud laughter and cheers)
Mr. Robertson then continued:
“In every court there is a jury, and in this
court of the people of Hamilton, the jury has spoken. The verdict is ‘Mr. Wood
will be left behind!” (Renewed cheers)
All four candidates competing in the two Hamilton
ridings did appear together the following evening at the Germania Hall, at Main
and James streets. At the beginning of the meeting, the chairman, Mr. Schwartz
announced that, while the candidates could speak in English, all others must
speak in German.
Aemilius Irving was the first speaker, and he
immediately denied that the current economic depression was the result of his
party’s policies:
“The commercial depression is traced to
Germany. The money taken from France was wasted, squandered upon fortresses,
and the inflation so produced ended in distress. It then spread to the United
States and Canada.”
Mr. Irving denied that conditions for the
Canadian manufacturer were as bad as portrayed by the Torys:
“Figures show that our principal
manufacturers consume now more material than ever before. Therefore they are in
a more wholesome state than they occupied when we thought they were extremely
prosperous. Is this a country going down? No; building is going on. People are
not leaving the country. They did leave years ago, but not recently.”
Mayor Kilvert was the next speaker and he
reviewed the preceding speech, starting by saying that he failed to see how the
payment of an indemnity by France to Germany had anything to do with the
current depression. He went on to state that it was the government in Ottawa
that permitted the expatriation of Canadian workers. Canadian resources were
not being developed. The National Policy would establish new factories in
Canada to the great benefit of all classes.
Mr. A. T. Wood, the next speaker, claimed to
be no speech-maker, but he vowed to try his best. He admitted that, in a speech
to the House of Commons in 1876, he had come out in favour of a policy of
protective tariffs, but the National Policy of the Liberal-Conservatives
included a tariff on imported raw materials.
The Spectator reporter present at the meeting
noted that this Wood’s statement was received with a “titter” as the audience
was well aware that the National Policy proposed no tariff on raw materials.
Mr. Wood continued speaking for some time,
until voices in the audience began to shout “time.” When he responded by saying
that his speech was nearing its conclusion, there was much ironical laughter
and applause.
Before the final speaker was introduced, Mr.
Wood had left the premises.
Mr. Robertson dwelt on the inconsistency of
Messrs. Wood and Irving, who, within five tears had transformed from
protectionists to free traders :
“Mr. Wood had come before them tonight and
had said that what was right in 1876 was wrong in 1878. Mr. Wood said he was
not a speechmaker, but he was a most estimable advocate because he contends one
day that black is white, and the next day that white is black.”
Referring to Mr. Wood’s speech in parliament
in favour of protection, Mr. Robertson asserted that Woods “was playing bass
fiddle then; he is now playing bass violin.”
Candidate Robertson noted that Wood had left
the meeting, and while he did not wish to criticize the gentleman behind his
back, he must tell people about Mr. Wood’s courage. He hoped now that his
opponent would present himself before the general public :
“And not shirk them as he did that large and
respectable audience in the Amphitheatre.”
The second monster meeting to be held at the
Stoneman’s Gardens’ Amphitheatre drew over 2,500 people, despite very inclement
weather. At the beginning of the meeting, the crowd was given the opportunity
of having the proceedings cancelled because of the heavy rain. However, the
crowd urged the meeting’s chairman to proceed.
Mayor Kilvert reviewed the basic tenets of
the National Policy, taking care to point out that:
“Raw material should be admitted free in
order that manufacturers might be encouraged, and even semi-manufactured goods,
which might be called raw, should be admitted free, if we could not produce
them.”
Mr. Irving made an appearance at the meeting
to speak about Grit policies, but, once again, Mr. Wood chose not to face the
electors at the Amphitheatre.
Mr. Irving contended that if they gave
protection to manufacturers, American capitalists would come into Canada. When
a chorus of voices cried, “That’s what we want!” Mr. Wood said : “then you’ll
have your labour market broken down.” A voice in the audience immediately shot
back : “it can’t be worse than it is.”
Candidate Robertson again hammered on the
point that both Mr. Irving and Mr. Wood had drastically changed their positions
on the tariff question:
“Do they remember that ‘Encourage Home
Industries” and ‘Protection to Home Industries” were emblazoned on a certain
committee room at the close of the last election? Do they hang the same
inscriptions now? (Cries of No!) They would have to go to the Opposition for
them now.”
The next evening, the Conservatives and the
Grits held separate meetings.
At the Grit meeting, held at 215 York street,
A. T. Wood was present to make a speech. When introduced, Mr. Wood was received
with a mixture of applause and groans.
After noting that every man, woman and child
was sick with the discussion concerning the Tory Party’s National Policy, Mr.
Wood quoted a lot of statistics to justify the Grit’s free trade position. As
noted in the Spectator, “their recitation being the signal for an exhibition of
great impatience amongst the audience, who engaged in a general conversation
for which the chairman rebuked them (without effect, however.)”
On August 31, 1878, the Spectator came out
with a strong denunciation of the questionable tactics of the Grit party :
“The whole plan of the Grit campaign in
Hamilton thus far has been distinguished by the evident desire on the part of
the wire-pullers to keep their proceedings as secret as possible. The major
portion of their work has been tinged largely with the back alley style of
doing business.”
The incident which provoked the Spectator’s
criticism was an attempt by the Grits to recover from the poor showing they
made at the Germania Hall meeting. As the votes of German citizens were much
sought after, the grits decided to hold a private caucus with them, away from
the prying eyes and ears of the Liberal-Conservatives.
Word was passed around that a meeting was to
be held in a room over Angus Sutherland’s grocery store, 56-58 King street
west. Only a few hand-written notices were passed to inform the general public
about the meeting.
When the meeting was about to begin, some
Liberal-Conservatives were noticed in the crowd:
“Suddenly one of the leaders in this clever
bit of finesse discovered that all present were not ‘of the faith,’ and it was
ordered that all who were not prepared to pledge their fealty to the Mackenzie
Free Trade Administration, and the Grit candidates of Hamilton, should retire.
This occasioned some hubbub, a number of Germans present stating that they had
been invited to attend, and therefore claimed the privilege of hearing what was
to be offered them.”
An argument broke out between members of the
audience and the chairman of the meeting, Mr. John I. Mackenzie, the result being that those in
favour of the National Policy left the meeting, leaving four people besides the
organizers of the meeting.
The Spectator commented on this turn of
events by saying “perhaps, before the campaign is over, the Grit candidates and
their friends will realize that fair play is bonnie play, and that their
hole-and-corner game is one which does not pay.”
On September 3, 1878, the Spectator sent a
reporter around the city to interview the managers of several Hamilton
industries to find out their views on the National Policy and what it would
mean for their businesses. The men interviewed, the Spectator claimed, were
chosen “without regard either to their political leanings or business, with the
object of allowing them to speak for themselves.”
Mr. E. W. Ware of the Gurney & Ware scale
manufacturing business said :
“Of course, we need protection. The Americans,
notably those in Buffalo, have time and again flooded the Canadian market with
scales at less price than they can be made for. They say they regard Canada as
only a State and can afford to ship their surplus goods here because our duty
is nothing to them.”
At the Burlington Glass Works, Burlington
street and MacNab streets, Mr. W. G. Beach was quoted as saying :
“All the table ware of every description –
tumblers, bottles and fancy ware – are imported from the States. But for the
fact that we are not warranted in going to the expense of moulds, etc. to make
such work, in consequence of the ‘slaughtering habits’ of the Americans, all
table ware etc. could be made here as cheaply as it is supplied by the American
houses, in very large quantities, as you may imagine when I have told you that
all the glass ware we make in Canada now is glass for lamps and lanterns. I am
confident that goods would not rise in price in Canada if we were sufficiently
protected to warrant us going into the manufacture of glass ware for the table,
etc. In That case, we would be able to employ between 200 and 300 hands. Now we
employ barely 100 hands.”
Mr. J. H. Killey, of the Mona Iron Works, referred
to the engines which had recently been purchased for the new Hamilton and Dundas
Railway, which had been made in Philadelphia:
“If we had a tariff framed in the interests
of the population, we would have it that not only engines, but thousands of
railway cars, which are yearly sent in here, would be manufactured in Canada as
cheap, if not cheaper, than they can be got in the States.”
Mr. Vail, of the Sanford, Vail and Bickley
company, probably the most extensive clothing manufactory in Canada, also came
out strongly in favour of the National Policy :
“When I came to Hamilton fully seventeen
years ago, there were only about 10,000 inhabitants in the city. Now there are
35,000. And what has caused this great increase? Why, the establishment of
manufactories here – the expenditure of a vast amount of money to supply
articles to Canadians, and giving work to thousands of workmen whose condition
has been greatly improved thereby. Seventeen years ago, a good farm could be
bought for $2,000; now the same farm cannot be got for $4,000. The reason is
obvious; the farmer is near a good market, and therefore can get so much more
for his produce. Thus, without very probably contributing any to that result,
the farmers around Hamilton have been greatly benefited by the building up of
the city. For, take away the manufacturers of Hamilton, and land will fall to
its price of 15 or 20 years ago; the people in the cities would have to leave,
and probably go back to the low wages and poor fare of England.”
While the local Tory newspaper, the Hamilton
Spectator, carried a succession of glowing reports of the Tory campaign and its
progress, its rival, the Hamilton Times, took the opposite point of view.
At one Grit campaign rally, which the
Spectator barely mentioned, the Times reported an incident which they tried to
make into a major issue. Mr. A .T. Wood, whom the Spectator criticized for his
reluctance to personally face the electors, was the target of some missiles thrown
from the audience.
As described in the Times, “several Tory
roughs, maddened by the enthusiasm of the vast audience who were cheering so
heartily the Reform speeches, sent a volley of rotten eggs into the grounds.”
The Spectator in reporting the meeting in
question dismissed the incident as the act of prankish young boys. The Times,
however, viewed the incident as the behavior of “a party which under the
prospect of defeat has invariably exhibited the lawlessness of desperadoes and
the rowdyism of cowards.”
Just before the election, the Times carried
an editorial, titled “A Few Timely Words to the Ladies of Hamilton.”
In explanation of the Grit position against
the National Policy, the editorial told the ladies of Hamilton that protective
tariffs would only aid the manufacturers and that higher tariffs on goods would
increase prices:
“You will have to pay more for your teas,
sugars, coffees, soaps, flour, bread, salt, coal, wall paper, ornaments, boots
and shoes, etc., cottons, wollens, parasols, gloves and wearing apparel both
for yourselves and your families.”
The editorial then concluded by reminding the
ladies of Hamilton that while they could not vote themselves, they could still
have an influence on the election’s result:
“Ladies often possess far clearer perceptions
than the other sex enjoy, and can in thousands of instances exert subtle yet
highly beneficial influence. We are not of those who wish to see ladies walking
in the mud of party politics, nor would we listen to a proposal to drag them
into the rude atmosphere of the polls from the homes they adorn, but we do say
as reasonable creatures they are interested in passing events, and should take
a part befitting their womanly instincts.”
By 8 a. m., on election day, September 17,
1878, carriages bearing the names of candidates spread out all over the city to
bring voters to the polls.
While the advent of the secret ballot had
made the process of voting itself less exciting than in the old days, there was
still considerable enthusiastic activity in connection with the election. As
the day wore on, the excitement became more intense, and every potential voter
was seized and carried to the polls.
At the Liberal-Conservative committee rooms
on the corner of King and John streets, there was a large crowd gathered all
day to hear the latest reports of voting trends:
“Victory was betokened in every eye as, with
stentorian voice, Mr. Waddell chronicled the returns from different wards,
which, in every case, showed a decided triumph for the National Policy.”
The Spectator building, on the corner of
MacNab street and Market Square, was another location for the general public to
learn how the election was going:
“By the close of the poll many thousand
citizens, amongst whom were not a few ladies, all filled with the most intense
curiosity to learn the latest returns, congregated.”
At early dusk, the proprietor of the
Spectator, sensing victory for the Liberal-Conservatives, illuminated the
outside of their building, fully anticipating the victory of the party the
newspaper had backed so thoroughly thoughout the campaign:
“The immense crowd which congregated in front
of the offices during the evening were loud in their praise of the novel idea
of a thorough illumination which enabled them to read the many thousands of
extras showing the state of the poll, which were distributed from the steam
presses.”
When it was declared that candidates Kilvert
and Robertson were victorious, it was announced that a meeting would be held at
the Amphitheatre. Over two thousand people made there way to that location, in
anticipation of victory speeches by the candidates.
Mr. Waddell began the meeting by saying that
when Sir John Macdonald had been in Hamilton the previous year, one of the signs
produced for his visit had read “Hamilton Redeemed in 1878.”
Unfortunately, in the middle of Waddell’s
speech, one half of the platform collapsed, and the meeting had to be moved
over to the Market Square.
Meanwhile, another mass of enthusiastic
supporters of candidates Kilvert and Roberston, would not be denied in their
desire for a victory parade:
“Accordingly, with banners, mottoes, and
other insignia floating in the breeze, the company marched through a number of
the principal street of the city.”
The music for the procession was supplied by
the Thirteenth Battalion Band as well as by the St. Patrick’s Band, The
Temperance Brass Band and the True Blues’ Fife and Drum Band.
As the parade wended its way through the
downtown streets, the number of marchers increased and the cheers grew in
volume until the crowd reached a fever pitch upon return to the Market Square.
Mr. Donal McInness began the speeches as
follows:
“The eyes of the whole Dominion have been
upon us; and I can assure you it is one of the proudest events in my life that
I am able to appear before you tonight and say there is nothing as successful
as success! (Loud Cheers)
“Our opponents have beat us in calumny; but
so far as we are concerned, there never was a purer election than there has ben
today. The reason is because you, the people, have been with us, and we have
been sincere and honest. Our opponents have lost it because their sins have
found them out. (Loud Cheers).
