Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T20:44:36.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origin of the Social Welfare State in Canada, 1867-1900*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

Elisabeth Wallace
Elisabeth Wallace*
Affiliation:
The University of Toronto
Get access

Extract

The welfare state—as a term of abuse or approval, depending on the point of view—is a phrase which has only recently come into common use, although contrasts between the so-called “negative” and “positive” state have been frequently drawn during the past two decades. The idea that the primary function of government is to make a good life possible, is, however, as old as Aristotle, and political theorists in democratic countries have long been agreed that the state exists for the well-being of its citizens, and not vice versa, although their views of what constitutes the welfare of the people have been markedly divergent. The expansion of government activities, which is conveniently summarized under the term “social welfare state,” in this country as in others is usually considered a twentieth-century phenomenon. Its origins in Canada, however, may be traced to the first thirty years after Confederation, when the proper function of government was a matter of general concern and wide debate. During this early period public opinion as to what the state ought to do for the social well-being of its citizens developed rapidly, and underwent a marked transformation.

Present-day critics of the British North America Act are given to pointing out that, as a nineteenth-century document drawn up when laissez-faire theories were at their height, it has become increasingly ill-adapted to further social welfare by state action. Yet contemporary historians have shown that in both Great Britain and the United States, during the past century, the classical doctrine of laissez-faire, interpreted as government abstention from interference with individual or group action, was more honoured in theory than in practice. This contention is supported by illustrations of early factory, mines, public health, and education acts in England, and of such American intervention in economic affairs as tariffs and grants to individual industries. There is much evidence that similar developments took place in Canada, which lends support to similar conclusions concerning the mythical nature of laissez-faire.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , August 1950 , pp. 383 - 393
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association at Kingston, Ontario, June 8, 1950.

References

1 Cf. Brebner, J. Bartlet, “Laissez Faire and State Intervention in Nineteenth Century Britain” (Journal of Economic History, Supplement VIII, 1948, pp. 59–73)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Goodrich, Carter, “Public Spirit and American Improvements” (Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. XCII, no. 4, 1948, pp. 305–9).Google Scholar

2 The Bystander, vol. III, 1883, p. 215.Google Scholar Cf. also Heaton, Ernest, “Ontario's Weakness” (Canadian Magazine, vol. VIII, 1886–1877, p. 265).Google Scholar

3 The Week, July 25, 1890 and Apr. 10, 1891.

4 Harcourt, Hon. R., “Canada's Destiny” (a speech delivered at the centenary celebrations, Toronto, 09 17, 1892)Google Scholar, published in Long, J. Robert, Canadian Politics, with Speeches by the Leaders of Reform and Progress in Canadian Politics and Government (St. Catharines, 1903), p. 120.Google Scholar

5 Reade, John, “Half a Century's Progress” (Canadian Magazine, vol. XVI, 1900–1901, p. 270).Google Scholar

6 From an article entitled “Women's Place in the State,” p. 524 (University of Toronto Library, no date, no publisher).Google Scholar His views on the subject were elaborated in another article on “Conservatism and Female Suffrage” (National Review, vol. LX, 02, 1888, p. 737).Google Scholar

7 Inaugural lecture of the ninth session of the Montreal Ladies' Educational Association, published in the Canadian Monthly, vol. III , 07-Dec., 1879, pp. 516–17.Google Scholar

8 Hardy, Edwin A., The Public Library (Toronto, 1912), pp. 26–40.Google Scholar

9 Patterson, Norman, “Canadian People: A Criticism” (Canadian Magazine, vol. XIII, 1898, p. 135).Google Scholar

10 Blake, Hon. Edward, Speeches in the Dominion Election Campaign of 1887 (Toronto, 1887), pp. 330–48, 356–68, and 371–5.Google Scholar

11 Toronto Morning News, Feb. 18 and May 3, 1886.

12 Feb. 2, 1889.

13 Discussed by Dr.Forsey, Eugene in his “Note on the Dominion Factory Bills of the Eighteen-Eighties” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. XIII, no. 4, 11, 1947, pp. 580–5).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Royal Commission on the Relations of Labour and Capital in Canada, Report (Ottawa, 1889), pp. 10, 36–7, 79, and 89.Google Scholar

15 Jan. 18, 1888. Cf. also the Christian Guardian, Apr. 2, 1879 and June 29, 1887.

16 Mavor, James, “The Relation of Economic Study to Private and Public Charity” (Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, vol. IV, 1893, p. 55).Google Scholar

17 Mavor, James, Report on Workmen's Compensation for Industries, printed by order of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario (Toronto, 1900), pp. 29, 42, and 45–7.Google Scholar

18 Drummond, Andrew T., “Some Workingmen's Problems” (Queen's Quarterly, vol. V, 07, 1897, p. 67).Google Scholar

19 Ryan, Carroll, “Political Morality” (Canadian Monthly, vol. III, 07-Dec., 1879, p. 407).Google Scholar

20 The Bystander, vol. III, 1883, p. 284 Google Scholar, and The Week, Apr. 24, 1884, Sept. 2, 1893 and Mar. 8, 1895.

21 The Week, Aug. 12, 1892, Dec. 15, 1887, and Nov. 17, 1893.

22 Shortt, Adam, “Recent Phases of Socialism” (Queen's Quarterly, vol. V, 07, 1897, p. 18).Google Scholar He upheld the same view in an earlier article in the Queen's Quarterly, vol. III, 07, 1895, p. 22.Google Scholar

23 Haultain, Arnold, “Complaining of Our Tools” (Canadian Magazine, vol. IX, 1897, p. 189).Google Scholar Cf. also LeSueur, W. D., “State Education and ‘Isms’” (Canadian Magazine, vol. II, 1893, pp. 6–7).Google Scholar

24 Longley, Hon. J. W., “Socialism—Its Truths and Errors” (Canadian Magazine, vol. VI, 1895–1896, pp. 297–301).Google Scholar

25 Saturday Night, Feb. 22, 1890, and The Week, Jan. 30, 1891.

26 Saturday Night, June 21, 1890.

27 Cooper, John A., “Canadian Democracy and Socialism” (Canadian Magazine, vol. III, 1894, pp. 334–6).Google Scholar

28 Hay, John, “Socialistic Schemes” (Queen's Quarterly, vol. III, 04, 1896, pp. 293–4).Google Scholar