• Aboriginals in North America
  • Beast Literature
  • Canadiana.1
  • Dances & Music
  • Fables and Fairy Tales
  • Fables by Jean de La Fontaine
  • Feasts & Liturgy
  • Great Books Online
  • La Princesse de Clèves
  • Middle East
  • Molière
  • Nominations
  • Posts on Love Celebrated
  • Posts on the United States
  • The French Revolution & Napoleon Bonaparte
  • Voyageurs Posts
  • Canadiana.2

Micheline's Blog

~ Art, music, books, history & current events

Micheline's Blog

Tag Archives: Monroe Doctrine

From Manifest Destiny to Exceptionalism

10 Sunday Nov 2013

Posted by michelinewalker in United States

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

American Exceptionalism, American Expansionism, American West, Doctrine of Discovery, Manifest Destiny, Monroe Doctrine, racism, Slavery

 800px-Emanuel_Leutze_-_Westward_the_Course_of_Empire_Takes_Its_Way_-_CapitolAmerican westward expansion is idealized in Emanuel Leutze‘s famous painting Westward the Course of Empire Takes Its Way (1861). The title of the painting, from a 1726 poem by Bishop Berkeley, was a phrase often quoted in the era of Manifest Destiny, expressing a widely held belief that civilization had steadily moved westward throughout history.” (Caption and photo credit: Manifest Destiny, Wikipedia).  See also the Smithsonian American Art Museum, Bequest of Sara Carr Upton.

Manifest Destiny

First Description

We have already covered the subject of “Manifest Destiny.” I used one of two descriptions provided by Wikipedia in its entry on “Manifest Destiny.” According to William E. Weeks, Manifest Destiny has the following themes:[i]

  1. the virtue of the American people and their institutions;
  2. the mission to spread these institutions, thereby redeeming and remaking the world in the image of the United States;
  3. the destiny under God to do this work.

This description is the current description of Manifest Destiny, as it has been interpreted, and it is almost synonymous with the currently contested Doctrine of American Exceptionalism.  (See Manifest Destiny and Doctrine of American Exceptionalism, Wikipedia.)

Second Description

The second description, Robert J. Miller‘s, seems an invitation to settle Louisiana, the territory bought from France in 1803 for 15 million dollars. Its three themes are:  

  1. The special virtues of the American people and their institutions;
  2. America’s mission to redeem and remake the west in the image of agrarian America;
  3. An irresistible destiny to accomplish this essential duty.[ii]

Justifying Colonialism

The Doctrine of Discovery (1823)
The Monroe Doctrine (1823)
The Manifest Destiny (1845)
 

Robert J. Miller has linked Manifest Destiny with the Doctrine of Discovery. The Doctrine of Discovery seems an afterthought. It was formulated in 1823 and legitimized colonialism, but that same year, on 2 December 1823, the Monroe Doctrine put an end to any further attempt to colonize America.

Therefore, neither doctrine is particularly edifying. The past, i.e. two to three hundred years of “discovery,” was rationalized by the Doctrine of Discovery, but “discovery” could not be repeated, except by Americans whose “irresistible destiny” was to stretch their boundaries all the way to the Pacific Ocean and, possibly, to the British territories located north of the 49th parallel, the future Canada.

So Manifest Destiny, a term coined by columnist John O’Sullivan in 1845, is perhaps best defined using William E. Weeks , except that Weeks’ three themes make “Manifest Destiny” more or less consistent with the notion of American Exceptionalism.

American Exceptionalism

Alexis de Tocqueville was the first to use the word “exception” with respect to America. For Tocqueville, American democracy was different from other democracies, but he did not suggest that it was superior to other democracies. On the contrary, other democracies were not to emulate democracy in America.

In his Democracy in America  (1835 and 1840), Alexis de Tocqueville (29 July 1805 – 16 April 1859; aged 53 [tuberculosis]) wrote that “a thousand special causes… have singularly concurred to fix the mind of the American upon purely practical objects[:]”

“The position of the Americans is therefore quite exceptional, and it may be believed that no democratic people will ever be placed in a similar one. Their strictly Puritanical origin, their exclusively commercial habits, even the country they inhabit, which seems to divert their minds from the pursuit of science, literature, and the arts, the proximity of Europe, which allows them to neglect these pursuits without relapsing into barbarism, a thousand special causes, of which I have only been able to point out the most important, have singularly concurred to fix the mind of the American upon purely practical objects. His passions, his wants, his education, and everything about him seem to unite in drawing the native of the United States earthward; his religion alone bids him turn, from time to time, a transient and distracted glance to heaven. Let us cease, then, to view all democratic nations under the example of the American people.” (See American Exceptionalism, Wikipedia.)

The Ugly American

Doctrine of Discovery
Monroe Doctrine
Manifest Destiny
Doctrine of American Exceptionalism
 

The Doctrine of Discovery, the Monroe Doctrine and the Manifest Destiny all converged to create the concept of American Exceptionalism. According to the Doctrine of American Exceptionalism, America is qualitatively superior to other nations and its mission is as defined in the Manifest Destiny: to remake the world “in the image of the United States.” The concept of Manifest Destiny, which made it the destiny of Americans to conquer and settle the West, developed into American Exceptionalism, a notion that cannot be linked with Alexis de Tocqueville’s use of the word “exceptional” because it borders on imperialism and has promoted the pejorative but fading image of the “ugly American.”

American Exceptionalism 

If one adheres to the notion of American Exceptionalism, the President of the United States can, theoretically, invade sovereign countries and effect strikes against other countries. Exceptionalism is a deeply-rooted notion that empowers America. However, it also constitutes a threat to US citizens. The United States remains a superpower, but is it America’s duty to protect the entire world, making itself an intruder, but also placing a terrible burden on the war-weary shoulders of its citizens? Not long ago, President Obama was considering a military strike against Syria, which may have been catastrophic.

588px-Oregoncountry2  Wpdms_oregon_territory_1848

The Annexation of Texas and the Oregon Country 

At any rate, if we step back, the concept “Manifest Destiny” was used not only to colonize Louisiana, but also to annex Texas (1845). Louisiana had been claimed by France and sold to the United States.  It was not annexed.  Yet, it was inhabited by Amerindians whose displacement is a great tragedy and who were killed quite wantonly as Americans pushed their boundary all the way to the Pacific Ocean, led by God. 

Manifest Destiny also legitimized the annexation of the Oregon Country, the Pacific Northwest, a disputed territory until the Oregon Treaty, signed on 15 June 1846 in Washington DC. Under the terms of the Oregon Treaty, territory located north of the 49th parallel became British as did Vancouver Island in its entirety. So this is how the West was won, a rather sad chapter in the history of the United States. Sad, because of the displacement of Amerindians. However, as we will see, in the days of “Manifest Destiny,” slavery, formerly a right, morally and legally, was becoming a wrong.

 

In short, the Doctrine of Discovery (1823), the Monroe Doctrine (1823), the Manifest Destiny (1845) and related doctrines I will not discuss, boil down to American Exceptionalism, which Russian President Vladimir Putin is currently challenging.  (See The American Thinker.)

Slavery & Racism

Although Exceptionalism served to legitimize the Annexation of the Republic of Texas (1845), it led to the Mexican-American War of 1846. It also served to justify the annexation of the Oregon Country. However, problems arose with respect to the possible annexation of Mexico. On the one hand, nineteenth-century ideology could not allow slavery. But, on the other hand, did the US want to welcome Mexicans, many of whom were métissés, half-breeds. One can dictate away slavery, but not racism.

Manifest Destiny threatened to expand slavery and was therefore rejected by prominent Americans (such as Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses Grant and most Whigs and Republicans [today’s Democrats]). (See Manifest Destiny, Wikipedia.) Moreover “[b]y 1843 John Quincy Adams, originally a major supporter, had changed his mind and repudiated Manifest Destiny because it meant the expansion of slavery in Texas.” But what of Métis?

On 4 January 1848, in a speech to Congress, Senator John C. Calhoun (18 March 1782 – 31 March 1850) of South Carolina expressed considerable racism.[iv]  Slavery was useful as slaves provided cheap labour. The loss of slaves would literally impoverish slave owners, usually owners of plantations. Mexicans would not be slaves, but they would not be altogether human.  Let us quote Senator John C. Calhoun:

“We have never dreamt [sic] of incorporating into our Union any but the Caucasian race—the free white race. To incorporate Mexico, would be the very first instance of the kind, of incorporating an Indian race; for more than half of the Mexicans are Indians, and the other is composed chiefly of mixed tribes. I protest against such a union as that! Ours, sir, is the Government of a white race…. We are anxious to force free government on all; and I see that it has been urged … that it is the mission of this country to spread civil and religious liberty over all the world, and especially over this continent. It is a great mistake.” (See Manifest Destiny, Wikipedia.)

Conclusion

It could be said, therefore, that the Declaration of Independence, signed on 4 July 1776, was mere rhetoric and an ideal until the abolition of slavery in the United States, which would not necessarily eradicate racism. Founding Father Thomas Jefferson (13 April 1743 – 4 July 1826) owned hundreds of slaves, yet he was the principal writer of the Declaration of Independence according to which “all men are created equal:”  

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Given the degree—the debt-ceiling crisis—to which extremist Republicans opposed and still oppose the Affordable Care Act: sabotage! Given also that, according to the Washington Times, not only has the NSA been listening on the conversations of friends of the United States, but it appears it has also used German Chancellor Angela Merkel‘s mobile telephone to spy on President Obama, it could be that the lofty ideals expressed in the US Declaration of Independence have not been attained. One also wonders whether or not the Civil War is over.

“It seems straight out of a grade-B movie, but it has been happening for the past 11 years: The National Security Agency (NSA) has been using Mrs. Merkel as an instrument to spy on the president of the United States. We now know that the NSA has been listening to and recording her cellphone calls since 2002.” Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/30/napolitano-going-the-stasi-one-better-and-in-ameri/#ixzz2jJU4Y6LU
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter (The Washington Times)

______________________________
[i] Weeks, William Earl, Building the continental empire: American expansion from the Revolution to the Civil War. (Ivan R. Dee, 1996), p. 61.
[ii] Robert J. Miller, Foreword by Elizabeth Furse, Native America, Discovered and Conquered: Thomas Jefferson, Lewis & Clark and Manifest Destiny (Praeger: Lincoln Connecticut and London, 2006).
[iii] Weeks, William Earl, loc. cit.
[iv] Arthur de Gobineau (14 July 1816 – 13 October 1882) wrote an Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races.  He developed a theory of the Aryan Master Race. He was a friend of Alexis de Tocqueville, which seems very strange.
[v] Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Folk Art Museum  
 
    Declaration_independence 
John Trumbull‘s famous painting is often identified as a depiction of the signing of the Declaration, but it actually shows the drafting committee presenting its work to the Congress (Caption and photo credit: Wikipedia)
 

I apologize for the use of certain words. My mother would be very upset.

The Old Plantation, attributed to Rose

The Old Plantation, attributed to John Rose, possibly 1785-1795[v]



michelinewalker.com

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • More
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Louisiana Purchase Treaty

19 Monday Nov 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in United States

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

France, Louis Jolliet, Louisiana, Louisiana Purchase, Monroe Doctrine, Napoleon, Paris, United State

Ceremony at Place d’Armes, New Orleans* marking transfer of Louisiana to the United States, 10 March 1804, as depicted by Thure de Thulstrup.

*Jackson Square
Thure de Thulstrup (April 5, 1848 – June 9, 1930), born Bror Thure Thulstrup
Photo Credit: Wikipedia
 

France controlled this vast area from 1699 until 1762, the year it gave the
territory to its ally Spain. Under Napoléon Bonaparte, France took back the
territory in 1800 in the apparent hope of building an empire in North America.  Here are the main dates:

Louisiana Purchase Treaty: 30 April 1803

  • The territory Louis Jolliet and Jacques Marquette, S.J. (a Jesuit) explored in 1673 and claimed for France would be controlled by France from 1699 until 1762.[i]
  • In 1762, the French gave the territory to Spain.
  • Napoleon took it back in 1800, hoping to build an Empire in North America.
  • Three years later, in 1803, Napoléon sold Louisiana to the United States.

In 1673, explorers Louis Jolliet and Jacques Marquette traveled down the Mississippi to within 435 miles (700 kilometers) of the Gulf of Mexico and claimed both sides of the River (all the way to the Rocky Mountains) for France.  The territory was given to Spain in 1762, but reclaimed by Napoléon in 1800.

However, a mere three years after the territory was reclaimed by France, it was sold to the United States for 15 million dollars.  The Louisiana Purchase Treaty was signed on April 30, 1803 during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson (April 13, 1743 – July 4, 1826), the third President of the United States.  The Treaty’s main American negotiator was Robert R. Livingstone, then US Minister to France.  This is what he had to say after the Treaty was signed:

We have lived long, but this is the noblest work of our whole lives… From this day the United States take their place among the powers of the first rank.

(please click on the picture to enlarge it)

Louisiana (green overlay)

The Story

Upon learning that Napoléon sold Louisiana, one is baffled.  Moreover, given that Napoléon sold it for 15 million dollars, one can easily jump to the conclusion that Napoléon knew nothing about real estate and made terrible mistakes on both sides of the Atlantic.  Yet, it may be that Bonaparte did what he had to do.

When the US approached Napoléon, which it did, all it was asking for was a right of way or a strip of land to the south of Louisiana which would have linked the eastern part of the current United States to its western part.  The US was somewhat landlocked.  However, Napoléon reflected that the United States could buy not only the very south of Louisiana, but all of it, for what we would call “peanuts,” i.e. very little money.

In fact, one wonders whether or not Napoléon had discussed the matter with Talleyrand.  Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, prince de Bénévent, then prince de Talleyrand (1754–1838), was Napoléon’s éminence grise or right-hand man.  Well, Talleyrand actually negotiated the Louisiana Purchase Treaty.

It would appear that Napoléon needed to purchase ships so he could conquer the world, with the exception of what would become the United States of America.  Fifteen million dollars could buy him a fleet.  It also appears France had debts to repay. However, we cannot exclude early warning signs of the development of the rather pompous “Manifest Destiny.”  In the not-so-distant future, the territory France sold would probably have been conquered by an expansionist United States, in which case France would have lost Louisiana.  It at least earned itself a consolation prize.

(please click on the picture to enlarge it)

Louisiana extending to the Rocky Mountains

The Monroe Doctrine (1823)

For instance, on December 2, 1823, the United States introduced a policy known as the Monroe Doctrine, after President James Monroe (April 28, 1758 – July 4, 1831).  The Monroe Doctrine was a document authored by Secretary of State John Quincy Adams (July 11, 1767 – February 23, 1848) who succeeded James Monroe as President of the United States (POTUS) between 1825 and 1829.  The document stated that European countries, or any other country for that matter, could no longer colonize South or North America.  Could he have been so bold had the US been considerably smaller?  I doubt it.

Therefore, the Louisiana Purchase Treaty, signed on April 30, 1803, may have led, in part, to a somewhat inflated view on the part of the United States concerning its place among nations.  When Livingstone stated that “[f]rom this day the United States take their place among the powers of the first rank,” he was giving the US a glorious future. I do not know whether or not this notion has been expressed in textbooks on the history of the United States, but by selling Louisiana, Napoléon played a major role in empowering the United States of America.

Conclusion

In 1763, under the of Treaty of Paris, France chose to keep Guadeloupe and ceded Canada, Acadie and territory east of the Mississippi to the British.  Later, in 1803, under the presidency of Thomas Jefferson, at fifteen million dollars, France chose to “give,” or nearly so, Louisiana to the United States.  

Père Marquette and Louis Jolliet would have felt betrayed by the Treaty of Paris (1763)and the Louisiana Purchase Treaty.  Napoléon Bonaparte removed from North America all that was left of France’s presence on the North-American continent, a continent French explorers, missionaries and Canadiens voyageurs had opened in its near totality, or almost.

* * *

Paris at the very end of April is a delightful city.  All that was old is new again.  But Mr Livingstone, with all due respect, could you really tell your fellow nation crafters that acquiring Louisiana was “the noblest work of [y]our whole lives?”  I would agree, however, that April 30, 1803 was a very fine day in the history of the United States of America and that all parties involved had something to gain, except for the people whose motherland ceased to be France, for better of for worse, with the stroke of a pen.

Territories Gained by the United States

Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska; parts of Minnesota that were west of the Mississippi River; most of North Dakota; most of South Dakota; northeastern New Mexico; northern Texas; the portions of Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado east of the Continental Divide; Louisiana west of the Mississippi River, including the city of New Orleans; and small portions of land that would eventually become part of the Canadian provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

RELATED ARTICLES:
French Canadians in the United States (November 14, 2012) 
Missionaries and the Noble Savage: Père Marquette & Gabriel Sagard (November 17, 2012)
The “Manifest Destiny” & the News (November 18, 2012)
 
_________________________ 
[i] Jacques Marquette and Louis Jolliet http://library.thinkquest.org/4034/marquettejolliet.html  
 
Micheline Walker©
November 19th, 2012
WordPress

michelinewalker.com

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • More
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

More Current Events & a Painting by A. J. Casson

19 Saturday May 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in Canada

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

British Empire, Canada, Fenian, Le Devoir, Monroe Doctrine, National Post, Quebec, The Globe and Mail

Old Maple, by A. J. Casson 1898-1992 (Group of Seven)
Brenner Fine Arts
 

All is relatively quiet in Quebec.  Today is a lovely spring day, so it seems that people are simply enjoying the fine weather.

Bill 78 was voted into law yesterday afternoon.  I have no way of knowing whether or not it will work, but a lot of people will call themselves martyrs.  It’s a mindset.

I am writing my next blog.  It is part of a mini-series called “From Coast to Coast”.  Yesterday I wrote about the Monroe Doctrine, but the plot has thickened to include the Fenians.  It could be that the Fenian raids are the catalyst in the building of Confederation.  Fenians were Irish nationalists who advocated revolution.  Some settled in the United States and started raiding the British colonies to the north from coast to coast.  Some also settled in Canada.

The Fenians scared the Atlantic Provinces into entering Confederation for sheer protection.  The future Canada was also scared into sending the Mounted Police West before it sent the settlers.

I must return to my account of how Confederation was achieved.   There are many things we were not taught in school.  For one thing, Confederation was not altogether a choice, it was a necessity.

cc1039

0.000000 0.000000

michelinewalker.com

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • More
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

From Coast to Coast: the Oregon Country

18 Friday May 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in Canada, History, United States

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Columbia District, Emanuel Leutze, John L. O'Sullivan, John Quincy Adams, Manifest Destiny, Monroe Doctrine, Oregon Country, United State

 Westward the Course of Empire Takes its Way (1861)

American westward expansion is idealized in Emanuel Leutze‘s famous painting Westward the Course of Empire Takes its Way (1861). The title of the painting, from a 1726 poem by Bishop Berkeley, was a phrase often quoted in the era of Manifest Destiny, expressing a widely held belief that civilization had steadily moved westward throughout history. (Wikipedia: Manifest Destiny)

Photo credit: Wikipedia

We will now see Canada moving quickly from the Act of Union (1840-1841) to Confederation (1867).  Why this sudden rush?

Manifest Destiny

In 1845, John L. O’Sullivan (15 November 1813 – 24 March 1895), a journalist, coined the term “Manifest Destiny” in an article published in the Democratic Review.  In this article, he favoured the annexation of Texas, not so much for the purpose of territorial expansion as for moral reasons. In the same article, he also promoted the annexation of the Oregon Country.

The term Oregon Country referred to the ownership of Pacific Northwest.  It included Fort Vancouver, Fort Victoria and other forts to which Simon Fraser (North West Company [NWC]) and other fur-traders and explorers had travelled.  The northern part of what was called the Oregon Country and later the Columbia district had been reached by land with the help of voyageurs and Amerindians, and the Hudson’s Bay Company owned part of that land which it used for fur-trading purposes.  On the map below, one can see the “disputed area.”

The Oregon Country

(please click on the map to enlarge it)

The Monroe Doctrine

Under James Monroe (28 April 1758 – 4 July 1831) and John Quincy Adams (11 July 1767 – 23 February 1848), the author of the Monroe Doctrine (2 December 1823), and perhaps emboldened by the Louisiana Purchase (1803), some Americans started to believe that they were destined, as quoted above, “to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man.”  In particular, Americans were to go Westward.

In 1811, John Quincy Adams (11 July 1767 – 23 February 1848), who would be the sixth President of the United States (1625 -1629), wrote to his father that:

The whole continent of North America appears to be destined by Divine Providence to be peopled by one nation, speaking one language, professing one general system of religious and political principles, and accustomed to one general tenor of social usages and customs. For the common happiness of them all, for their peace and prosperity, I believe it is indispensable that they should be associated in one federal Union.

Canada’s position

Such an ideology may have been perceived as an impediment to British expansion Westward and, eventually, to Confederation, which would unite Canada’s provinces.  American-born Canadian explorer Simon Fraser (20 May 1776 – 18 August 1862 [NWC]) had travelled down the Fraser river and reached the Pacific.  The British were therefore in the Oregon Country and had claims to the territory.

The Treaty of 1818

“resolved standing boundary issues between the two nations, and allowed for joint occupation and settlement of the Oregon Country, known to the British and in Canadian history as the Columbia District of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and including the southern portion of its sister for district New Caledonia.”  (Wikipedia: Treaty of 1818)

The Hudson’s Bay Company had not been in a hurry to see this territory settled.  However, there were US settlers arriving in the Oregon Country.  As a result, in 1841, James Sinclair, of the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC), took Red River Colony settlers west from Fort Garry.  This was an attempt to retain Columbia District as part of British North America. He chose to guide twenty-three families to the Columbia district.  The group consisted of one hundred twenty-one people.

“Most of the families were of mixed-race (Métis) and were headed by men who were well-known to Sinclair and who were capable hunters, well-suited to living off the land; while on the trail and as pioneers in Oregon Country.”  (Wikipedia: James Sinclair)

The Oregon Treaty of 1849

It was a brave effort on Sinclair’s part, but only Métis were able to make so difficult and lenghty a journey as could his Métis families.  At any rate, eight years later, in 1849, under the terms of the Oregon Treaty, Britain “ceded all claims to land south of the 49th parallel” to the United States, except for Vancouver Island and little coastal islands that became the Colony of Vancouver Island.

Ten years later, because of the Fraser Canyon Gold Rush, British citizens fearing American expansionism founded the Colony of British Columbia.  The two British colonies were amalgamated in 1866 as the United Colonies of Vancouver Island and British Columbia.”  (Wikipedia: Oregon Country)

In short, one could now settle in the United Colonies of Vancouver Island and British Columbia, but how could one get there?  One obstacle, the Monroe Doctrine, had been circumvented, but another obstacle remained: getting across the Rocky Mountains.

Text of the Oregon Treaty. PDF

Towards Confederation…

When Confederation was achieved, in 1867, the border remained unchanged and Canada now extended from sea to sea.  However, travelling from sea to sea or moving to what is now British Columbia was well-nigh impossible.  The Panama Canal had not been built.  Building started in 1880 but was not completed until 1914. You might remember that John Jacob Astor (The American Fur Trade Company) asked Gabriel Franchère, to take voyageurs from New York City to Fort Astoria, at the mouth of the Columbia river, on the Tonquin.  They travelled around Cape Horn (c. 1811).  Canada would need a railway so settlers could reach the West Coast.

—ooo—

Let me pause by stating that the Fathers of Confederation knew about the Monroe Doctrine and that they did fear active expansionism on the part of the US.  In fact, I do not fully understand why the United States let the northern part of the Oregon Country go to Britain and ultimately to Canada.  Obviously, there was good will on the part of both parties and I believe that eventually both parties were winners, except that the disputed land was being taken from Amerindians.

The Oregon Treaty

THE VOYAGEURS
The Singing Voyageurs
The Voyageur Mythified
The Voyageur from Sea to Sea
The Voyageur & his Canoe
The Voyageurs & their Employers
The Voyageurs: hommes engagés ←
 
© Micheline Walker
May 18, 2012
WordPress
 
(click on the title to hear the music)
Dvořák: Humoresque in G Flat Major, Op. 101, No 8, Batázs Szokotay (piano)
Antonín Leopold Dvořák (bio) 
0.000000 0.000000

michelinewalker.com

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • More
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Another Desmonstration: a New Law…

18 Friday May 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in Quebec, Students' Strike

≈ Comments Off on Another Desmonstration: a New Law…

Tags

British North America Acts, Canada, Canadian Pacific Railway, French language, Jean Charest, Le Devoir, Monroe Doctrine, Quebec

Jean Charest, Premier of the Province of Quebec

Matters have not improved significantly in the student’s strike.  People are still demonstrating as the Premier tries to introduce a law: Bill 78, that would put an end to the disorder.

Le Devoir.com is a very good source of information, but it’s a French-language paper.  It calls for an end to the demonstrations, called manifestations in French: Assez!  Enough!

Telling this story is difficult because matters keep changing and reports differ.

Links:

  • CBC News:  http://www.cbc.ca/news/ 
  • CTV News: http://montreal.ctv.ca/
  • The Gazette: http://www.montrealgazette.com/index.html
  • The Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/ 
  • Le Devoir: http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/348126/greve-etudiante-assez (front page: Enough ! Assez! French)

I am in the process of writing the history of Confederation or Constitution, or BNA Act (British North America Acts, starting in 1867) in blog form.  It cannot be done in one post.  The Constitution was patriated (brought to Canada from England) in 1982, but Quebec did not sign it.

The discussion starts with the Monroe Doctrine or Manifest Destiny.  We then go back to the descendants of our voyageurs and their leader Louis Riel.  The big story is building the railroad: the Canadian Pacific Railway.

Completing the Railway before 1867 was impossible because it had to go through several ranges of mountains, but a promise sufficed.

Canadian Pacific Logo, 1996
© Micheline Walker
May 18, 2012
WordPress
 
45.403816 -71.938314

michelinewalker.com

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • More
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Europa

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,526 other followers

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Recent Posts

  • La Princesse de Clèves, 7
  • La Princesse de Clèves, 6
  • La Princesse de Clèves, 5
  • Dear Friends,
  • Do not despair …
  • La Princesse de Clèves, 4
  • Chronicling Covid-19, 2021
  • About Marguerite de Navarre
  • Dutch Winter Scenes
  • A Merry Christmas

Archives

Categories

Calendar

January 2021
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Dec    

Social

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • WordPress.org

micheline.walker@videotron.ca

Micheline Walker

Micheline Walker

Social

Social

  • View belaud44’s profile on Facebook
  • View Follow @mouchette_02’s profile on Twitter
  • View Micheline Walker’s profile on LinkedIn
  • View belaud44’s profile on YouTube
  • View Miicheline Walker’s profile on Google+
  • View michelinewalker’s profile on WordPress.org

Micheline Walker

Micheline Walker
Follow Micheline's Blog on WordPress.com

A WordPress.com Website.

Cancel
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
%d bloggers like this: