ada, 1802-12: A Review of a Controversy,' Canadian Historical Review 55, 1 ...... Philippines during the 1970s, his objective was to reconstruct their history.
NOTES
AND
LETTERS
COMMENTS
TO THE
EDITORS
BecauseLubomyr Luciuk'sreview of my book Ukrainiansin Canada:The FormativeYears,1891-1924 (CHR74, 1 (March 1993): 153-5) is laced with mis-
leadingstatements, I wouldrequestthat you print thisletter asa correction. 1 Contrary to Luciuk'sdescriptionof the book as 'a synthesisof many secondarystudiesdealingwith the Ukrainian-Canadian experience,'it is a synthesisof secondaryworks on Canadian, Ukrainian, and UkrainianCanadianhistory.More importantly,it is alsobasedon (i) archivalresearch (at the National Archivesof Canada and severalprovincial,church, and Ukrainian communityarchives);(ii) a thoroughand systematic reading of the Ukrainian immigrant press(1893-1923), relevant English-and Frenchlanguagenewspapers and periodicals,and hundredsof Ukrainian-Canadian almanacsand commemorativebooks;(iii) governmentpublications(Sessional Papers,CensusReports,LabourGazette); and (iv) city and mercantiledirectories.Even the mostcursoryperusalof the endnotesand the bibliographical note makesthis abundantlyclear. 2 Contraryto Luciuk'sintimationthat the bookis 'a productof severalyears of team research,organizedby the director of the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studiesand finally written up by Orest Martynowych,'my M^ thesisprovided the interpretiveframework for the book (as noted in the preface)and mostof the researchwascarriedout by me. Of the four research assistants mentionedin the acknowledgments, two workedon the projectfor lessthan one month, one worked part-time for six months,and only one (whosecontributionis fully recorded)wasassociated with the projectfor any length of time and performedmore than the mostroutine tasks. 3 Contrary to Luciuk'ssuggestionthat I seem 'to have been unaware of severalmajor new studiesdealingwith Canada'sUkrainians'and his implication that my failure to mentionthesestudiesmay havebeen 'intentional,'all relevantstudiesare mentionedin the endnotes.Only two volumespublished in the late 1980s/early1990s,both co-editedby Luciuk, are not mentioned: the first becauseit dealtwith the period after 1924,the secondbecauseit was publishedin November1991, more than two monthsafter the publicationof my book. 4 Contraryto Luciuk'sassertion that I have'indulgedin a tastefor polemics' in the endnotes,I havedrawn attention,in severalendnotes,only to factual errors, questionableinterpretations,and methodologicaldeficiencies in some of the secondary sources cited(includingat leastone pamphletpublishedby Luciuk).
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
75
5 Insteadof providingsubstantive criticismof the book'smajor themesand interpretations,Luciuk disparagesmy work by associating it with that of historianswho recount'in fdliopiestic[sic]termsthe hardshipsand triumphs of ... prairiesodbusters.' He alsodismisses asirrelevantthe 'religious,political and socioeconomic affiliations'of the first immigrants,and maintainsthat I fail to providesatisfactory answersfor historiansinterestedin the modern Ukrainian-Canadiancommunity with its urban, Ontario-based,leadership composedof 'post-Second World War [immigrants]and their descendents.' Quite apart from the fact that the last point is a rather curiouscriterion for evaluatinga work aboutthe period 1891-1924,manyof the issuesexamined in my book - anxietiesabout the 'latinization'of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, concernsabout bilingual/second-language education, hostilities between nationalists and communists, and tensions between Ukrainians and
Jews- providebackground andinsightsinto developments that haveshaken the Ukrainian-Canadiancommunity(especiallyin urban Ontario) during the pastdecade. 6 AlthoughLuciukcommends me for helpingto open up the themeof Ukrainian internmentduring the FirstWorld War, he neglectsto mentionthat
my analysis of the issueamountsto a point-by-point refutationof sensational and widelypublicizedallegations madeby him (seechapter12, especially 341 n82, and parts of chapter 15) in his capacityas researchdirector of the Ukrainian-Canadian
Civil Liberties Commission/Association, which has been
seekingto obtain redressfrom the federal governmentsince1988.
While I welcomeinformedand thoughtfulcriticism,Luciuk'sreviewoffers little in the way of scholarlyappraisal.His reviewamountsto a gratuitous attackon my reputationand the credibilityof my book. OREST T. MARTYNOWYCH Toronto
I wish to correct an inaccuracyin Lubomyr Luciuk'sreview (½HR74, 1 (March 1993): 153-5) of Orest Martynowych'sUkrainiansin Canada:The Formative Years,1891-1924. The bookwasnot the productof 'team research' with the manuscript'finallywrittenup' by Martynowych,asLuciuksuggests. As director for the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian
Studies, I formed acIUS
committee,which supervisedthe researchconductedby Martynowychand the four researchershired to assisthim for varying periods of time. AS indicatedin my preface,I wasimpressedby the interpretativeframework
whichemergedfromMartynowych's master's thesis(1978)for the University of Manitobaand wishedto seehim developand extendit throughto 1924. Martynowychwasin chargeof writingthe volume,and all submissions by the researchers werereviewedby him. The final text originatedwith him, and he alone,rather than any 'team,'is responsible for the text'scontents. MANOLY
R. LUPUL
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
WEALTH AND PROSPERITYIN NOVA SCOTIAN AGRICULTURE, 1851-71
A characteristic featureof the AtlanticCanadianeconomythroughoutthe twentiethcenturyhasbeen relativelylow personalincome,high unemploy-
ment,anda loss ofpopulation through netout-migration. Thetideofoutmigration began as early as the 1870s,when personalincomesin the Maritime region alreadywere lower than in central Canada) The deep historicalrootsof regional'underdevelopment' naturallydirectattentionto the pre-Confederationera and, in particular,to agriculture- the singlemost extensiveeconomicactivity. Most recent discussionof early Maritime agriculture emphasizesits positiveaccomplishments. Alan Brookes,for example,describesthe 1850s and 1860sas a period of modestprosperitybasedon rising agricultural prices,the growthof the potato trade, and accessto the Americanmarket under Reciprocity? Bill Achesonremindsus that per capitaagricultural productionkept pacewith that of New Englandand Quebecfrom 1851 to 1871.sAlan McNeil demonstrates thatin 1861the outputof individualfarms in Nova Scotiarivalledthosein Ontario.4 A rich and growingliterature of
We are gratefulto the SocialSciencesand HumanitiesResearchCouncilof Canada for financialsupportof thisresearchand to the staffsof the PublicArchivesof Nova Scotiaand the DalhousieUniversityArchivesfor valuableguidance.We have benefitedfrom discussion with Bill Acheson,Bob Ankli, RustyBittermann,Keith Cassidy, Ian Drummond,Phil Girard,Jim Irwin, MarvinMcInnis,RosemaryOmmet, LarsOsberg,RichardReid,FazleySiddiq,JamieSnell,participantsat the 1992 meetingof the CanadianHistoricalAssociation, and the editorsand refereesof this journal. We are gratefulaswell to Bittermann,JulianGwyn,and Siddiq,who shared variousunpublisheddatawith us. 1 Alan Brookes,'The GoldenAgeand the Exodus:The Caseof Canning,King's County,'Acadiensis 11,1 (autumn1981):57-82; KrisInwoodandJim Irwin, 'CanadianRegionalCommodityIncomeDifferencesat Confederation,'in Kris Inwood, ed., Farm,Factory andFortune: NewEssays in theEconomic Historyof the Maritimes (Fredericton: AcadiensisPress 1993); Patricia Thornton, 'The Prob-
lem of Out-migrationfrom AtlanticCanada,1871-1921,'Acadiensis 15, 1 (autumn 1985): 3-34
2 Brookes,'The Golden Age' 3 T.W. Acheson,'The Conditionof Agriculturein New Brunswickon the Eveof Confederation,'in Inwood,ed., Farm,Factory andFortune, 37-60 4 Alan McNeil, 'Cultural Stereotypesand Highland Farming in EasternNova Scotia,1827-1851,'Histoire sociale/SocialHistory 19, 37 (May 1986):39-56, and 'Societyand Economyin RuralNovaScotia,1761-1861'(PhD dissertation, Queen'sUniversity1991), chaps4 and 5 Canadian HistoricalReview,LXXV, 2, 1994
0008-3755/94/0300-0239$01.25/0 ¸ Universityof TorontoPressIncorporated
240 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
communitystudiessuggests that the rural economyin at leastsomeareas continuedto growthroughoutthe pre-Confederation era?One suchstudy by Bittermann,McKinnon,and Wynn examinestwo communitiesin which the proportionof rural familiesable to supportthemselves from their own farms increased from 1851 to 1871. 6
Of course,evidencedrawnfrom individualcommunitiesisan inadequate basisfor generalizingabout the region asa whole becausethe regionwasso
diverse. 7Anotherrecentarticlein thisjournal undertakesthe difficulttask of makingsomegeneralstatementabout pre-Confederation agriculturein the whole of Nova Scotia.Julian Gwynand FazleySiddiq providea profoundlypessimistic appraisalusingas their principalevidencethe average valueof estates thatenteredthelegalprocess of probate. 8A cross-tabulation of estatesizewith the ageand occupationof the deceased appearsto showa decline in farm wealth from 1850-2 to 1871 after adjustingfor price
5 RustyBittermann, 'Middle River:The SocialStructureof Agriculturein a Nineteenth CenturyCape Breton Community'(MA thesis,Universityof New Brunswick 1987);RustyBittermann,'The Hierarchyof Soil:Land and Labourin a
19thCenturyCapeBretonCommunity,'Acadiensis 18, 1 (autumn1988):33-55, and 'EconomicStratificationand AgrarianSettlement:Middle Riverin the Early Nineteenth Century,'in Ken Donoran, ed., TheIsland.'NewPerspectives on CapeBreton History,1713-1990(Fredericton: Acadiensis Press1990),71-88; StephenJ. Hornsby,Nineteenth Century CapeBreton: A HistoricalGeography (Kingstonand Montreal: McGill-Queen'sUniversityPress1992); Debra McNabb, 'Land and Familiesin Horton Township,N.S., 1760-1830'(MA thesis,Universityof BritishColumbia1986), and 'The Role of Land in SettlingHorton Township,NovaScotia,'in MargaretConrad,ed., MakingAdjustment in PlanterNova Scotia,17.59-1800 (Fredericton: AcadiensisPress1991), 151-60; Alan McNeil,
'Mobilityand RuralSocietyin AnnapolisTownship,NovaScotia,1760-1861,'in DonaldH. Akenson,ed., CanadianPapersin RuralHistory,vol. 9 (1994), 239-58
6 RustyBittermann,RobertMcKinnon,andGraemeWynn,'Of Inequalityand Interdependence in the NovaScotianCountryside, 1850-1870,'Canadian HistoricalReview74, 1 (March 1993): 1-43
7 T.C. Haliburton,History ofNovaScotia, vol.2 (1829;Belleville: Mika 1973), 358-9;J.W. Dawson,Scientific Contributions towardtheImprovement ofAgriculture in NovaScotia(Pictou:Dawson1853), 7; Robert McKinnonand GraemeWynn, 'NovaScotianAgriculturein the "GoldenAge": A New Look,' in DouglasDay, ed., Geographical Perspectives ontheMaritimeProvinces (Halifax:Gorsebrook Institute1988), 47-60; GraemeWynn,'The Maritimes:The Geographyof Fragmentationand Underdevelopment,'in L.D. McCann,ed., A Geography of Canada (Toronto: Prentice Hall 1982), 156-213
8 PublicArchivesof NovaScotia(PANS),RecordGroup (RG) 48. Siddiqpioneeredthe useof thesedataduringhisdoctoralresearch; seeFazleySiddiq, 'The Inequalityof Wealthand Its Distributionin a Life CycleFramework,' (PhD dissertation,DalhousieUniversity1986) and 'The SizeDistributionof ProbateWealth-holdings in NovaScotiain the Late 19thCentury,'Acad/ensis 18, 1 (autumn 1988): 136-47.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
241
change?A statistical regression on the samedataappearsto indicatethatby the 1860sfarmershad lost their ability to accumulatewealth as they grew older? ø
Gwynand Siddiqconstruethe patternof probatewealth-holdingasevidence that Nova Scotianagriculturereacheda Malthusianimpassein the sensethat therewasno moreland to supportfurther expansion.They argue that NovaScotianagriculturedegeneratedinto a subsistence activitywith no potentialfor wealthaccumulationand a decliningcapacityto feed the provincial population.It is recognizedthat farm acreagewasstill expanding, but pessimists dismissthe new land as being relativelyunproductiveand incapableof increasingfood productionapacewith populationgrowth.An allegeddecline in the price of agriculturaloutputsrelativeto the price of consumptiongoodsexacerbatedthe farm crisis. Gwynand Siddiq,like other participantsin the debate,might agreethat the influx of midwesterngrainsduring the middle decadesof the century causeda profoundreadjustment in easternCanadianmarkets,wherewheat cultivationdeclinedandlivestock productionof all kindsincreased) • These changescreatesomeuncertaintyaboutthe appropriatechoiceof indicators. The assessmentof agriculture in the midst of structural change raises difficultiesakin to thoseencounteredin comparingregionswith a different mix of agriculturalcommodities?Wheat productionand surplus,for ex-
9 The tablesappearin twolocations: JulianGwyn,'GoldenAgeor Bronze Moment:Wealthand Povertyin NovaScotia:The 1850sand 1860s,'Canadian Papers in RuralHistory, vol. 8 (1992), 195-230, tables1 and 3, andJulian Gwyn and FazleySiddiq,'WealthDistributionin NovaScotiaduring the Confederation Era, 1851 and 1871,' CanadianHistoricalReview,73, 4 (Dec. 1992): tables 1
and 2. The datareportedin the twoarticlesdiffer slightly. 10 LarsOsbergand FazleySiddiq,'The Acquisitionof Wealth in NovaScotiain the Late Nineteenth Century,'in E.N. Wolff, ed., Research in Economic Inequality, vol. 4 (Dec. 1992).The argumentsare extendedin anotherpaper presentedby Siddiqto the DalhousieUniversityDepartmentof Economics(1991) and the Canadian EconomicsAssociation (1992).
11 RobertAnkli and WendyMillar, 'Ontario Agriculturein Transition:The Shift from Wheatto Cheese,'JournalofEconomic History42, 1 (March 1982):207-15; Bill Marr, 'The WheatEconomyin Reverse:Ontario'sWheatProduction, 1887-1917,' Canadian JournalofEconomics 14, I (Feb. 1981): 136-45;Marvin McInnis,'The ChangingStructureof CanadianAgriculture,1867-1897,' JournalofEconomic History42, 1 (March 1982): 191-8, and 'Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture,1815-1930,' CanadianPapersin RuralHistory,vol. 8, 17-128
12 For the controversy aboutchoiceof indicatorfiguresin the debateaboutLower CanadianagricultureseeTim LeGoff, 'The AgriculturalCrisisin Lower Canada, 1802-12:A Reviewof a Controversy,'CanadianHistorical Review 55, 1 (March 1974):1-31, and 'Response' byG. PaquetandJ.-P.Wallotwith 'Reply' byLeGoff,Canadian Historical Review 56, 2 {June1975):134-72;J.I.Little,
242
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
ample,are inappropriatemeasures of a farm sectorshiftingout of wheat? A preferableindicatorisfarm income,foodsurplus,or someotherconstruction that aggregatesa wide range of commodities.Another potential measureis the priceof farm land,whichin a purelyagriculturalregionreflects the capitalizedvalueof anticipations aboutfuture income.Gwynand Siddiq rely heavilyupon a relatedsource,the valueof farm estatesenteringprobate;theyalsousea more traditionalsource,the written commentof contemporaryobservers. In this paper we reviewvarioussourcesthat have been usedto assess Nova Scotiaagriculture.We are concernedto gain an impressionof the provinceas a whole and, in particular,to evaluatethe extremepessimist hypothesis of Gwynand Siddiq.We constructone line of evidencefrom censusreportsof commodityproductionand priceobservations thatderive from a varietyof sources.The movementof land pricesas recordedin probatesand deeds providesadditional evidence,as does the written commentof contemporaryobservers. We examinethe probateevidenceat greaterlength.Severemethodological problemsunderminethevalueof this sourceasan indicatorof farm prosperity.Of course,everysourceis limited in one wayor another. We argue that all classes of evidenceare consistent with the optimisticviewthat agriculturalincomecontinuedto growand that NovaScotianfarmerscontinuedto experiencea modestprosperityduring the 1850sand 1860s.We concludewitha briefdiscussion of the implications of thisdebatefor the largerquestionsof regionaldevelopment. The most comprehensivesource of information about nineteenthcenturypopulationand productionis the census.Summarydatafrom the Nova Scotia census of 1851 and the Canadian
census of 1871 in table 1
indicatethat the numberof farmersincreasedby one-third,the amountof land usedfor agriculturedoubled,and the number of livestockincreased betweenthesetwo benchmarks.Farmersare thosepeoplewho returned their occupationsas suchto the enumerator,exceptin a few countiesin 1871 reportingfewer occupiersof land than farmers,in whichcasethe
'Problemsin MeasuringRelativeProductivityduring the Grain-DairyTransition Period,' Histoiresociale/Sociale History18, 36 (Nov. 1985): 425-32; Marvin McInnis, 'A Reconsideration of the Stateof Agriculturein LowerCanadain the FirstHalf of the NineteenthCentury,'CanadianPapers in RuralHistory, vol. 3 (1982), 9-49.
13 DougMcCallaarguespersuasively thatwheatalonedoesnot sufficeevenfor Ontario at the heightof its mid-centurywheatboom;seehisPlantingthe Province: TheEconomic Historyof UpperCanada,1784-1870(Toronto:University of Toronto Press1993), chaps5 and 12.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS TABLE
243
1
NovaScotiaFarmersand Their Capital,1851and 1871
% change Number of farmers
1851
1871
1851-71
31,604
42,077
+33
Acresof improvedland (00Os) Number of largeLivestock
839 272,502
1,627 323,546
+93 +19
Number of small livestock
333,713
452,539
Value ($000s) of land Value ($000s) of livestock
Land and Stockvalue($) per farmer
+36
2,938 3,935
9,763 6,349
+232 +62
217
383
+76
Source:AppendixA; Censusof NovaScotia,1851;Censusof Canada,1871
figure for occupiersis used? 4 For land, we use dyked and other land reportedin 1851,andimprovedacresin 1871.Theremaybe disagreement aboutthe precisemagnitudeof change,but thereseemslittle doubtthat the numberof farmersandthe quantifiesof farm capitalincreasedsignificantly. Gwynand Siddiqstatethat 'the priceof farmlanddeclinedfrom 1851 to 1871.'• Unfortunately,theyproduceno evidenceto supportthisclaim.We examine the valuesof land and stockrecordedin deedsand probatesregistered in Pictou County (seeappendixA). Pictouis selectedfor illustrative purposes becauseit is centrallylocated,becauseit is the largestagricultural countymeasuredin numbersof farmers,and becauseGwynand Siddiq identify Pictouas part of a decliningregion.We find that the value of farmlandincreasedsignificantly. To the extent that land valueis a capital-
ized expression of the viabilityof farming,the risein pricesindicatesthat Pictoufarmingbecamemoreviablefrom 1851 to 1871.It is possiblethat PictouCountywasanomalous in thisregard,butwehaveno reasonto think so.Indeed, the province-wide increasein land and livestocknumberssuggeststhatfarmersthroughoutthe provinceanticipatedan adequatereturn on thistypeof investment. In tableI wevaluethe provincialland and stock at Pictouprices.The resultis an estimatedfour-foldincreasein the valueof all provincialfarmland,whilethevalueof landandstockper farmerroughly doubled? These data indicate a considerable increase in farm wealth, since
land and stockare its mostimportantcomponents. The increasein number of farmers is also significant.It seemsto us unlikelythat farmingwouldhaveattracteda net inflowof peopleif they did
14 The occupiersof land are recordedon censusschedule4 (agriculture);personaloccupationis recordedon schedule1 (personal). 15 Gwynand Siddiq,'WealthDistribution,'448 16 Sourcesfor the valuationare reportedin appendixA.
244
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
not anticipatebeing able to win an acceptablestandardof living. The labouringpopulationwasremarkablymobileduringthe nineteenthcentury; Nova Scotianfarmerswould have abandonedtheir land and emigratedif their standardof livinghad fallen significantly relativeto the opportunities availablein New England and the North Americaninterior. The fact that
thenumberof farmersincreased ratherthandecreased (astheydid in later' decades)isindirectevidencethatfarm incomeandwealthmoreor lesskept pacewith opportunitieselsewhere. More direct evidence is available from a calculation of agricultural income,whichvaluesthe censusreportof productionafternettingout hay and feed grainsconsumedby livestock.During the 1950sRichardEasterlin usedthismethodto estimatestate-level agriculturalactivityon an historical
basis?MarvinMcInnishaspioneeredthe useof thistechniqueon Canadian micro and aggregatedata.asRustyBittermannand Alan McNeil construct this class of indicator
for individual
Nova Scotian
households
and
communities?We do sofor the provinceasa whole.Detailsof the calculation are reported in appendicesB and c. We estimatethat agricultural incomeroughlydoubledduring the two decades(table 2). All areasof the provincesharedin the growth.The pessimists identifyeasternNova Scotia as experiencingan especiallyseveredeclinein farm wealth,but our evidence suggests otherwise.The census-based estimateof income suggests fastergrowthin this region than in the provinceas a whole. The typical farmer in Pictou,Antigonish,Guysborough, and the islandof Cape Breton had an income20 per cent lessthan the NovaScotiaaveragein 1851, and only 10 per centlessin 1871. If there is anybiasin the figuresit is to understategrowth,inasmuchas the yield of butter per cow and meat per animal is assumedto remain constant.Three-fifthsof farm incomecamefrom livestockproducts(dairy products,meat, and homespun)in both years.The dominanceof livestock productsis consistentwith what we know of land use. More than threequartersof all improvedland wasusedfor pastureand hay-fieldsin 1870,
17 Richard Easterlin, 'State Income Estimates,' 703-59, in Simon Kuznets and
Dorothy Thomas,Population Redistribution andEconomic Growth,UnitedStates, 1870-1950 (Philadelphia:AmericanPhilosophicalSociety1957) 18 For a sampleof this important line of researchseeFrank Lewisand Marvin McInnis, 'AgriculturalOutput and Efficiencyin LowerCanada,1851,' Research
in Economic History, vol.9 (1984), 45-87; MarvinMclnnis,'MarketableSurpluses in Ontario Farming,1860,' SocialScience History8 (1984): 395-424; MarvinMcInnis, 'OntarioAgricultureat Mid-Century,'CanadianPapers in RuralHistory, vol. 8 (1992), 49-84, and 'Output and Productivity in CanadianAgriculture,'in StanleyEngermanand RobertGallman,eds.,Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth(Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress1986), 734-8. 19 Bittermann,'Middle River';McNeil, 'CulturalStereotypes'
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
245
and some significantportion of the remainder wasused for feed grains,
roots,pulses,andotherfoddercrops? ø Farm income grew in part becauseagriculturalpricesincreased,as is revealedby a producerprice index (table 2) that weighsthe individual commoditypricesby their shareof revenue? • The weightsare important becausepriceschangedat different rates;the price of livestockproducts rosebydifferingamounts,whilethewheatpricefell and that of potatoesdid not change.Overall,the productionprice index rose34 per cent. Produce pricesincreasedeven more quicklyin Ontario during the same interval. Pricesfor beef, hay, butter, and oatsappearto havechangedat the same rate in the two provinces,while Nova Scotiapricesfor pork, wheat, and potatoesfell relativeto thosein Ontario? An evengreaterincreasewould havebeen registeredif data were availableto includewood harvestedby farmers.Varioussourcessuggesta rapid rise in the price of wood, which
contributedasmuchas10 per centof all farm income? s Of course,the benefit to farmersof risingfarm priceswasoffsetby any increasein the priceof goodsand services theypurchased.The pessimists claimthat non-agricultural pricesrosefasterthan farm prices,whichwould haveexacerbatedthe allegedcrisis.There is little systematic evidenceabout the price of manufacturesin Nova Scotia,but elsewherethey declined relativeto primaryproductpricesbecauseof technological change? •A contrarymovementin NovaScotiaseemsunlikely.Our own examinationof contemporarysources(appendixc) suggests that farm pricesroserather thanfell relativeto non-farmprices.Thisimpression wouldbe reinforcedif wheatwasincludedamongthe farmpurchases, asmightbe appropriatefor somepartsof the province.
20
See table 6 below.
21 We calculatethe shareof eachcommodityin total farm revenueand then take an arithmeticaverageof the 1851and 1871shares.The weightsturn out to be hay.068,butter.203,beef.182,mutton.047,pork .087,other grains.079, wheat.062,cloth.112,and potatoes.162. 22 McCalla,PlantingtheProvinc•appendixC 23 Acheson,'The Conditionof Agriculture,'table1;McCalla,PlantingtheProvince, chaps4 and 12;McNeil,'SocietyandEconomy,'chap6; M.C. Urquhart,'New Estimatesof GrossNationalProduct,Canada,1870-1926:SomeImplicationsfor CanadianDevelopment,'in EngermanandGallman,eds.,LongTermFactors, 9-94
24 Duringthisperiodthe priceof foodroserelativeto clothingand textileprices in NewEnglandand the mid-Atlanticstates;seePhilip CoelhoandJames Shepherd,'Differencesin RegionalPrices:The United States,1851-1880,' JournalofEconomic History34 (1974):551-91 (seeappendixtables3 and 4). For a moregeneraldiscussion seePeterMathias,TheFirstIndustrial Nation,2nd ed. (London:Methuen1983),278, andJeffreyWilliamson,'Greasingthe Wheelsof Sputtering ExportEngines,' Explorations in Economic History, 17,3 (July1980): 189-218.
246 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
TABLE
REVIEW
2
AgriculturalIncome in Nova Scotia,1851 and 1871, ($000s)
% change 1851
1871
1851-71
Crop income
1,578
3,079
+75
Livestock income
2,705
5,318
+97
Agriculturalincome Agric income/farmer Self-sufficiency index Productionprice index Food consumptionprice index
4,464 .141 .152 100 100
8,398 .200 .217 134 121
+88 +43 +43 +34 +21
Note: AppendicesB and C
The dataalsoallowusto examinethe pessimists' contentionthatagricultural productionfailedto keeppacewith the food consumed by a growing population.We take as an indicator of food self-sufficiency the value of productionof sevenbasicfoodstuffsdividedby population? • The selfsufficiencyindex reportedin table2 roseby 43 per cent,althoughsomeof the changereflectsthe effect of risingfood prices.A consumptionprice index (table2) roselessthan the producerindexprincipallybecausemore wheat wasconsumedthan producedwhile wheat pricesfell and because more livestockoutputwasproducedthan consumedwhilelivestockprices rose.After adjustingfor changesin the food consumptionpriceindex, we are left with a real improvementof 22 per cent? In otherwords,farmersin 1870producedone-fifthmorefood per consumerthan did their parents' generation.If the province'sabilityto feed itselfis an appropriatebasisfor judging agriculturalperformance,then Nova Scotianagriculturebecame more rather than less successful.
Althoughthe census-based indicatorsilluminatethe paceof agricultural progress,it is usefulto examinethe writing of contemporaries who commenteddirectlyon the stateof localagriculture.The earlyfarm improvementliteraturerevealsthatat leastsomepeoplebelievedin thepossibility of
25
We count each child as one-half a consumer.
26 The adjustmentfor pricechangeweightsthe foodsin proportionto their sharesof provincialconsumption in 1870-1.We adjusteachcommodity's productionby apparentnet import (exports)and assumethat potatoesconstituted 90 per cent of vegetableexports.Unfortunately,there isno recordof shipmentsacrossthe Bayof Fundyand alongthe Northumberlandshore. Trade in smallboatswith New Englandand Newfoundlandmayalsobe underrecorded.The weightsare butter.197,beef.220,mutton.045,pork .063,
potatoes. 183,wheat. 147,andother grains. 132.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
247
agricultural progress? Anothercontemporary voiceis newspaper opinion; the problem here is to distinguishpoliticalrhetoric from informed comment. Gwynquotesa passage from the EasternChronicle that describes dismal economiccircumstances in PictouCountycirca 1869.28The newspaper's pessimismis hardly surprising,however,in view of its strident anti-Confederate editorial position.Gwynalso citesan 1867 report by Duncan Campbell,who optimistically arguesthat 'practicalfarmers,educatedmen, who have travelled in other countries, vindicate the character of the Prov-
ince and declareit destinedto becomean agriculturalcountry... there are splendidtractsof countrycapableof cultivationin the Province. 'w Other contemporarysourcesconfirmthe more positiveappraisal.The
Historyof theCountyof Pictou(1877) describes considerable improvement during the 1850sand 1860s,includingthe wide diffusionof threshingand mowingmachinery,the improvementof stockand modesof cultivation,the elimination of merchantcredit, an increasein the number and quality of carriages,and improvementsin costume.'In nothing has the countybeen more distinguishedduring this period than by the progresswhich the farming populationhave made in comfortand independence... The improvementhas been most apparentin the newer setclements ... [whose residents]are as independentin their circumstances as the people of any
part of the country. ,so These and other contemporarysourcescreatean image of moderate prosperityin the NovaScotiancountryside during the 1850sand 1860s.Of course,anecdotalevidenceof thissortseldomprovesdecisivebecauseof the riskthat individualobservers maybe unrepresentative, misledby preconceptions or biases,or just plain wrong. The pessimistsexamine additional sources,the mostimportantof whichis the valuationof estatesentering the legal processof probate. The possibilitythat individualsmanagedto accumulatewealth as they becameolder suggests the importanceof consideringwealth for specific agesor age classes? • The Nova Scotiaprobatedata reported in table 3
27 GraemeWynn, 'Excitinga Spirit of Reform amongthe Plodholes,'Acadiensis 20, 1 (autumn 1991): 5-51
28 Gwyn,'Bronze Moment,' 200 29 DuncanCampbell,'ImmigrationReport,'NovaScotia, Journals oftheHouseof Assembly 1867,app. 7 30 GeorgePatterson,Historyof theCountyofPictou(Montreal:DawsonBrothers 1877), 437-8
31 The probaterecordstypicallydo not provideinformationaboutthe ageof the decedent,whichthereforemustbe identifiedfrom anothercourse.The ageof someindividualscannotbe determinedwith certainty(if at all). It canbe difficult, for example,to confirmthat the probatedJohn MacDonaldwasthe same John MacDonaldnamedin a supplementarysource.Our own researchesin
248
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
TABLE
REVIEW
3
Mean Value of ProbatedEstatesbyAge Class Nova Scotia 1850-2 and 1871
Ages
Farmers
All others
1850-2
21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71all
394 1,416 1,441 1,106 1,893 2,578 1,697
1,479 2,297 2,560 5,135 4,794 10,790 4,640
1871
21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71all
1,364 2,256 1,797 2,334 2,025
1,327 8,647 8,281 22,537 9,884
2,249 2,150
40,414 17,702
Source: PANS, RG 48
clearlyindicatethat older men tended to be wealthierin both 1851 and 1871amongfarmersand non-farmers? It is particularlyinstructiveto examinefarmersaged fifty-oneto sixty, sinceyoungermen had not yet realized their potential for accumulation while older men alreadyhad begun to passon wealth to family members prior to death. Studiesof wealthin nineteenth-century Americatypically indicatethat the rate of wealthaccumulationdiminishedwith ageand that wealthpeakedbefore the age of sixty.• We measurewealthas the valueof
32
Pictouand Richmondcountiessuggest the near-impossibility of confirming agesfor more than two-thirds to three-quarters of probatedindividuals. The 1850-2 datacollectedby Gwynreport agesfor an astonishing95 per centof the probatesand 100 per cent in PictouCounty!It is unlikelythat all are attributed with the samelevel of certainty. This sectionof the papercouldnot havebeenwrittenwithoutthe cooperation and permission ofJulianGwyn,whoholdscopyrightto the 1850-2probate data.
33
JeremyAtackand Fred Bateman,'The EgalitarianIdeal and the Distributionof Wealthin the NorthernAgriculturalCommunity: A Backward Look,'Review of Economics and Statistics63 (Feb. 1981): 124-9, and To Their Own Soil (Ames: Iowa
University Press1987),chap.6;DavidGalenson, 'Economic Opportunity on the UrbanFrontier:Nativity,WorkandWealthin EarlyChicago,'JournalofEconomic History 51, 3 (Sept.1991):581-603;DavidGalensonandClaynePope,'Economic and GeographicMobilityon the FarmingFrontier:EvidencefromAppanoose County,Iowa,1850-1870,'Journal ofEconomic History, 59, 3 (Sept.1989):635-55, and 'Precedenceand Wealth:Evidencefrom Nineteenth-CenturyUtah,' in
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
249
an estateafter deductingany outstandingindebtedness. This procedureis useful becauseone possiblereservationabout a census-based measureof wealth is that it does not allow for a rise in farm indebtedness,which would
be predictedby the pessimistic viewof agriculturaldegeneration.A simple tabulationof the probatedata,however,indicatesa declinerather than an increasein the proportionof farm probatesrecordingsomelevel of debt and a declinein the averagelevelof debt amongdebt-holders. We reportseparately the datafor HalifaxfollowingOsbergand Siddiq? One reason to do so is the possibilitythat valuation was conducted on differentprinciplesin differentpartsof the province.NovaScotiaprobate law wasadministeredat the countylevel exceptfor appeals.The surviving probaterecordsprovideconsiderable evidenceof county-specific idiosyncrasies;for example,the kind of informationincludedin the probate inventoriesvariedfrom countyto county.It is equallypossible,althoughimpossible to confirm, that countiesdeveloped distinctivemethodologiesor principlesfor valuingland and other assets. With a sufficientlylargesample it would be possibleand desirableto examine the processof valuation
withineachcounty;herewecandisaggregate onlyibr HalifaxCounty. The data summarizedin table 4 indicate that averagewealth increased
from 1851 to 1871 for all age groupsin Halifax and in the rest of the province.The averagefarm estateroughlydoubled.Farm wealthincreased fasterthan non-farmwealthexceptin Halifax County,but the latter result canbe disregardedasa misleadingartifactcreatedby the smallnumber and unrepresentative natureof the non-farmobservations. For our purposes,the importantresultis that the averagesizeof farm estateroughlydoubled.
ClaudiaGoldinand Hugh Rockoff,eds.,Strategic Factors in Nineteenth Century American Economic History(Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress1992), 225-41; StevenHerscovici,'The Distributionof Wealthin NineteenthCenturyBoston: InequalityamongNativesandImmigrants,1860,'Explorations in Economic History 30, 3 (July1993):294-320;J.R.Kearland ClaynePope,'Choices,Rentsand Luck,' in Engermanand Gallman,Long-Term Factors, 215-60, and 'The Life Cyclein EconomicHistory,'JournalofEconomic History 43, 1 (March 1983): 149-58;J.R.Kearl,ClayneL. Pope,and LarryT. Wireruer,'HouseholdWealthin a SetdementEconomy: Utah, 1850-1870,'JournalofEconomic History 40, 3 (Sept. 1980):477-96; ClayneL. Pope,'Householdson the AmericanFrontier:The Distribution of Income and Wealth in Utah, 1850-1900,' in David Galenson, ed.,
Marketsin History(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress1989), 148-89;Donald F. Schaeffer,'A Model of Migration and WealthAccumulation:Farmersat the AntebellumSouthernFrontier,'Explorations in Economic History24 (1987): 130-57;RichardSteckel,'PovertyandProsperity: A LongitudinalStudyof
WealthAccumulation, 1850-1860,'NBERWorkingPaperSerieson Historical Factorsin Long Run Growth, no. 8, Dec. 1989
34 Osbergand Siddiq,'The Acquisition'
250 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
TABLE
KEVIEW
4
EstateValue by Subgroup,1850-2 and 1871,Fifty-fifty-nine-Year-Olds 1850-2
1871
Mean n
value
Mean n
value
1851-71
% change in mean
Farmersin Halifax County
2
1,189
2
2,152
+86
All other farmers Non-farmers in Halifax Co All other non-farmers
44 14 25
1,142 5,436 4,966
20 7 14
2,481 43,816 8,594
+117 +706 +73
Source: PANS, RG 48
Another indicationof increasingwealthderivesfrom a statisticalanalysis that isreportedin appendixt) and isbasedon a simpleregression modelof changingwealthoverthelife cycle.Applicationof thismodelto the probate dataindicatesthat in both yearswealthaccumulated rapidlyamongyoung farmers, that it accumulatedmore slowlyas age increased,and that it eventuallybeganto diminishin absolutetermsasthe agedran downtheir savings in part bypassing on theirwealthto surviving familymembers.The process of farmwealthaccumulation wassimilarin the twoyearsexceptthat
thosedyingin 1871appearto havebegunlifewitha largerinheritance. s5A hypothetical fifty-year-old in 1871accumulating in a mannerpredictedby the statistical analysis wouldbe roughlytwiceaswealthyashiscounterpart twentyyearsearlier,principally because of enjoying a largerinheritance? Any conclusions basedon thesedata mustbe temperedwith a recognition of the limitationsimposedby the smallsample.For 1871,only 132 observationsare availableto represent roughly 50,000 males reporting agricultureastheir principaloccupation(table 5); 108 observations represent the 42,000 adult maleswith non-agriculturaloccupations. These are
astonishingly smallsamplesto representa societycharacterized by considerableinequalityof wealth,as the pessimists themselves demonstrate. Today, socialscientists argue the need for thousandsof observations in order to obtainreliableestimates with heterogenous data? In contrast,the largestage-occupation classreportedin table4 hasonlyforty-fourobserva-
35 This is indicatedby the significance of the variabledum71. 36 The changein wealthof a fifty-year-old farmer predictedbyour estimatedcoefficientsis reportedin appendixtableD2. We feel that the firstand fourth equationsprovidethe mostreliable predictions. 37 The importanceof a su•ciently largesampleisarguedbyDanielGordon, ZhenhxiLin, LarsOsberg,and ShelleyPhipps,'PredictingProbabilities: The Problemof AdequateSampleSize,'paperpresentedto the CanadianEconomicsAssociation Meeting,June 1992.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS TABLE
251
5
The ProbateSampleand NovaScotiaPopulationin 1871 Provincial
ProbateSample
Ages
farmers
21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71all
6 10 12 25 20 59 132
others 8 22 16 16 21 25 108 Farmers
Provincialpopulation Probate incidence
population 32,197 20,747 15,545 10,654 8,056 4,843 92,042
Probate
incidence .0004 .0015 .0018 .0038 .0050 .0173 .0026
Others
49,644
42,398
.0027
.0025
Source: PANS, RG 48
tions.So smalla samplecarriesa large risk that the survivingestateswill be unrepresentativeof provincialexperience.An undersizedsamplepossibly explainsthe improbablefindingthataveragefarmwealthdeclinedby30 per centin easternNovaScotiain the sameperiodasit increasedby 45 per cent in nearbyHalifax County? The smallnumberof observations is especially worrisomefor the largely urbanpopulationof non-farmersin Halifax Countybecausewealthwasless
equallydistributedin North Americancitiesthanin the countryside. 39The observations reportedin table4 providea convenientand particularlyclear exampleof the problem. Six of the sevennon-farmHalifax probatesreportedhail from elite occupations that accountedfor only5 per centof the non-agricultural occupations reportedin the 1871HalifaxCountyCensus. •ø Thesedecedentsdo not representadequatelythe full rangeof socialclasses in a complexport citysuchasHalifax. The probatesampleis smallin part becausefewer than one-fifthof all deathsresultedin a probatedestate? • As a result,any measureof average
38 Gwynand Siddiq,'WealthDistribution,'tables1 and 2; Gwyn,'GoldenAge,' tables 1 and 3
39 See the literature reviewby Herscovici,'The Distributionof Wealth.' 40 Canada,Census, 1871,vol.2, table13.The non-farmHalifaxprobatesconsistof threemerchants,twogrocers,one gentleman,and one mason. 41 There is someevidencethat the probateproportionof adultdeaths,about20 per cent in 1871NovaScotia,wasdeclining;seePhyllisWagg,'The Biasof Probate:UsingDeed to TransferEstatesin Nineteenth CenturyNova Scotia,' NovaScotiaHt•toricalReview10, 1 (1990): 74-87. Wills were registeredat a similarfrequencyin Ohio and, more commonly,in Ontario;seeWilliam
252 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
wealthdependscruciallyon assumptions madeaboutthe 80 per centwho were not probated?We can speculateabout the differencesbetween probatedand non-probatedwealth,but the relationshipturns out to be quitecomplicatedand hencedifficultto predict. The probatesdescribewealthat death,bywhichpoint mostpeoplehave reached an age atypicalof the living and have begun to passon their lifetime accumulationof wealthto other familymembers. 4sFurthermore, probatingan estatewascostly.The direct and indirect costsof probating implythatsmallerandmoreremotelysituatedwealth-holders werelesslikely to enterthe process of probate)• Anothercomplication is the widespread practiceamong the rich as well as the poor of transferringwealth to youngerfamilymemberswhilethe accumulator wasstillalive.•sBruceElliot citesone Ontario township,for example,in which more than half of the farmswerepassedto childrenbeforetheparent'sdeath?PhyllisWaggadds that widowswith youngchildrenmight avoidprobatesincean estatecould not be resolveduntil the childrenattainedtwenty-one years,and therewasa ,riskthat the probatecourtwouldappointsomeoneelseasguardianof the childrenand controllerof familyassets? For theseandotherreasons there
Newell,'Inheritanceon the MaturingFrontier:Butler County,Ohio, 18031865,' in Engermanand Gallman,eds.,Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth,261-306, and Bruce Elliot, 'Sourcesof Biasin Nineteenth-Century Ontario Wills,' Histoiresociale/Social History18, 35 (1985): 125-32. Livio Di Mateo and Peter Georgereport evidencethat in WentworthCountythe proportion of deathresultingin probateincreasedfrom 1871to 1900;seetheir 'CanadianWealthInequalityin the LateNineteenthCentury:A Studyof WentworthCounty,1872-1902,'Canadian HistoricalReview 73, 4 (Dec. 1992): 453-83.
42 Elliot, 'Sourcesof Bias';LarsOsbergand FazleySiddiq,'The Inequalityof Wealthin Britain'sNorth AmericanColonies:The Importanceof the Relatively Poor,' Reoiew ofIncome and Wealth, series34, no. 2 (•une 1988): 143-63;Wagg, 'The Bias of Probate'
43 Elliot, 'Sourcesof Bias';Wagg,'The Biasof Probate' 44 The followingprobateand relatedcostsappearin the file of Lunenburg probates:
Name JoshuaZwicker
Dateoffiling I May 1871
Estate value($) 9,202
Costs/estate (%) 4
ThomasVogler 26 Nov. 1872 692 13 John Countenay 30Jan. 1872 1,731 3 AlexanderForestall 15 May 1872 12,808 1 45 The literatureon inheritancepracticesis surveyedby SusanGrigg,who notes that marriagesettlementsand dowriesshouldbe includedamongthe various formsof inter-vivostransfers; seeher 'Womenand FamilyProperty:A Reviewof U.S. Inheritance Studies,'HistoricalMethods22, 3 (summer 1989): 116-21. 46 Elliot, 'Sources of Bias'
47 Wagg,'The Biasof Probate'
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
253
is no easyor simplewayto establishthe relationshipbetweenprobatedand non-probated wealth? Gwyn and Siddiq acknowledgeat leastsomeof the waysin which probated wealth might differ systematically from non-probatedwealth. They ask:'How can one usesucha sampleto make legitimateinferencesabout the wealth holding of the living population?The answeris to scale the sampleby usingappropriateweightsfor each observationin it, in other words to correctfor age, sex and other biaseswhich it might display,in
orderto makeit representative of the livingpopulation.'•9 Unfortunately,the cross-tabulation of wealthby occupation,whichis the pessimists' principalevidence,incorporates no adjustmentfor age,sex,and lbcationalcomposition. søThereisno attemptto compareprobateinformation with censusmanuscripts, assessment rolls,or other sourcesthat might illuminate
the nature of selection bias. The failure
to consider and correct
for age, sex,and 1ocationalinfluencesunderminesconfidencein the pessimists'tabulationof wealthby occupation. ' Quite apartfrom the problemsof selectionbias,wealthisa weakguideto prosperityin a specificsectorat a particulartime and place.The sectoral designationderivesfrom the individual'sapparentoccupationat time of death.Unfortunatelythe occupationrecordedin mostnineteenth-century sourcesis a somewhatimprecisesocial identity constructedby various influences,of which economic activityis only one. Moreover, wealth at death
reflects accumulation
from
a lifetime
of income
earned
in an un-
known mix of activities in an unknown set of locations. Some of the wealth
may havebeen earnedin Europeor elsewherein North America, s• and probablysomeof it wasinheritedrather than earned.After the individual had arrivedin NovaScotia,sheor he probablyworkedat differentoccupations during the courseof the life cycle,on a seasonalbasisand as part of
weeklyworkroutine? 48 GloriaMaina•i•dJackson Maincontest the 'facileassumption thattheaffinityof
49 50 51
52
probatecourtsfor estates increasedin directproportionto their size';seetheir 'EconomicGrowthand the Standardof Livingin SouthernNew England, 1640-1774,'JournalofEconomic History48, 1 (March 1988):27-46. Gwynand Siddiq,'Wealth Distribution' Ibid., tables1 and 2; Gwyn,'GoldenAge,' tables1 and 3. There issomeeffort to separatethe databy economicregion,but the regionsare unreasonably large. Evidencethat nativityand earlyarrivalmattered,quite apart from the influence of age,maybefoundin theAmericanstudies byGalenson, Herscovici, and Pope,whichare citedabove. Bittermann,Wynn,and McKinnon,'Of Inequalityand Interdependence,'26ff; Brookes,'The GoldenAge';LarryMcCann,'"Living a DoubleLife": Town and Countryin the Industrializationof the Maritimes,'in Day,ed., Geographical Perspectives, 93-113. There wasenormousoccupationalmobilitythroughout North America;seeJoe Ferrie, 'A LongitudinalAnalysisof EuropeanMigrants
254 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
We need think only of the successful farmerswho usedtheir wealthand statusto becomea road commissioner, justiceof the peace,merchant,or politicianto recognizethe pitfallsin focusingon occupationat death.The tendencyof farmersto acquirethe socialidentityof gentlemanor some other higherstatusrole astheybecamewealthycreatesa clearbiasin a data setdescribingoccupations at a singlepoint in time. The wealthassociated with farming will be underestimatedand the bias will be greatestat the upper end of the age spectrum,which containsthe majorityof probate observations?
For theseand otherreasonsit isdifficultto interpretwealthat the end of a workinglife as a measureof incomeearned in a particularsectorat a specifictime and place. Not surprisingly,researchersin other countries avoidthe useof probatedataunlessalternatesourcesare unavailable?Of course,all sources are limited in somewayor another.Giventhe frailtiesof eachsource,however,we are impressed by the extentof agreementamong them. The probatedata indicatethat farmersthroughoutthe pre-Confederationera were able to accumulatewealthastheygrewolder and that the averagefarmer waswealthierin 1871 than in 1851. Increasesin land prices (Pictou deeds and probates) and acreage (census)confirm the increasein wealth.It is possiblefor wealthto accumulateevenif incomedid not change,but censusevidencefrom the period confirmsa modestincrease in farm income.
Census-based
measures indicate
that Nova Scotian
agriculturecontinuedto expandduringthe pre-Confederation era,whether we measurethe growthin termsof the numberof farmers,the quantitiesof land and livestock,the volumeof farm production,agriculturalincome,or provincialfood self-sufficiency. There is no signof a reversalor even a halt to this processuntil someyearsafterward;the province'sagriculture conto the U.S., 1840-1860,' paper presentedto the AmericanEconomicsAssociation, 5Jan. 1992,and Kearl and Pope, 'Choices,Rentsand Luck.' 53 The lackof detailcontainedin mostprobaterecordsmasksthe presenceof any non-farm
assets in the estates of farmers and farm land in the estates of non-
farmers.
54 Peter Coclanis, 'The Wealth of British America on the Eve of the Revolution,'
JournalofInterdisciplinary History21 (autumn1990):245-60, andJohn McCusker and RussellMenard, TheEconomy ofBritishAmerica, 1607-1789(ChapelHill: Universityof North CarolinaPress1985), 263-5. Similarreservations appearin the recent Britishliterature;seeJ.M. Collinge, 'ProbateValuationsand the Death Duty Registers: SomeComments,'Bulletinof theInstitute for Historical Research 60 (1987): 240-5; W.D. Rubinstein,'CuttingUp Rich:A Replyto F.M.L. Thompson,'Economic HistoryReview 45, 2 (May 1992);350-61; F.M.L. Thompson,'StitchingIt All TogetherAgain,' Economic HistoryReview45, 2 (May 1992):362-75. Somewouldarguethat the eighteenth-century probatesare more reliable than thoseof subsequentcenturiesbecausethe method of valuationwasnot yet influencedby notionsof conventionalpractice,with their accompanyingerrors.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
255
tinuedto expandfor anothertwodecades?The availableevidencedoesnot permit a proper adjustmentfor price change,but farmersin Nova Scotia appearto havegainedratherthansufferedfrom relativepricechangefrom 1851 to 1871.
Although it is necessary to reject the extreme pessimistic view of Nova Scotianagriculture,Gwynand Siddiqare correctto directour attentionto the distinctivefeaturesof farming on Canada'seast coast.Nova Scotia farmerslackeddirectaccess to largeurban markets.The climatewastoo wet for somecropsand too coldfor others.The soilcoverwasrelativelythin in muchof the province.Farmersrespondedto thesecircumstances by organizing their workinglivesto combineagriculturaland non-agricultural activities, byplantingrootsandearlyripeningfield grainsthattoleratemoist coolsummers,bycarefulcroprotationand drainage,by applyingdistinctive fertilizerssuchas musselmud and seaweed,and, mostof all, with a strong commitmentto animal husbandry.The data in table 6 indicatethe large shareof NovaScotia'simprovedfarm acreagethat wasdevotedto pasture andhay.In spiteof theseadaptations in farmpractice,however,the average farm incomewasrelativelylow. The low level of farm incomemay be decomposed into the relativelysmallsizeof farmsand a relativelylowincome per acre (table6). The latterhelpsto explainwhyfarm landwascheaperin Nova Scotia than in Ontario?
The documentationof agriculturaland other commodityincomeon a regionalbasisisveryrecent,but an earliergenerationof scholars wouldnot have hesitatedto associate a low level of personalincomewith relatively weakor marginalagriculturalperformance.A populartext claimsthat 'one handicapunderwhichboth maritimecoloniescontinuedto labourin this
periodwastheslowness of theiragricultural development. '•7Anotherwidely read surveydescribes the limitationsof regionalagricultureand observes that farmingbecame'evenlessprosperous' after the entryof midwestern grainsinto easternmarkets?McCallumprovidesthe clearestrestatement of
55 Canada,Census1891,vol. 2, table 16. Admittedly,the expansionafter Confederationwaslessthan that predictedby AbrahamGesner,IndustrialReaourcea ofNovaScotia (Halifax:Mackinlay1849),65. 56 A lowerprice of land in NovaScotiais notedby Campbell,'Immigration Report,'10,andconfirmedbya comparison of appendixA belowwithevidencefor Ontarioreportedby EdwardGreyand BarryPrentice,'Trendsin the Price of Farm Real Estatein CentralWellingtonCountysince1836,' working paper,University of Guelph,Schoolof AgriculturalEconomics, appendixtable 1.1,and 'Exploringthe Priceof Farmlandin Two OntarioLocalitiessince LettersPatenting,'CanadianPapers in RuralHistory,vol. 4 (1984), 226-39. 57 W.T. Easterbrookand Hugh GJ. Aitken, CanadianEconomic History(Toronto: Macmillan1956), 239. This text remainsin print. 58 R. Cole Harris andJohnWarkentin,Canadabefore Confederation (NewYork: Oxford 1974), 178, 188-96, 200-5
256 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
TABLE
REVIEW
6
Incomeper Capita,AgriculturalIncomeper ImprovedAcre and per Farm,and the Sharesof ImprovedAcreageDevotedto Pastureand Hay, 1870 Income
Share of
Commodity Agricultural Improved per improvedacres income income acres improved in pasture per capita per farm per farm acre and hay Canada
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.51
Nova Scotia New Brunswick
0.75 0.86
0.58 0.70
0.78 0.78
0.74 0.91
0.76 0.61
Quebec
0.86
0.81
1.00
0.81
0.55
Ontario
1.19
1.30
1.10
1.19
0.43
Source:Inwood and Irwin, 'CanadianRegionalCommodityIncome Differences at Confederation,' 149-70 and table 3
whatmightbe calledthe agricultural-led growthhypothesis (ALGH).59 Nova Scotiaindustrializedlesssuccessfully than the other Canadianprovinces, accordingto thishypothesis, becauseitsagriculturalsectorwaslessprosperousand the linkagesbetweenagricultureand industrywereweaker. •øThe mechanisms identifiedby ALGHadvocates includethe influenceof farm income on the demand for manufacturedconsumer goods and the investment demand for farm machineryand other manufacturedcapital goods, the influenceof farm incomeand agro-processing employmentopportuni-
ties on migrationdecisions 6j and capital/labourratiosthroughoutthe economy,the contributionof agriculturalsizeand intensityto internaland external returns to scalein the manufacturingand servicesectors,and the size of local savingsavailable to finance infrastructuraland industrial investment.
59 McCallum,Unequal Beginnings. An earlytreatmentbyRichardCavesand RichardHolton is particularlyclear;seetheir CanadianEconomy: Prospect and Retrospect (Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress1959),chap.5. Similarideas arisein the studyof internationaldevelopment; seeLloydReynolds, ed., Agriculture in Development Theory (NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress1975). 60 Recentcomparisons of provincialagriculturesincludeMorrisAltman,'EconomicDevelopmentwith High Wages:An HistoricalPerspective,' Explorations in Economic History25, 2 (April 1988): 198-224; Inwood and Irwin, 'Regional CommodityIncome';John Isbister,'Agriculture,BalancedGrowthand Social Changein Central Canadasince1850:An Interpretation,'Economic Development andCulturalChange 25 (1976-7); McInnis,'Perspectives,' 77-83. 61 The influenceof regionalincomedifferentialson the anticipateddestinationof Europeanimmigrantarrivalsisdemonstrated for CanadabyAlan Greenand DavidGreen, 'BalancedGrowthand the GeographicalDistributionof EuropeanImmigrantArrivalsto Canada,1900-1912,'Explorations in Economic History 30, 1 (Jan. 1993): 31-59 (seethe coefficientYl in tables6-11).
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
257
Thisis not the appropriateplaceto evaluatethe ALGHasan explanation for Canadianregionaldifferencesor, more simply,Nova Scotia'slevel of industrialproduction,personalincome,or populationgrowth? Independent of the ALGH,however,we knowthat agriculturemattereda great deal simplybecauseit was so large. Recent studiessuggestthat agriculture accountedfor about half of all productionand labour in the Maritime regionduringthe 1860s?For thisreason,evenif for no other,we can be sureof a connection betweenagriculturalincomeandthe earlyappearance of regionaldisparities. Agriculturalproductionloomslarge in recent discussions of the early Atlanticeconomy.During the 1970sand 1980ssignificantadvanceswere made in our understandingof activitiesthat gavethe region its distinctive employmentProfile,notablymining,fishing,shipping,and shipbuilding. The focusof scholarshipin the 1990shasturned to agricultureand industry, which even in Nova Scotiaand New Brunswickaccountedfor threequartersof all economicactivityduringthe nineteenthcentury.Within the
newagricultural literature'thereexistsan importantcleavage betweenthose authorswho emphasizethe positiveeconomicachievementsof Maritime farm familiesand thosewho paint a picture of agriculturalfailure and decline during the 1850sand 1860s.ProfessorsGwyn and Siddiq argue vigorously for the pessimistic perspective, but our readingof the evidenceis rather different.It maybe true that NovaScotianfarmswere smallerand agriculturalland lessproductivethan elsewherein North America, but agriculturenevertheless continuedto growand farm familiescontinuedto accumulatewealth throughoutthe pre-Confederationera. The limited sourceswe have examineddo not supportan overallassessment of Nova Scotianagriculture,but theydo suggest a flexibleand successful responseto the challengeof farming in a smallperipheralregion with a climate illsuitedto the profitablecashcropsof the continentalinterior.
Appendix A: TheValueofFarmCapital We use the valuesrecordedin deedsregisteredfor Hopewell and East BranchEastRiverof PictouCounty,a 'backland'districtin east-central Nova
62 One reasonto hesitatebeforeacceptingthe ALGH is the possibilityof reverse causationinsofarasthe farm economyrespondedto demand emanatingfrom the urbaneconomy.Ar•o. ther questionaboutthe ALGH is its implicitidentification of primaryproductionwith agriculture,therebyignoringindustriessuchas miningand fishingthatwererelativelymore importantin NovaScotia.On the other hand, suchprimarysectoractivitieswere not sufficientlyprosperousto makeup for the low levelof agriculturalincome, evenin Nova Scotia;see Inwoodand Irwin, 'CanadianRegionalCommodity,'103. 63 Acheson,'The Conditionof Agriculture';Inwoodand Irwin, 'CanadianRegional Commodity'
258
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
Scotia, to calculatean averageprice per acre disregardingintra-family transfersand transfersof lessthen fiveacresandweightingeachobservation
by the numberof acres(tableA1)? Probaterecordsfrom acrossPictou countysuggestthat land pricesin this small districtwere lower than the countyaverage(tableA2),thatpricesroughlydoubledfrom 1851to 1871, and thatlivestock pricesincreased moreslowly(tableA3).65 The provincial wealthcalculations summarizedin the text embodyvaluesof $3.50 and $7.00 per acre and the valuesreportedin tableA3 for sheep,horses,and milk cows.All other cattleare valuedat $6.83and $9.11per animal,which are aggregations of the relevantcategoriesin table3. The smallnumberof hogobservations leadsusto use$4.00per hogin bothyears. Appendix B: Commodity Prices
Farmers'market pricesreported in Pictou'sEasternChronicle and in two Halifax newspapers, the AcadianReporter and the BritishColonist, fluctuated markedly.This volatilityunderminesconfidencein averagesconstructed from this source,especiallyfor yearsin which few weeklyobservations survive.It seemslikelythat smallvolumestradedat the extremepricesand that the gains/losses from unexpectedprice changeaccruedto the holders of inventories, who often were merchants rather than farmers. For these
reasonswe examinecommodityvaluationin the probaterecordsand in the recordsof the Hospitalfor the Insane(Halifax), the Asylumfor the Poor (Halifax), the Grant Mill (PictouCounty) and the Dickie store (Upper Stewiacke),all of which exhibit greater stability.Rural pricesapparently fluctuatedlessthan Halifaxprices,and rural Pictouprices(probaterecords and the GrantMill ledger)typicallywerelowerthan thoserecordedin the
PictouandHalifaxmarkets?Furthercomplicating factorsincludeseasonal influences,the internationalprice cycle,and regionaldifferencesthereoL Seasonalpatterns varied by location, although unfortunatelythere is insufficientinformationto createa full seasonaladjustment.Interpretation of the 1850-1 benchmarkis awkwardbecausegrain priceswereunusually low in thoseyears,possiblyreflectingthe influenceof the international market? 7
64 PANS, RG 46 65 Ibid., RG 48
66 McCallareviewsthe difficultiesencounteredin drawingagriculturalpricesfrom contemporarysourcesin his PlantingtheProvince, appendixC. 67
The Acadian Recorder indicates a substantial
decline
between the summers of
1848 and 1850 in the price of oats,potatoes,flour (rye and wheat), and beef, followedby a doublingduring the followingfour or fiveyears.The upswingis confirmed in the recordsof the Halifax Poor House and in McCalla'ssurveyof Toronto prices,PlantingtheProvinc•appendixC.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS TABLE
259
A1
Value per Acre of Land Transferred1850-2, 1860-2, and 1870-2, Hopewell and EastBranch EastRiver
Number of transactions 1850-2 1860-2 1870-2
Mean acresper transaction
18 19 21
Mean price ($) per acre
95 69 39
3.05 5.53 6.96
Source: Pans, RG 46, Deeds
TABLE
A2
Value per Acre of LandValued 1850-2, 1860-2, and 1870-2, Pictou County
Number of transactions
Mean acresper transaction
Mean price ($) per acre
1850-2
15
121
4.53
1860-2
13
121
6.04
1870-2
14
108
7.96
Source: Pans, RG 48, Probates
TABLE
A3
Value per Animal 1850-2, 1860-2, and 1870-2, PictouCounty 1850-2
1860-2
1870-2
obs
#
value
obs
#
value
obs
#
value
5 9
5 17
7.68 2.69
3 11
3 16
7.50 2.08
1 7
1 13
10.00 3.15
Cows
42
82
13.71
39
110
12.81
28
88
14.92
Heifers Horses
21 3 24
16 5 24
7.73 6.50 34.78
23 20 20
36 32 23
6.75 3.11 44.43
12 13 26
18 28 32
11.06 4.89 41.41
Lambs
2
14
0.67
2
8
1.47
2
23
1.03
4 18 4
4 126 8
14.50 1.65 6.43
5 34 5
9 272 7
16.67 1.95 7.86
1 35 6
2 216 13
24.00 2.18 10.00
Bulls Calves
Hogs
Oxen
Sheep Steers
Source: PANS, RG 48, Probates
Notes:obsis the numberof probateswith information; # is the numberof animals;valueisvalueper animal in dollars.
260 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
In Table B1 we report prices based on five sources:the purchasing recordsof the Poor House (1850-1) and Hospitalfor the Insane (1860-1 and 1870-1),Halifaxnewspapers (Acadian Recorder augmented bythe British
Colonist for 1870-1),theEvening Chronicle fromNewGlasgow, PictouCounty probate records,and the Grant Mill. Where possible,we averageweekly pricesto obtain a monthlyprice, and monthlypricesto obtain an annual averageafter discardingoutlyingobsepeations. The different sourcesagree on the directionand extentof pricechange,but we are carefulto compare probateobservations with probateobse•wations, newspaperpriceswith the samein a singlelocation,andsoon? The 'bestguess'pricesreportedin the final column of table B1 follow the Pictou evidencemore closelythan Halifaxin an attemptto approximatefarm-gateprices? The JamesDickie DayBookin Upper Stewiackeprovidessomeinformationaboutcommodities purchased byfarmers. 7øBetween1860-1and1870-1 mostpricesdeclined (codfish,salt,soda,sugar,and tea), someincreased (tobacco),and othersremained substantially unchanged(molasses, cloth, and flour). For the 1850swe turn to invoicesfor goodsreceivedbya Halifax
textileimporterfor 1849and 18597 In tableB2wesummarize sixkindsof cloth importedin largevolumes;four pricesdeclinedwhile twoincreased. Using asweightsthe quantitiesappearingon invoicesin 1849,the total bill declinedby 2 per centbetween1849and 1859. Our admittedlyfragmentaryinformationsuggests that agriculturaland wood pricesrose relativeto manufactures and other farm purchases, and hence that farmersgainedrather than lost throughrelativeprice change. Gwynand Siddiqapparentlyread the evidenceotherwise,but theydo not explaintheir sources, the poolingof informationfrom differentsources and locations,the treatmentof seasonality, the price cycle,anomalousobservations, weightsused to generate an index number, units and qualities, currencyconversion,or the classification of wood as a farm or non-farm product.Moreover,their pricesappearto be internallyinconsistent, insofar as they claim that agriculturalpricesrose6 per cent in PictouCounty,in contrastto 30-38 per cent in Halifax and the AnnapolisValley,and that
68 We convertthe Halifax currencyof the 1850sto NovaScotiadollars;seeAlan McCullough,'CurrencyConversions in BritishNorth America,1760-1900,' Archivaria 16 (summer 1985): 83-94.
69 The incomecalculationappliesthe priceof oatsto other grainsand excludes woolproducedon farmsbecausehomespunisvaluedat .50 per yard. 70 DalhousieUniversityArchives,MSU-6$A-5 (26 March 1860-24 May 1861) and A-17(11July1870-21July1871),JamesDickieDayBooks,UpperStewiacke. We excludethe saleof goodson creditand to twoother storekeepers supplied by Dickie.The assistance of CharlesArmourswith theserecordsis gratefully acknowledged. 71 The Friezeand RoyCollection,DalhousieUniversityArchives
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
TABLE
261
B1
The Price of Farm Commodities, 1850-1 and 1870-1 ($) Halifax
Halifax
Pictou
Pictou
Grant
newspaper institution newspaper probate mill Butter/lb 1850-1 1870-1
Potatoes/bu 1850-1 1870-1 Beef/lb 1850-1 1870-1 Pork/lb 1850-1 1870-1
Mutton/lb 1850-1 1870-1
.15
Our
prices .15
.14 .22
.12 .24
.IS .19
.41 .46
.44 .42
.$$ .$$
.04
.05
.026
.05
.08
.075
.072
.06
.08 .092
.058 .08
.056 .07
.06
.05 .07
.054 .065
.O6
.07:5
.19
.25 .$0
.35
.08
.07
Hay/ton 1850-1 1870-1
21.10 16.00
11.65 11.50
6.00 7.80
8.00
12.00
8.14
12.00
.36 .44
.$0 .39
.35 .$2
.28
.30
.38
.39
Oats/bu 71 1850-1 1870-1 Wheat/bu 1850-1 1870-1 Wheat flour/bbl
1.48 1.27
1850-1
5.54
5.10
5.25
1870-1
5.$6
6.50
5.62
TABLE
1.50 1.30
B2
Textile Prices, 1849 and 1859 ($)
Prices
72
Quantity (yds)
Typeof cloth
1849 1859
Gingham Rolledlining Osnaburg Fancyprint Greyshirting White shirting
10.0 5.2 8.1 6.0 5.1 5.0
8.0 3.5 6.6 8.0 4.6 5.4
1849 6:58 202 11:5 6:57 336 626
The priceof othergrains(rye,corn,buckwheat, andbarley)istakento be 65 per centgreaterthanthe priceof oats,in recognition of the ratioof their weightsrelativeto oats.
262 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
non-agricultural pricesrose70 per centin the Fundyregionin contrastto 20 per cent in Pictou and 11 per cent on the South Shore. Such price dispersionis implausiblein the smallNovaScotianeconomy. Appendix c: TheConstruction ofFarmIncome andRelated Estimates
Aggregatefarm incomeis the sumof incomegeneratedin the production of commoditiesfor which information survives(ignoring those used as
inputsinto other agricultural activities). 7sThe censusreportsquantities; pricesare reportedin the final columnof tableB1.We deviateslightlyfrom earlier work by using different prices, by reducing the presumedfeed requirementsto reflect provincialavailability,and by includingcloth, rye, corn,andbuckwheat? • Our horsesreceive14 bushelsof feedgrainand 1.1 tonsof hay,the sheepreceive0.5 bushelsand 0.14 tons,while cattle,oxen, and cowsreceive1.1 tons.One componentof farm incomederivesfrom the slaughterof animals.We employthe countyqevel slaughterratesreportedin 1871for sheepandswine.For cattleweimputea 70 per centslaughterrate followingBittermann,who arguesthat the censusdivideda singleherd into milking and non-milkingcomponents['milch cows'and 'other horned cattle') and that the portion of the latter used for beef production fluctuatedin responseto localgrain, hay,beef, and dairyprices.Thosefluctuationsrender meaningless the reportedslaughterrate in any one year. Appendix 1):Statistical Analysisof theAge-Wealth Relationship
We examinethe age-wealth relationshipwiththreespecifications (tableD1). One is a joint examinationof the two occupationalgroupsin 1851 and, then,independently, in 1871(equations 2 and3). A secondapproachexam-
73 Atackand Bateman,To TheirOwnSoil(Ames:Iowa StateUniversityPress1987); Bittermann,'Middle River';Bittermann,McKinnon,andWynn, 'Of Inequality and Interdependence,'19-21; Lewisand McInnis, 'AgriculturalOutput' 74 Income= cloth + butter+ beef+ mutton+ pork + grain+ potato+ hay cloth = (linen + woolcloth)* cloth price beef= (cows* 0.70 * 350) * beefprice butter= cows* 0.75 * butterprice mutton= sheep* 0.35 * 36.75* muttonprice pork = swine* 0.97 * 146 * pork price grain = [0.9 * (fall wheat+ springwheat) * (wheatprice)] + [0.9 * oats* oats price] + [0.9 * (barley+ rye + buckwheat+ corn) * other grain price] - [(14 ß horses- 7 * foals- 0.5 * sheep)* oatsprice] potato= 0.87 * potatoes* wheatprice hay= (hay- 1.1 * horses- 0.55 * foals- 1.1 * cows- 0.14 * sheep- 1.1 * other cattle- 1.1 * oxen) * hay price
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
TABLE
265
D1
The RelationshipbetweenAge,Wealth,and Occupationunder AlternateSpecifications, 1850-2 and 1871 group
obs
1. all
650
2. 1851
dum71
occ
1.96'
1.15
(1.7)
(1.0)
410
age .154'
(8.2)
0.68
240 579
2.28
271
-.026
(-1.4) -.018
(-0.7)
.180'
-.044
(6.5)
2.55*
.159'
(1.75) 5. other
-.024
(1.5)
(7.6)
(1.2) 4. farm
ageoc
.165'
(0.5) 5. 1871
age71
(9.5)
1.50
.165'
(0.78)
(6.5)
(-1.4) -.055
agesq -.0007*
(-2.4) -.00(1•
(-2.6) -.0010'
(-2.5) -.0009*
(-1.4)
(-5.6)
-.016
-.00(]•
(-0.5)
(-2.1)
Note: T-statistics are in parentheses; asterisks indicatedifferencefrom zero at the 10 per centconfidencelevel.
TABLE
D2
PredictedIncreasein the Wealth of a Fifty-Year-Old between1851 and 1871 under Alternate Specifications Farmers (%)
Equation1 Equations2 and 5 Equations4 and 5
116 o214 147
All others (%)
116 157 96
Note: Thesecalculationsusethe coefficientsreportedin table D1.
inesjointlythe 1851and 1871data,oncefor farmersanda secondtimefor non-farmers(equations4 and 5). A third approachpools all 650 observationsin a singleregressionequation1, which examineslog (wealth) as a
functionof a dummyvariablefor 1871 dum71,a dummyvariablefor a farmingoccupationocc,the decedent'sage,agetimesthe dummyvariable for year age71,agetimesthe dummyvariablefor occupationageoc and age squaredagesq. Because the regressions havea semi-logspecification, the coefficientson ageand age-sq indicatethe percentagechangein wealthassociatedwith each additionalyear of life. All three approaches(table D1) indicatethat NovaScotians accumulated wealthastheygrewolder (a strong positivesignon age),althoughthe changeseventuallyslowdown and are reversed(negativesignon age-sq). Wealthfor a forty-year-old accumulated at roughly10 per centper year,with no significantdifferencebetweenfarmers
264
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
and non-farmersin eitheryear.75This rate of accumulationis greaterthan that implicit in census-based cross-sectional samplesof Americanfarmers, and lessthan that reportedfor urbanresidents. 76 There issomesuggestion in bothyearsthatfarmersbegantheir liveswith more wealthon average,but that non-farmershad a slightlyfasterrate of annual accumulation.Nevertheless,all occupationalcoefficientsare insignificantat a 10 per cent confidencelevelunder all specifications. Equations 1 to 3 have a positivesign on occand a negativesign on ageoc, while in equations4 and 5 dum71is a larger positivenumber and age71is a larger negativenumberfor farmers.Nevertheless, the only statistically significant
coefficientis dum71in equation4, which suggests that farmersin 1871 beganwith greaterwealththan the precedinggenerationin 1851.Interestingly,the samecannotbe saidfor non-farmers(dum71in equation5). We examine the wealth of malesonly, becauselegal sourcessuchas
probatedocuments shedlittlelighton women'scontroloverwealth?The sampleis too smallto considerthe influenceof different locationswithin the provinceor choiceof occupation withinthe non-farmsector.A preliminary examinationsuggeststhat the data from Halifax County and the easterncountieshavesomewhatdistinctiveage-wealthrelationships. If these countiesare droppedfrom the estimation,the patternof estimatedcoefficientschangeslittle except that age71becomeslarger and acquiressignificance.The occupationalcoefficientscontinueto be insignificant. KRISINWOODUniversity of Guelph and PHYLLIS WAGG Dalhousie University
75 From equation1, wealth-- a constantterm plus.154t-.0007t-squared, which impliesthat dw/dt is 9.8 per centat the ageof forty. 76 Atackand Bateman,'The EgalitarianIdeal' and To TheirOwnSoil;Galenson, 'EconomicOpportunity';Galensonand Pope,'Economicand Geographic'; Herscovici,'The Distributionof Wealth'; and Pope,'Householdson the American Frontier'
77 PhilipGirard, 'MarriedWomen'sProperty,ChanceryAbolitionand Insolvency LawReformin NovaScotia,1820-1867,'in PhilipGirardandJim Phillips,eds., Essays in theHistoryof C,anadianLaw,vol. 3: NovaScotia(Toronto:Universityof Toronto Press1990);Philip Girard and RebeccaVeinott, 'Married Women's PropertyLaw in NovaScotia,1850-1910,'paperpresentedto the Atlantic CanadaStudiesConference,May 1992
NOTES
ORAL
TRADITION
AND
AND
ORAL
COMMENTS
HISTORY:
REVIEWING
SOME
ISSUES
Compelling questionsare being raised - in the massmedia, in museum exhibits,and in both popularand academicwritings- abouthowhistorical depictionsof cross-cultural encountersare constructedand gain authority. One issuein thesedebatesconcernsthe statusof indigenousoral traditions, specificallyhow oral traditionscan contributeto documentingthe varieties of historicalunderstandingin areasof the world wherewritten documents are either relativelyrecentor evenabsent. In many ways,historiansand anthropologists are convergingin their approachesto historicalreconstruction,pointing to the need to unite anthropologicalattentionto culturalcategories,cosmologies, and symbols
with historians' disciplined controlof writtenrecords? A relatedquestion, though, concernswho getsto frame and to tell the story- whosevoicesare prominent in thesediscussions and whoseare marginalized.Increasingly, indigenouspeoples are demanding that their oral traditions be taken seriouslyas legitimateperspectives on history.The issue,for them, centres on who controlsthe imagesand the representationsof their livesportrayed to the larger world. While there is growingawarenessin Canadaabout the need to re-evaluatethe history of Native-whiterelations, it is clear that Aboriginal peoples'viewsof their own historyrarely appear in academic literature.
This debate is as much about epistemologyas about authorship.Indigenouspeoplewho growup immersedin oral traditionfrequentlysuggest that their narrativesare better understoodby absorbingthe successive personalmessages revealedto listenersin repeatedtellingsthanby tryingto analyseand publiclyexplaintheir meanings.This contrasts with a scholarly approachwhichencourages closescrutinyof textsandwhichcontendsthat,
I Studiespointingout the need to investigate symbolicand metaphoricalelements in bothwrittendocumentsand oral accountsinclude,for example,RenatoRosaldo, IlongotHeadhunting5 1883-1974(Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress1980); RichardPrice,FirstTime:TheHistorical Visionofan Afro-American People (Baltimore: JohnsHopkinsUniversity1983);Anne Salmond,TwoWorlds: FirstMeetings between MaoriandEuropeans, 1642-1772(Aukland:Viking1991);GananathObeyesekere, TheApotheosis of CaptainCook: European Mythmaking in thePadtic(Princeton: PrincetonUniversityPress1992);AnthonyPagden,European Encounters withthe New World:FromRenaissance to Romanticism (New Haven and London: Yale UniversityPress1993). Canadian Historical Review,LXXV, 3, 1994
0008-3755/94/0900-0403 $01.25/0 ¸ Universityof TorontoPressIncorporated
404
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
by openlyaddressingconflictinginterpretations, we may illuminatesubtle meaningsand enrich our understanding? The challenge,then, is to acknowledgethisdilemmawithoutdismissing it asinsoluble,to respectboth the legitimateclaimsof FirstNationsto tell their own storiesand the moral and scholarly obligationto writeculturallygroundedhistoriesthatcanhelp us learn from the past. This short article attemptsto do three things.First, it summarizeshow anthropologists and folkloristshaveshiftedtheir evaluationsaboutthe kinds of historicalevidenceembeddedin oral tradition.Second,it providessome cross-cultural perspectiveabout how contemporarypeoplesare currently usingoral traditions to speak publicly about their past. Finally, it asks whethersuchan overviewprovidesany ethnographicinstruction.What, if any, guidelinesemergefor historiansre-examiningthe historyof colonial encounters
in Canada?
HistoricalApproaches toAnalysisof Oral Tradition
The terms'oral tradition'and 'oral history'remainambiguousbecausetheir definitionsshift in popular usage.Sometimesthe term oral traditionidentifiesa bodyof material retainedfrom the past.Other timeswe useit to talk abouta process by which informationis transmittedfrom one generationto the next. Oral historyis a more specializedterm usuallyreferring to a researchmethod wherea soundrecordingis madeof an interviewaboutfirsthandexperienceoccurringduring the lifetimeof an eyewitness. s Becauseeveryculture has passedessentialideasfrom one generationto anotherbyword of mouth, the seriousstudyof oral traditionspansmore
thana century. 4A brief reviewof thisliteraturesuggests that eventhough the questions are old, theykeep resurfacingand the samekindsof answers keepbeingreinventedasthoughtheyare somehoworiginal.
2 A thoughtfuldiscussion of thispoint ismadewithreferenceto Yup'iknarrative in Alaskain a workingpaperby PhyllisMorrow,'On ShakyGround:Folklore, Collaboration, andProblematic Outcomes,' Departmentof Anthropology, Universityof Alaska,Fairbanks.
3 For a discussion of the differingdefinitionsof oral traditionand oral historysee Jan Vansina,Oral TraditionasHistory(Madison:Universityof WisconsinPress 1985), 12-13;TrevorLummis,'Oral History,'in RichardBauman,ed., Folklore, CulturalPerformances andPopularEntertainments (New York and Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress1992),92-7. 4 A concisehistoricaloverview of theoretical approaches combiningperspectives from Britishsocialanthropologyand North Americanfolklorestudiescan be found in Ruth Finnegan,Oral Traditions and theVerbalArts:A GuidetoResearch Practices (London and New York:Routledge1992), 25-52.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
405
In the nineteenthcentury,for example,Europeanfolkloristssaworally narratedaccountsasdisembodied'things'to be collected,muchasmuseum collectorsviewedobjectsof material culture. Folkloriststreated oral narrativesasculturalartifactsthathad survivedfrom earlierperiods- asa kind of freeze-driedhistory- and hopedthat thesetraditionsmight providea keyto the past.Embeddedin an ideologyof socialevolution,thisperspectivehad seriousflaws.At best,E.B. Tylor and SirJamesFrazerrecognizedthe intellectualcharacterof oral narrative,albeit treatingit askind of proto-science or proto-religion.At worst,their approachesembodieda crypto-racist analysisof so-calledprimitivethought. Ironically,both 'intellectualist'and 'spiritualist'formulationsare resurfacing in contemporarydebateswherethe statebecomesinvolvedin evaluating oral tradition. One variation on the first emerged in the 1991 British ColumbiaSupremeCourt decisionthat evaluatedoral traditionsin termsof howwell theyansweredquestionsposedby the courtsin termsaccessible to the courtsandjudged them inadequateby thosecriteria?The secondformula more often emergeswhenbroadlybasedinterestgroups,claimingthe best and mostpoliticallycorrectintentions,appropriateindigenoustraditions,claimingto find in them evidenceof innatespiritualityor a 'natural' understanding of ecology? In both prescriptions, indigenoustraditionsare expectedto provideanswersto problemscreated bymodern statesin terms convenient for modern states. If many nineteenth-centuryanalysesignored the social character of narrative,a subsequent generationof scholarsshowedmuch more concern for the socialcontext in which oral tradition occurs.However, they were more interestedin what oral narrativesaidabout the present than in what it saidaboutthe past.Emile Durkheim,writingin 1915, sawnarrativeas the
glue that (withritual) helpedto bind communities together. 7 Bronislaw Malinowski,immersedin Trobriandsocietya decadelater, pointed out that one can only speculateaboutwhat oral traditionactuallymeansto parti-
5 Allen McEachern,Reasons forJudgment: Delgamuukv v. B.C. (Smithers:Supreme Court of BritishColumbia1991), 4. For a discussion of thisjudgment see Anthropology andHistory in theCourts, ed. BruceG. Miller, themeissue,BCStudies 95 (autumn 1992).
6 For a discussion of how theseimages,onceestablished, mayultimatelybe used againstindigenous peopleseeAnn FienupRiordan,'OriginalEcologists? The RelationshipbetweenYup'ikEskimosand Animals,'in Ann FienupRiordan, ed., Eskimo Essays (NewBrunswick and London:RutgersUniversityPress1990), 167-91.
7 EmileDurkheim, TheE!ementary FormsofReligrious Life,translatedJ.W.Swain (New York: Free Press1915)
406
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
cipants,andthat the morelegitimatequestionwasto observehowit is used. 8 To legitimatesocialinstitutions, he argued,peopleneeda charter.The rules that govern everydaylife are alwaysin doubt. Daily life is fraught with inconsistencies, differencesof opinion, and conflictingclaims.Oral tradition providesone wayto resolvethoseclaims.Peoplereflecton their oral traditionsto makesenseof the socialorder'that currentlyexists. In the mid-twentiethcentury,structuralists offereda more complicated perspective. Scholarsinfluencedby ClaudeLevi-Strauss proposedthat oral narrativesare not about eitherpast or present, that they are essentially statements aboutthe humanmind. Far from beingstraightforward explanations,thisargumentcontinues,oral traditionsshowthe capacityof humans to think symbolically aboutcomplexproblems.Reallife isfull of contradictions,and mythgivesuswaysto copein a worldriddledwith suchcontradictions.Any interpretationof myth that dealswith superficialor obvious meaningsis misguided,becauserealitylies at a deeperlevelof understanding. Rather than actingasclear-cutreflectionsof society,oral narrativesmay invert actualsocialbehaviour,becausethe purposeof suchnarrativesis to resolvesymbolically thoseissuesthat cannotnecessarily be workedout in the sphereof humanactivity. 9 Anotherrelevantframeworkfor analysis linksoral traditionwith political movements,broadeningcomparisonfrom small-scale societiesto include modern states.Throughout the eighteenthand nineteenthcenturies,folkloristsinspiredby von Herder collectedand publishedtextsthat enabled literate classes to identifyrootsin the pastand to regardlanguagesas the personalpropertyof specificgroups.Reificationof oral traditionillustrates two basicprinciplesby which local knowledgecan be appropriatedand integratedinto the political sphere.On the one hand, interestin oral tradition has emerged from nationalistichopes that a lost or vanishing culturalheritagecanbe reconstitutedin order to unifya population.On the other, this interest can be appropriatedas a tool of the state to foster administrative governance and to extendpoliticalcontrol? øIn nineteenthcenturyGermany,for example,a kind of romanticnationalismbeganasa revolutionaryforceaimedat forgingunity amongdisparatestates.Apparent relicsof ancient traditionwere identified and positedas a common,lost,
8 BronislawMalinowski,Argonautsof theWestern Padtic (London: Routledge 1922); Mythin PrimitivePsychology (New York:Norton 1926)
9 SeeClaudeLevi-Strauss, StructuralAnthropology (GardenCity:Anchor1967), especially203-4. 10 Uli Linke, 'Anthropology,Folklore and the Governmentof Modern Life,'
Comparative Studies in Sodety andHistory 32 (1990):117-48;SueTuohy,'Cultural Metaphorsand Reasoning: FolkloreScholarship and Ideologyin Contemporary China,' AsianFolkloreStudies50 (1991): 189-220
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
407
poeticrepositoryof heritage.Once an administrativenetworklinking these stateswasin place,however,the goalsof folkloreresearchshiftedto emphasize the importanceof incorporatinglocal knowledgefor purposesof governance.Gradually, attention to oral tradition was converted into a technique for population managementand political control, enacted throughthe Prussianstateand culminatingin the riseof Germanfascism. TM In China, folklorestudieshavealsoexperienceda shiftingrelationship with stateideology.Folkloreemergedasa field of studyat NationalBeijing Universityin 1918. Introducedduring a period of political instabilityand change,it becamean ideologicaltoolfor legitimizingpopularrebellionand
destroying the imperialstate?Romanticand pragmatictrendscompeted, though, with romantic idealistsselectivelyretrieving traditionsthought worthyof emulationand politicalpragmatists investigating traditionsthey wantedto eliminate.1"Ultimately,both forms of politicaldiscoursewere suppressedby the state: the more romantic folkloristswere seen as encouraging'irrational beliefsof the past';pragmaticfolkloristswere seenas emphasizinglocal differencesin Chinese culture. Both were viewed as a threatto nationalunity.Ironically,publicperformances of ethnicmusicand materialcultureare onceagainreceivingofficialencouragement, thistime asa wayof demonstrating the state'sabilityto harnessdiversityin the name of unifyingnationalistsentiment? This very brief overview,then, suggeststhat oral narrative has been analysedboth asevidenceaboutthe pastand asevidenceaboutthe social constructionof the present. Examplesfrom recent historysuggestlinks
betweenoral traditionand nation-building, and underscorethe slippery divide between goals of cultural autonomyand those of bureaucratic pragmatism. The cumulative strengthof theseperspectives is the evolving recognitionthatoraltraditionanchorsthe presentin the past.Thisremains especially importantin indigenous societies wheregenealogical knowledge playsa significantrole in explicatingrulesgoverningsocialorganization.
11 Linke, 'Anthropology,'119-35;seealsoMaryBethStein,'Comingto Terms with the Past:The Depictionof Volkskundein the Third Reichsince1945,' JournalofFolkloreResearch 24, 2 (May-Aug.1987):157-85;JamesDowand HannjostLuxfield,'NationalSocialistFolkloreand Overcomingthe Pastin the FederalRepublicof Germany,'AsianFolklore Studies 50 (1991): 117-53. Similar processes havebeen documentedin Finland,where the Kalevalatradition arousedand intensifiednationalistsentiments from the mid-nineteenthcentury until the end of the Second World War; see William Wilson, Folkloreand,Nation-
alismin ModernFinland(Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress1976). 12 Hung Chang-tai,GoingtothePeople: Chinese Intellectuals and,FolkLiterature, 1918-1937(Cambridge:HarvardAsianStudiesSeries1985), 10-12 13 Linke, 'Anthropology,'139-42 14 Tuohy, 'Metaphors,'189-220
408
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
Contemporary Approaches toAnalysis of Oral Tradition Recent studiesare more likely to evaluateoral tradition on its own terms than as an illustrationof some other process.They focus both on the formation of narrativesand on the positioningof thosenarrativeforms within hierarchiesof other narratives.To take orally narrated accounts seriouslyis not to suggestthat theyspeakfor themselves in anysimpleway or that their meaningsare self-evident.One of the more incisiveobservationsof contemporaryanthropologyis that meaningis not fixed - that it mustbe studiedin practice. Broadlyspeaking,oral tradition (like historyor anthropology)can be viewedasa coherent,open-endedsystemfor constructingand transmitting knowledge.Ideas about what constituteslegitimate evidencemay differ in oral traditionand scholarlyinvestigation, and the explanations are certainly frameddifferently.They cannotbe comparedeasily,nor cantheir accuracy or truth value necessarilybe evaluatedin positivisticterms. From this perspective, scholarlypaperscan be understoodas anotherform of narra-
tivestructuredby the languageof academicdiscourse? Orally narrated accountsabout the past explicitlyembracesubjective experience.Once considereda limitation,this is now beingrecognizedas one of oral history'sprimarystrengths:factsenmeshedin the storiesof a lifetime providea number of insightsabout how an understandingof the pastisconstructed, processed, andintegratedintoone'slife? Anthropologistsand historianswho incorporatethissubjectivity in their analyses tend to head in two different directions.One approach focuseson what such testimonies revealaboutsocialhistory- the complexitiesof dailylife and the contradictions inherentin relationsof power.Another approachpaysmore attentionto the formationof narrativesand to waysin whichsuchnarrative forms influence and anchor memory. This discussioncan be groundedby tying it to observations from four different cultural contexts - observationsmade by an anthropologist
workingin the Philippines,a historianworkingin New Zealand,an ethnohistorian in eastern Africa, and an alliance of Native communities in
northwesternBritishColumbiamaking their own public representationof oral tradition
in a court of law. These cases are useful to consider because of
the differingperspectives of their authorsand becausetheyindependently raisequestionsaboutattachmentof memoryto placeand to family,aswell
15 See,for example,William Cronon, 'A Placefor Stories:Nature, History,and
Narrative,'JournalofAmerican History 78, 4 (March1992):1347-76. 16 For a discussion seeSelmaLeydesdorff,'A ShatteredSilence:The Life Stories of Survivorsof theJewishProletariatof Amsterdam,'in LuisaPasserini,ed., Memoryand Totalitarianism (Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress1992), 145-63.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
409
asaboutconsequences of reificationwhenoral traditionsare comparedwith written
documents,
When Renato Rosaldobegan his work with the Ilongot people in the
Philippines duringthe 1970s,hisobjective wasto reconstruct their history from the mid-1800sto the presentusingoral sources.One majorcontribution of hiswork hasbeen to demonstratethat our expectationsand definitionsof what oral historyismayactuallyhamperour abilityto hear what is being said.He explains,for example,that when he askedabout the Japaneseinvasionduring the SecondWorld War, he expectedto hear varieties of personalnarrative.Instead,peoplerespondedwith long listsof place namesand, as theyspoke,theywept.Transcribingthesenamesin what he calls 'uncomprehendingdiscomfort,'he had no idea why named places could generatesuchemotion;only later did he come to understandhow thesenamesanchoredimportantpersonalmessages to place. It is a mistaketo equatespokentestimonieswith written documents,he says.Assoonaswe do so,we inevitablybeginto conceiveof oral traditionas 'undistortednarrativetransmittedthrough a conduit' and to evaluatewhat
we hear in positivistic ways?This leadsto the sameerror madeby early folklorists- a searchfor so-calledoriginal, authentic,or accurateaccounts.
In so doing,we can entirelymissthe point of what oral traditionactually does,how it is used.
Oral testimonies,he says,are meantto be heard in the particularcontext in which they are told. They are not documentsto be stored for later retrieval.They are culturalformsthat organizeperception,not 'containers of brute facts,'becauseall factsare culturallymediated.In his own work with Ilongot people, he came to see that oral tradition is mapped on landscape muchasWesterners mightusea calendar.Eventsare anchoredto placeandpeopleuselocationsin spaceto speakabouteventsovertime. Rosaldo'sethnographicadviceis straightforward: studythe text. Don't look throughor aroundor behindit. What peoplesayisintimatelyinvolved with how they sayit. To plunder other peoples'narrativesfor 'facts'risks seriously misunderstanding theirmeanings?Oral traditionscan'tbe stored with the idea that their meaningscan be determinedretrospectively; their meaningsemergefrom how theyare usedin practice.
In New Zealand,wherea vocaland articulateMaori populationconstitutes one-quarterof the country'sinhabitants,historianJudith Binneysetout to comparethe characteristics of MaorioralhistoriesandPakehawrittentexts.
17 RenatoRosaldo,'Doing Oral History,'SocialAnalysis 4 (1980): 89-99 18 Ibid., 92
410
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
If Rosaldo focuses on the differences between written and oral narratives,
Binneypointsout that they sharecertaincharacteristics. All are structured, interpretive, combative,and subjectiveas well as objective.'History,' she says,'is the shapingof the pastby thosewho live in the present.All histories derivefrom a particulartime, a particularplace and a particularcultural
heritage.'•9 Frequently,historians raisequestions aboutthe reliabilityof oral histories,suggestingthat becausethey may change over time, they pose problemsfor assessment of factualcontent.Binneyinvertsthis formula:a goodWesternEurohistory,shesays,hasa lifespanof about ten or fifteen yearsbeforeit getsreinterpreted;in contrast,the life of an oral historyis considerably longer.While the details,participants,and symbolsin an oral accountmay change,its purpose,like that of written history,is to allow peopleto interpretthe pastand presentin newways. Maori oral historiesand Pakehawritten textsare passedon in different waysand theyhavedifferentpurposes.Maori historyis conveyedby narrafive,song,and proverbto listeners.Its concernsare with familyand genealogy. Its purposeis to establishmeaningfor eventsand to validatefamily claimsto power and knowledge.Pakehahistoryis conveyedin writing to readers.It isinscribedasa politicalnarrativewhosepurposeisto eraseother interpretations.Its notionsof causalityand consequence are everybit as cultural as Maori concems;they are just different. The challengefor the Westernhistorianis to understandthat Maori oral historyprovidesmore than alternativesourcesor even alternativeperspectives.It has its own purposes, and the primaryresponsibility of the historianisto ascertainthose purposesand to be responsibleto them. She concludesthat the contradictionsin whatconstitutes history- oral andwritten- cannotbe resolved.The narrativescan bejuxtaposed,shesays,but not necessarily reconciledinto a seamless whole. 2ø
Workingin easternAfrica,David Cohen addresses problemscreatedby a reified definitionof oral tradition.Like Binney,he is workingin a region where there is a significantbodyof recordedoral history,but like Rosaldo he movesawayfrom thinking of oral historyas a product and towards viewingit aspart of socialprocess. Sincethe beginningsof decoIonization in the 1920s,he pointsout, there has been an energeticproductionof written oral historiesin Busoga, Uganda.The processof actuallyrecordingthosehistoriestook placeat a critical point in time, coincidingwith a period of shifting power and
19 Judith Binney,'Maori Oral Narratives,PakehaWritten Texts:Two Formsof TellingHistory,'NewZealand JournalofHistory 21, I (1987): 16-28 20 Ibid., 27-8
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
411
political ferment during which colonialpowerswere leavingUganda and certainclanswere anxiousto elevatetheir own positionvis-•-visother clans. Clans with the resourcesto record their own genealogiesand related historiesdid so,and the opportunitiesgeneratedfor youngpeople to work with elders created an enormousinterest in the issueof clan history. Eventually,thosetestimoniesthat were written down came to be accorded considerable statusand graduallyassumedthe characterof officialhistory. Inevitably,theseaccounts marginalized otherlesspowerfulclans? 1 More interestingthan theseofficialhistories,he says,are the reactionsof the people whosehistorieswere overlookedin the process.They never acceptedthat the recordedaccountsrepresentedtheirinterests,nor did the written versionsassumeany particular authority in their eyes. For less powerful clans,oral tradition remainsviable,active,debated,discussed, and revisedin dailyactivities, gesture,and speech,'not simplygivenor handed downbut ... continuously and activelygatheredand dissected.'2•We mustbe careful not to reify oral tradition,Cohen says,becauseto do so inevitably privilegesparticularclasses or clanswhosetraditionsmostcloselyapproximate our own definitions.The more examplesof oral tradition one encounters, the harder it is to formulate a useful definition.
If we look at howoral traditionisusedin practice,we cometo seethat for the majorityof peopleit is not a setof formaltexts:it isa living,vitalpart of life. 'Knowledgeof the pastis not the deadand dyingsurvivals of a pastoral culture handeddownthroughnarrowconduitsfrom generationto generation,'•-•but is relatedto the criticalintelligenceand activedeployment of knowledge.Furthermore,it is inclusiverather than exclusive. Peoplewill alwaysacknowledgethat someeldersknow or remember more than others, just as they will acknowledgethat written versionsof oral accountsare valuable.
But neither
authoritative
elders nor written
texts close off the
discussion and circulationof historicalknowledgein the communities.
The precedingobservations aboutthe importanceof place,of family,and aboutthe contestednatureof oral traditionconvergein a fourth example from northwesternCanada.This casediffersfrom the others,though,by highlightingthe problemsfacingFirstNationscommunitieswhen theyengage in formal, public self-representation in the courts.It also indicates someof the problemsthat emergewhen the stateattemptsto codifyoral tradition.
21 DavidWilliamCohen,'The Undefiningof Oral Tradition,'Ethnohistory 36, 1 (winter 1989): 9-18; Vansina, Oral Tradition,107-8
22 Cohen, 'The Undefiningof Oral Tradition,' 9-18 23 Ibid., 12
412 THE CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
In the late 1980sthe hereditarychiefsof the Gitksanand Wet'suwet'en decided to presenttheir casefor a settlementof land claimsbefore the BritishColumbiaSupremeCourt.They took the enormousriskof tryingto statetheir relationshipto land on their own terms,from their ownperspective, usinglongstandingoral traditionsas a medium for presentingtheir argumentto the court.They publiclyenactednarratives,songs,and dances thathaveusuallybeenperformedonlywithina communitycontext,presenting them as complexsymbolicstatementsaboutlinkagesbetweenpeople and place.Acknowledging that theyweremakingtheir argumentsin a court of lawthat hasinstitutionalized proceduresfor resolvingconflicts,the thrust of their legal argumentwas framed to match that court's requirements. Their assertions were,first, that they,the Gitksanand Wet'suwet'en,lived in organizedsocietiesin this region before contactwith Europeans;second, that they continue to live in organizedsocieties,with specificreference to HouseandClan;and,third, that thelinkagebetweenpastandpresentsocial organizationcan be demonstratedthrough oral traditions.They further contended that oral tradition was a Declaration of Title to the land, and
wenton to specifyhowtheir oral traditionsdemonstrate that title?4 They framed their casewith referenceto two particularkinds of oral tradition - the Gitksan adaawk (sacred reminiscences about ancestors,
histories, and territories central to the social organization of Gitksan Houses)and the Wet'suwet'enkungax(songsabouttrailsbetweenterritories central to Wet'suwet'en Houses). Their Statement of Claim assertsthat the
expressions ofownership of land comethroughthe adaawk,kungax,songs,and ceremonialregalia; that the confirmation of ownership comesthrough the totem poleserectedto give thoseexpressions a materialbase;and that the assertion of ownership of specific territories is made to the court through specificclaims.In otherwords,theyargued,there existsa complexrelationshiplinking history,the performanceof adaawkand kungax,and the land. They also tried to impress on the court their understandingof the symbolicimportanceof oral tradition. Minimally,they said,oral traditions provideevidencefor scholars like archaeologists, anthropologists, linguists, and historians who are studyingthe past.But, theycontinued,oral traditions are far morethanliteralhistory,and the casebeforethe SupremeCourtdid notdependon the literal accuracyof thesehistoriesto establishconnections betweensocialorganizationand land tenure? For a varietyof reasonsdiscussed elsewhere, " ChiefJusticeMcEachern rejected their assertionsabout the conceptsembodied in oral tradition.
24 McEachern, Reasons,45 25
Ibid.
26 See BC Studies95 (autumn 1992).
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
413
Despite the appellants'admonition not to evaluatethe oral traditions againsta positivistic definitionof 'truth,' thejudge rejectedtheir valueas
evidence for precisely thisreason?His Reasons forJudgment, publishedand distributedin a boundvolume,providea powerfulexampleof the unequal weightaccordedto differentnarratives.The inescapablelessonseemsto be that removingoral traditionfrom a contextwhereit hasself-evident power, andperformingit in a contextwhereit isopenedto evaluationbythe state, posesenormousproblemsfor seriousunderstanding of its historicalvalue. What links examplesfrom four suchdifferent parts of the world is the similarquestionstheyraise:How do the narrativeformsenablingmembers to process, remember,andtransmitknowledge aboutthe pastvaryfrom one societyto another?Do suchnarrativesrefer primarilyto the past,or are they framedwith referenceto pressingcontemporaryconcerns? What do they tell us about the socialprocesses surroundingthe transmissionof oral narrativesin societies whereessential knowledgeis passedon verbally? Minimally,the casesdiscussed abovecontestour definitionsof placeand of event.Oral tradition anchorshistoryto place,but it alsochallengesour notion of what place actuallyis. We frequentlyview place simply as a location- a settingor stagewhere peopledo things.Indigenoustraditions makeplacecentralto an understanding of the part, and map eventsalong the mountains,trails,and riversconnectingterritories? Oral traditionalso complicates our definitionsof whatconstitutes an event. We usuallythink of an event as a discrete,apparentlybounded incident, and view storiesas illustrations that maysupplementour understanding of suchevents.But our definitionsreflect our own stories,and eventsdefined by a historian may appearepiphenomenalin indigenousaccountsthat invokea verydifferent kind or sequence of causality? g
27 SeeMcEachern, Judgment, 75.JudgeMcEachernnoted:'I am unableto accept adaawk,kungaxand oral traditionsas reliablebasesfor derailedhistorybut theycould confirmfindingsbasedon other admissibleevidence.' 28 MargaretRodman,'EmpoweringPlace:Multilocalityand Multivocality,'AmericanAnthropologist 94, 3 (Sept.1992):640-56. SeealsoFrancesHarwood,'Myth, Memoryand Oral Tradition:Ciceroin the Trobriands,'American Anthropologist 78, 4 (Dec. 1976):783-96;JulieCruikshank,'Gettingthe WordsRight:Perspectiveson Namingand Placesin Athapaskan Oral History,'ArcticAnthropology 27, 1 (1990): 52-65.
29 Fogelson,'Events.'For example,the Klondikegold rushcan be tracedto an actual 'discovery'on a specificdate by named individualsand that event is recordedin manybooks.Indigenousaccountsabout the discoveryof gold define the 'event' quite differently.SeeJulie Cruikshank,'Imagesof Societyin KlondikeGold RushNarratives:SkookumJim and the Discoveryof Gold,' Ethnohistory 39, 1 (winter 1992): 20-41.
414
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
The examplesalso addressthe broad issueof how indigenousoral traditionsbecomeincorporatedinto socialprocesses, particularlywhenthey are usedto debatecontestedissues. Oral traditionscannotbe treatedsimply as evidenceto be siftedfor 'facts';they are told from the perspectives of peoplewhoseviewsinevitablydiffer dependingon context,socialposition, and level of involvement. s Too often, the notion of communityhistory presumesa homogeneity of opinionand interestthat doesnot existnow and cannotbe assumedto haveexistedin other timesand places.But even when the detailsof individualand family accountsvary,theyall point to the importance of land and family as anchor points for memory.This has particular significancegiven the sustainedpressuresindustrialcapitalism and bureaucraticadministrationplace both on land and on longstanding institutionsassociatedwith kinship. Genealogyand place become focal pointsby which memorycan resistfacelessbureaucracy. Finally,theseexamplessuggestthat reified definitionsof oral tradition have methodologicalconsequences. Treating orally recorded accountsas though they are equivalentto written documentsthat can be stored now and analysedlater is problematic,if widelypractised.Retrospective useof suchdocumentsposesdifficultiesbecausean understandingof the contexts in which they were performed, the occasionsthey embellish,and the contentiousissuestheyaddressare likelyto be erased.Inevitably,we should be cautiousabout attemptsto codifyoral tradition - to articulatewithin a Westernframeworkconceptsembeddedin indigenousframesof meaning. Ethnographic Instruction: Where DoesIt LeadUs?
Examplesdrawnfrom the Philippines,New Zealand,Uganda,and British Columbiasuggestthat one of the more direct contributionsoral tradition can make to academicdiscourseis to complicateour questions.Historians and anthropologists immersedin the project of re-examiningthe pastask what actuallyhappened,how to incorporatethe perspectives of various participants,and how to evaluatedifferent kinds of evidence,but these questionsare usuallyframed usingWesternconceptsand categories.The questionsraisedby indigenouspeople are more likely to askwhosestory makeslegitimatehistory.Who identifiesthe 'events'threadedtogetherin historicalwriting?How is the meaning of 'place' constituted?What problemsemergeonce attemptsare made to codifyoral traditionsas historical ' sources' 731
30 Obeyesekere,TheApotheosis of CaptainCook,139 31 For example,at a workshopon the Historyof AboriginalHistoryin CanadasponsoredbyParksCanadain Ottawa,21-22January1993,Aboriginalpeoplespent twodaysessentially reformulatingthe questions posedat the outsetbyhistorians.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
415
Questionsabout historicalreconstructionof indigenoushistory are embeddedin largerdebatesaboutthe privilegingof theoryand the issueof voice.One positionholdsthatthe investigation of autonomous, small-scale societiesis irrelevantif not misguidedbecauseit ignoresthe world systemin whichall economiesare embedded.The tentaclesof mercantilecapitalism, industrialcapitalism,and statesocialism havepenetratedthe marginsof the world so deeplyand for sucha long time that it is futile to speakof indigenouspeoplesas thoughtheyhave,or evenhad, self-regulating autonomoussocialsystems? A contrasting culturalconstructionist positionsuggests that culture is alwaysin the processof being refashionedin responseto externalconditions.Culture,in thisview,isnot an empiricalbundleof traits passed intactfrom onegenerationto another;rather,it is creatively reconstructedbyeachgenerationto dealwith real socialand politicalproblemsin the present.Furthermore,thisis a normalhumanprocess and hasprobably always beenthe case? RichardLee, an anthropologist whoseworkhasbeencentrallyembedded in this controversyfor more than two decades,points out that although thesetwo paradigmsare usuallypresentedas competing,when taken to their logicalconclusions they havethe sharedeffectof marginalizingthe historiesof small-scale societies? 4 One doessoby denyingthe existenceof autonomoussmall-scale societies; the other, by implyingthat their histories are somehow'invented.'They alsosharea tendencyto presume an understandingof historicalprocessand to project contemporarytheoretical formulationsbackwardin time withoutnecessarily demonstratingan understandingof the historian'scraft.AsLee pointsout, sucherasureof memory affects us all. If we dismiss or overlook the historical contributions
of small-
scalesocieties, we risk losingevidenceof human diversityand of alternative solutionsto complexhumanproblems.
32 For a classicdefinitionof this thesisseeEric R. Wolf, Eurepeand thePeople withoutHistory(Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress1982). This is precisely the argumentthatwaspresentedbyadvocates of the MackenzieValleyPipeline Inquiryand theJamesBayHydroelectricProjectin northernCanada.For a critiqueseePeterUsher,'NorthernDevelopment,ImpactAssessment and SocialChance,'in Noel DyckandJamesB. Waldram, eds.,Anthropology, Public PolicyandNativePeoples in Canada(Montrealand Kingston:McGill-Queen's UniversityPress1993), 98-130. 33 A concisesummaryof the issues raisedby thispositionis madebyJocelyn Linnekin, 'On the Theoryand Politicsof Cultural Constructionin the Pacific,' Oceania 5, 62 (1992): 250-1. Shepointsout that the literatureis controversial becausethe term 'invention'impliescreativityin somecontextsand deception in others.
34 RichardLee, 'Art, Scienceor Politics,'American Anthropologist 94, 1 (March 1992): 31-54
416
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
One of thewidespread and systematic forcesoperatingin theworldtoday, especially visiblein totalitarianregimesbut equallyimplicatedin the history of indigenouspeoples,is pressuretowardseradicationof memory.For insightinto thispressure,we can turn to a growingbodyof evidencefrom societiesorganizedas states?LouisaPasseriniand her colleagueshave interviewedsurvivorsof totalitarianpolitical systemsto determine how people speakingin the 1980sand 1990srecall their experiencesfrom periodswhen truth wasdefinedby the state:during one decadein Nazi Germany;during twodecadesin Franco'sSpain;and duringsevendecades of Marxist-Leninistorthodoxyin the former SovietUnion. Recognizingthat memorycannotbe reducedto oral historybecauseit involvesfar more than orality and individuals,these researchersattempt to situate subjective accountsof terror and losswithin the context of contemporarystudiesof memory.While their work focuseson totalitarianregimes,theyare careful not to drawtoo fine a distinctionbetweenthosesystems and liberal democ-
racies,and their questions certainlybeardirectlyon the assaulton memory in colonialcontexts.How, theyask,are memoriestranslatedacrossgenerations during periods of political repression?Is transmissionof memory effecteddifferentlyby men and by women?How is memoryreconstructed when the politicalfiltersshift,as they did in Germanybetweenthe 1940s and 1950sand as they haverecentlyin Russia? To what extent,they ask,is individualmemoryconnectedwith collectivememory? The questionsraisedby Passeriniand her colleagues becomeevenmore difficultto answerwhen the filtersare culturalaswell aspolitical.They are difficultwhen the accountssoundsimilarto thosewe might expectto hear,
and theyare difficultwhentheysoundunfamiliar. All societies havecharacteristicnarrativestructuresthat help membersconstruct,remember,and process knowledge.We tend to try to makeunfamiliarstoriescomprehen-
siblebyinterpreting themwithreference to ourownnarrative structures; •6 however,wheneverindigenousnarrativesseem simple to interpret, we shouldsuspectthat we probablydo not understandthem. For instance,a worldsystems approachmightinterpretindigenousoral traditionprimarily
35 SeeLouisaPasserini, Fasdsm andPopularMemory(Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress1987);and LouisaPasserini, ed., Memory andTotalitarianism (Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress1992). 36
A recent issue of the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee
newsletter devoted to
indigenousknowledgebeginswithan editorialurgingthat 'an effectivesystem ... be developedto collect andclassij• nativeknowledge,particularlywithrespectto northernresources, environmentand culture.'Northern Perspectives, 20, I (1992): 2 (myitalics).A newsletterpublishedbyUNESCOcalledTEKTALK(TEK standingfor 'traditionalecological knowledge')statesthatitspurposeis'to furthertherecognition andunderstanding of TEK,to promotetheapplication of TEK in the decision-making process, andto promotenetworkingamongthose interestedin TEK' ( TEK TALK 1, 1 (1992): 1).
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
417
as a set of lensesthroughwhich complexexternalrelationsare refracted. Yetworksinvestigatingindigenous. conceptsof colonialhistorydemonstrate howpeopleuseimagesof the pastto createpresentrealities;howtheydo so in the contextof a dialoguewith Euro-American ideologieslike Christianity; and howtheymayintegratesuchconceptsinto their ownnarrativesto make senseof and to explainthe contemporary predicamentin whichtheyfind
themselves, encapsulated as theyare within boundariesof largerstates? Formulationsworkedout in thisprocess,in turn, maybe passedon to subsequentgenerations asagreed-upon history.Yetone purposeof incorporating Westernconceptsmaybe to opposeand to defendagainst Westerninterpretationsof theirhistory? If we return to questionsof how narrative form shapesand anchors memory,and how individualspeakersuseparticularnarrativesin specific contextsfor precisepurposes,we are transportedback to the contested terrain betweentraditionalhistoricalnarrativeand postmodernconcerns with locationof voice.Whetherwe try to integrateorallywritten accounts with historicaldocumentsin someeven-handed kind of wayor whetherwe concludethat they are fundamentallydifferent kinds of narrativeand can merelybejuxtaposed,we are still facedwith the dilemmaof how historical weight is differentlyaccordedto different accounts,someof which become includedin officialhistory,othersrelegatedto memory. Neither oral accountsnor historicaldocumentstry to constructinclusive and authoritativenarratives,and thoseattemptsgroundedin culturalrelativism are not problem free. Oral historyinevitablyprivilegesone kind of causality andassumes thatan understanding of conventional archaeological, documentary,and ethnographicsourcesgivesus sufficientinformation to interpret the oral record.Yet as RichardDeMallie notes,if we ignore the significance of indigenousnarrativeformsand indigenousexplanations of causality,'the effect is a bit like combininglinesfrom two different plays with radicallydifferentplotsand definitionsof characters;the result,while aesthetically pleasing,failsto representeither of the originalsaccurately.
37 SeeTerenceTurner,'Ethno-Ethnohistory: MythandHistoryin NativeSouth AmericanRepresentations of Contactwith WesternSociety,'in JonathanD. Hill, ed.,Rethinking History andMyth:Indigenous South American Perspectives onthe Past(Urbana:Universityof IllinoisPress1988),235-81;RaymondFogelson, 'The Ethnohistoryof Eventsand Non-events,' Ethnohistory 36, 2 (spring1989): 133-47;GeoffreyWhite,Identitythrough History: LivingStories in a Solomon Islands Society (NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress1991).JonathanFriedman,'The Pastin the Future:Historyand the Politicsof Identity,'American Anthropologist 94, 4 (Dec. 1992): 837-59. 38 SeeSergeiKan, 'Shamanism and Christianity: Modern DayTlingit EldersLook at the Past,'Ethnohistory 38, 4 (fall 1991):363-87. 39 RaymondDeMallie, '"These Have No Ears":Narrativeand the Ethnohistorical Method,' Ethnohistory 40, 4 (fall 1993): 515-38
418 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
On the other hand, the dangersof hyper-relativism posedifferentproblems.Whilemanyhistorians nowunderstand histories to be interpretations that changeas circumstances change,this perspectivecompeteswith a notion of historyas 'just the facts.'Significantly,as Handler and his colleaguespointout,relativismisinvokedmorefrequentlyfor somehistories NativeAmericanhistory,for example- than for mainstreamhistory.Using museumsas their example,theypoint out that one emergingformulation portraysminorityhistoriesas 'stories'and mainstreamhistoriesas 'justthe facts.'When the oppositions are formulatedin thisway,relativismactually reinforcesthe legitimacyof mainstreamhistoryby makingit appearthe more real or more truthful
of the narratives. 4ø
This paper raises,without resolving,questionsof interestto Aboriginal peoples,historians,and anthropologists. The strongestaffirmation for continuingto think abouthow self-representation and analyticalnarrative cancoexistin historicalwritingcomesfrom indigenouspeoples'ownsense of historically rootedidentity.It maynot be possibleto produceseamless narrativesaboutcolonialencounters,but we canlearn how the veryact of constructing,remembering,and transmittingnarrativescontinuesto be a reassertionof autonomy. Like oral tradition, written narrativesabout the
pasthaveto be understoodas part of socialprocess.While the narratives emergingfrom oral traditionsmay not alwayssit easilysideby sidethose constructed from writtendocuments,the ongoingresistance of indigenous peoplesmay be enactedpreciselythrough their self-constructions. The challengefor historians and anthropologists is to demonstrate howall social constructions, includingour own,factorinto socialprocesses we are trying to understand, and howtheyconnectgenerations, times,and places. JULIECRUIKSHANK University ofBritishColumbia TO OUR READERS (AND LETTER WRITERS)
The number and tone of recent letters to the Canadian Historical Review have
led its editorsand EditorialAdvisoryBoardto reconsiderCHRpolicyon the handlingof letters.The Review believesthat fosteringa scholarlydebate
40 For a discussionof this issue see Eric Gable, Richard Handler, and Anna Law-
son,'On the Usesof Relativism: Fact,Conjectureand Blackand White Historiesat ColonialWilliamsburg,'American Ethnologist 19, 4 (Nov. 1992): 791-805.
My thanksto the SocialScienceandHumanitiesResearch Councilfor supporting researchthat raisesquestions framingthisarticle.I alsothankmy colleagueBruce G. Miller and threeanonymous reviewers for comments on an earlierversion.Any shortreviewessayrisksoversimplifying complexissues, and my purposehereis to sketchthe outlinesof a debatethat engagesboth historiansand anthropologists.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
419
betweenand amonginformedreadersis one of its mostimportantduties. Furthermore,it believesthat it shouldtry to do soin astimelyand focuseda manner aspossible. Beginningwith the September1994 number, the CHRwill return to its earlier practice.Lettersthat are criticalof materialthat appearedin our columnswill be referred to the authorof the criticizedmatter,alongwith an invitation to submit a brief rejoinder to be run with the criticism.This treatmentwill be givento all lettersrespondingto reviews,and might,at the discretion of the co-editors, be accorded letters that react to remarks in
articlesor in itemsthat appearedin the Notesand Commentssection. Authors of letters to the CHRare askedto keep their communications shortand to the point. The co-editorsreservethe right to require revisionsto lettersbefore
publishing them,aswellastorefuse topublish anyparti•cular letter. LETTERS
TO THE
EDITORS
I believethat one of the mostimportant featuresof book reviewingis to foster scholarlyinquiry and research.As a result, I feel compelled to respondto PhyllisAirhart'sblunt reviewof Secularizing theFaith( CHR,74, 4, 1993), which stiflesdebateabout the complexquestionof the relation betweenreligion and society. The critiquebeginsby claimingthat secularizationis made 'irrelevantas an analyticaltool' becauseit is utilized as something'inevitableand irresistible.'This equationof secularization with absolutedeclineis Airhart's, not mine. For example,I suggestthat the responseto Darwinand biblical criticismmayhavesavedmanyfrom doubt;but that for othersit left Christianityon a lessfirm foundation.As I write in the introduction:'Secularization cannot be viewed as a necessarilylinear, irreversible,or inevitable process.'(18) CriticssuchasAirhartindulgein a caricatureof secularization asa wayto dismissit. Shealsocharges thatthesecularization thesismasks thesubstantial 'public role of Christianity'in the growth of government.No doubt the social gospelwasinstrumentalin the riseof the state.But wasthisan exampleof Christianitybeingproclaimedor evidenceof the diffusionof Christianity? The churchesdid not maintainleadership; ultimatelytheybecameservants of the state.Shortlyafter the floweringof the socialgospel,the churches followedthe imperativesof the Canadianstateinto the GreatWar. A great train of soul-searching resultedasmany realizedthat the churcheshad lost much of their social, moral and spiritual leadership.The sobering observations of the clergyafter the war cannot simplybe ignored. But Airhart's
review does not consider
the historical
evidence.
Airhart takesparticularexceptionto the 'negativeandjudgmentaltone'
420 THE CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
of myobservation that the UnitedChurchwas'hesitantaboutgraspingany newinsightor understanding' andwas'a defeatedchurchuncertainabout its message,mission,or future.' Is this characterizationdifferent from Airhart's own concludingobservations about Methodismin the 1920s?In ServingthePresent Age,she suggests that Methodists'were left at times confusedabouttheir identityand ambivalentabouttheir relationshipto ... evangelicalProtestantism.'(134)
Methodistidentitywaswrappedup in socialservice.Airhartcautionsthat 'a churchcommittedto "servingthe presentage" riskedbeingcondemned to culturalirrelevancy if it wasunableto moveasquicklyasthe times.'(140) Here isprecisely whereAirhartandI partcompany.Thiscommitmentlooks suspiciously like basingChristianity on the 'shiftingsandsof expediency.' The spiritualraisond'•tre of the churchesmaybe sacrificedin the rushto servethe presentage. Are there no elementsof Christianitythat should remainimperviousto the changesin history? Whether one is advancingor rejectingthe secularizationthesis,definition of religionis necessary. Airhartfindsmy definitionof religion'narrowand surprisingly static.'Whysurprising? My insistence that religioninvolvebelief in the existenceof the supernaturaland possibilityof the miraculousis consistent with substantive definitionsemployedby manyscholars.My definition is certainlyexclusive.All-inclusiveand functionaldefinitionsfail to recognizeanythingdistinctivein religion. At the very least,it shouldbe acknowledged that there isa continuingdebateaboutthe complexquestion of what is religion. The matter is not asclear asAirhart would like. In the review,Airhart doespropose'change'asan alternativeinterpretation. One wondersif 'change' is a more preciseterm than secularization. What kind of changetookplaceasreligiousbeliefsand practicesadaptedto the modern world?The term needsto be defined. Otherwise'change' has the mostpotent implicationsof inevitabilitypossible.Criticsof the secularizationthesishavefailed to comeup with a more persuasive or precisealternative. Indeed the insistenceon 'change' may be a way to asserta latent belief in the certainprogressof Christianity.If, asAirhart asserts, Secularizing
theFaith'merelyechoesoldertheologicalcritiquesof liberalProtestantism,' then her critiquemerelyechoesthe triumphantoptimismof the Victorian churches.
Attemptsto repudiatethe secularization thesis- moreoverto removethe term from scholarlydiscourse - havefailedbecausethe evidenceof secularization is compelling.No doubt, refinementsare required. I hope debate about secularizationand more importantlythe religioushistoryof Canada remainsan open one. DAVIDB.MARSHALL University of Calgary I want to assureDavid Marshallthat it wasnot my intent to stiflediscussion
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
421
of secularization. The questionsI raisedwere not about the useof seculari-
zationtheoryin general,but simplywiththisparticular application of it. Marshall'sown spiritedresponseconfirmsthat there are a numberof issues that deservefurther exploration. To clarifya few points:Marshalldoesindeed saythat secularization is not necessarily irreversibleor inevitable.But when the sentencefollowingsays that decline 'may also be halted, briefly,or temporarily reversed' (my emphasis),the outcomesoundsrather assured.Keepingmy responseto the length requestedby the editorsprecludesdetailedcommenton his reference to my book, but there seemsto me an obviousdifferencebetweenhis characterizationof the United Church (floundering, defeated,uncertain, etc.) and my assessment of Methodism'sidentificationwith a particulartype of Christianity- evangelical Protestantism. Christianverifies(vsexpediency) are more importantto me than he assumes, but ashistorianswe deal with thosetruthsaswe find them capturedin time and in place.Relatedto that point, the specificsubstantive definition he proposes,which focuseson belief in the supernaturaland in miracles,obscuresthe complexitiesof liberal theology.But this particulardefinition would be blind to other significantdevelopments in Christianity(contemporaryevangelicalism an obviousexample) where one finds belief articulatedpreciselyin those theologicalterms coexistingwith what he identifiesas key indicatorsof secularization.
As for Marshall'scharacterizationof my reviewas 'blunt,' I admit that the brevitydemandedby the CHRpushesus to cometo'the point more quickly thanwe mightwish.Readerswill find one of his reviewsin the sameissuein which mine appeared;theycanjudge for themselves howwell he models what he expectsof others. PHYLLIS D.AIRHART EmmanuelCollege, University of Toronto CHR PRIZE
The editorsand membersof the AdvisoryBoard are pleasedto announce that the winnerof the CHRPrizefor the bestarticlepublishedin thejournal in 1993isJeanSangster for '"PardonTales"from Magistrate's Court:Women, Crime, and the Court in PeterboroughCounty, 1920-50' in the June 1993 issue.A completeset of the Dictionary of CanadianBiography will be presentedto Professor Sangster by the Universityof TorontoPress.Honourable mention wasawardedto RustyBitterman,RobertA. MacKinnon,and GraemeWynn for their article, 'Of Inequalityand Interdependencein the NovaScotianCountryside, 1850-70,'in the March 1993issue. ArticlesbyAdvisoryBoardmembersare not eligibleif the prizeisawarded during their tenureon the board.Articlesby editorsare not eligibleduring their tenureand for a periodof twoyearsfollowingtheir resignation.
NOTES
AND
DESPERATELY NATIVE
AGENCY
COMMENTS
SEEKING
ABSOLUTION:
AS COLONIALIST
ALIBI?
In 1991, a British Columbiajudge rejected the GitksanWet'suwet'enland claim,releasinga writtenjudgmentin which the potentialpoliticaleffectof historians''expertise'wasgivenclear expression.In thisjudgment, Chief JusticeAllan MacEacherndismissedthe evidenceof anthropologists who testifiedin the Gitksan'sfayouron the groundsthat theywere 'too closely associated with the plaintiffs. '• Historians,on the other hand,weredeemed far more credible due to their perceivedimpartialityas 'collectorsof archival,historicaldocuments';for this reasonthejudge remarked:'Generallyspeaking,I acceptjust abouteverythingthey put beforeme.'"While somemight evaluatethis asa flatteringtribute to the scienceof historyand its Canadianpractitioners,it seemsto us that MacEachernhasattributedto historiansa degreeof objectivitythat is reallyunattainable,particularlyin the politically charged field of Native-newcomerrelations. None of us conductsresearchor formulatesthesesindependentlyof either our life experienceor the eventscurrentlytakingplacein societyaround us.These realitieshelp determine the issueswe examine, the questionswe ask,and the waysin which we seekto answerthem. The judge's assumptions about historicalimpartialityconfront us with an urgent need to investigatethe reality behind the traditional historian'sneutral pose, to examine the premiseson which the studyof Native-newcomer relationsis presently based,and to considerthe agendabehind historicalwritingswhether or not it is made explicit.For the implicationsof the GitksanWet'suwet'enland claimscaseare clear: publishedacademicwork is accessibleto the larger, non-academicworld, and conclusions,like facts, can be employed for political ends by anyonewho has reasonto constructa case.We owe it to ourselves, and to the peoplewhosepastwe study,to approachour workwith an awarenessof its political ramificationsand a consciousness of our own locationwith respectto the subjectmatter. In the wordsof Adrienne Rich: 'we cannot help making historybecausewe are made of it, and historyis madeof peoplelike us,carriersof the behaviorand assumptions of a given time and place.'"As historians,our engagementwith the past cannot 1
2
3
SupremeCourt of BritishColumbia,Delgamuukw vs.theAttorney-General ofBritish Columbia, 'ReasonsforJudgementof The HonourableChiefJusticeAllan MacEachern,' 8 March 1991, 50 Ibid., 52
AdrienneRich, 'ResistingAmnesia:Historyand PersonalLife' (1983), in Blood, BreadandPoetry.Selected Prose1979-1985 (New York and London 1986), 144 Canadian Historical Review,LXXV, 4, 1994
0008-3755/94/1200-0543$01.25/0 ¸ Universityof Toronto PressIncorporated
544
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
obscureour involvementwith the present,despiteMacEachern'swishful thinking. With this in mind, we have undertakenan analysisof a recent trend in publicationson Native-newcomer relations:the recognitionof Nativeagency and the waysin which somehistoriansare approachingthe issue.We will examinethree scholarlyworks:DouglasCole and Ira Chaikin'sAn IronHand upon the People:The Law againstthe Potlatchon the NorthwestCoast(Van-
couver/Toronto: Douglas& Mcintyre 1990); J.R. Miller's article 'Owen Glendower,Hotspur, and CanadianIndian Policy,'originallypublishedin Ethnohistory 4 (1990), alsoin his anthologySweet Promises: A ReaderonIndianWhiteRelationsin Canada(Toronto: Universityof Toronto Press1991); and Tina Loo'spaper in the CanadianHistoricalReview,'Dan Cranmer'sPotlatch: Law as Coercion, Symbol,and Rhetoric in British Columbia, 1884-1951' (73, 2, 1992). These three works are linked in their commitment to uncoveringthe role of Nativeagencyin the relationshipbetweenCanada'sFirstNationsand the Canadiangovernmentin the late nineteenth and early twentiethcenturies.Cole and Chaikin, Loo, and Miller all examine the functioningof the
law banning the potlatch,while Miller also looks at the passsystemand residentialschools,aselementsof a generalpolicyaimed at forcedcultural change.In all three works,the authorsconcludethat despitethe weightof the state'sauthority, the First Nations continued to assertthemselves,to resist the power of colonialism,and to maintain the vibrancyof their cultures.In taking this approach,thesescholarshave contributedto the crucial processof dismantlingthe antiquated stereotypeof Aboriginal peopleaspassivevictimsin the era of settlement. With this,we haveno quarrel. The argumentfor Native agencyis now nearly twentyyears old in the writing of Canadian historyand its use in understandingAboriginal roles in the fur trade, for instance,is virtually undisputed. 4 Cole, Chaikin,Miller, and Loo are part of a largergroupof Native historianswho seekto showthat Aboriginal peoplewere able to act aswell as react to the myriad of state and church initiativesthat soughtto eliminate the First Nations as economic, political, social, cultural, and
4 R.A. Fisher,Contact and Conflict: Indian-European Relations in BritishColumbia, 1774-1890(Vancouver1977);AJ. Ray,Indiansin theFur Trade:TheirRoleas Hunters,Trappers andMiddlemen in theLand•Southwest ofHudsonBay,1660-1870 (Toronto1974);AJ. Rayand D. Freeman,'GiveUsGood Measure': AnEconomic Analysis ofRelations between theIndiansandtheHud•ong BayCompany before 1763 (Toronto1978); J.S.H.Brown,Strangers in Blood: Fur TradeCompany Families in Indian Country.(Vancouver,1980);S. Van Kirk, Many TenderTies: Women in Fur TradeSociety (Winnipeg 1980); B.G. Trigger, Nativesand Newcomers: Canada's 'HetvicAge'Reconsidered (Kingston1985)
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
545
religiousforceswithinthe nascentCanadianstate. 5 Scholarshaveproven that the argumentfor Native agencyis not misplacedin the settlement period even as they haveshownthe lengthsto which stateand church authorities went to ensure the dominance of non-Native society.Cole, Chaikin, Miller, and Loo break with the general trend in one significant way:theygo beyondthe argumentfor the recognitionof Nativeagencyto one that usesevidenceof Native resilienceand strengthto soften, and at timesto deny,the impactof colonialism,and thus,implicitly,to absolveits perpetrators.Though all four scholarsseemto acknowledgethe colonial oppressionexperiencedby the FirstNations,they nonetheless concurthat through poor implementation,Native resistance,and the peculiaritiesof legal process,the negativeeffectsof colonizationwere mitigated, even nullified.Further,in Tina Loo'spaper,thisapproachisextendedto making the argumentthat by callingforth resistance,the colonizersactuallycontributed to the empowermentof Aboriginalpeople.In the courseof presenting their evidencefor suchclaims,thesewritersglossover the suffering'of FirstNationsunder federal 'wardship,'minimizethe extent of the veryreal and observabledamageinflicted on Aboriginal societies,and continually emphasizethe altruisticintent of the colonizers.This trend in scholarly writing thus carrieswithin it an insidioustendencyto turn Native agency into colonialist alibi?
This problem is perhapsmostevidentin Cole and Chaikin'swork, An IronHand uponthePeaple. The subjectof the potlatchand itssuppression has long been a contentiousone in CanadianNativehistory,no doubt because, as the authorsnote, sincethe nineteenth centuryit has assumeda great symbolicsignificancefor both Native and non-Nativesocieties.No other
ifistitution betterillustrated thegulfbetween indigenous cultures andthe dominantimportedone. In the potlatch,the religious,social,and economic
5 SarahCarter,LostHarvests: PrairieIndianReserve Farmers & Government Policy. (Kingstonand Montreal 1990);ClarenceBolt, Shoes TooSmallfor FeetTooLarge: ThomasCrosby and theTsimshian(Vancouver1992);JoAnne Fiske,'Gender and the Paradoxof ResidentialEducationin Carrier Society,'in Jane S. Gaskelland Arlene Tigar McLaren,eds.,Women andEducation, 2nd ed. (Calgary1991), 131-46; Ken S. Coates,'BestLeftasIndians':Native-White Relationsin theYukon Territory, 1840-1973 (Montreal 1991); Celia Haig-Brown,Resistance andRenewal: SurvivingtheIndian Residential School (Vancouver1988) 6 Here we are talkingaboutscholarlyworksthat carrywithin them their own valuesand uses.We are not speakingto the subjectof authorialintent, though clearlycontextisasimportantan elementin the evaluationof historicalwriting asit is to the studyof any texts.Scholarship, when taken asa whole asit tends in a certaindirection,can undoubtedlybe interpretedand usedin waysnever intendedby itsauthors.It is to suchan identifiabletrend in historicalwriting, not to particularauthors,that we addressour commentshere.
546
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
valuesof the variousNorthwestCoastsocietieswere holisticallyintegrated,a fact that offended missionariesand governmentolT•cialspreciselybecause they recognizedthat thesevalueswere incompatiblewith the seamlessassi-
milation of Aboriginalpeople into Euro-Canadiansociety.Through the facade of olT•cialrhetoric about concern for Native health, neglect of childrenand elders,or economicimpoverishment due to potlatchingshines the true motivation for criminalization of the institution. Contemporary commentatorssawit as 'inconsistentwith all progress,'progressbeing the adoptionof Euro-Canadianvalues,work habits,and patternsof accumula-
tionandconsumption. 7To stress thisisin nowayto implymalevolent intent on the part of thoseespousingthe ban: the term 'progress'summarizedthe panaceasof the age,expressing boundlessfaith in the future and in the potentialof technologyto solveall the problemsof human existence.It must, however,be emphasizedthat mostmembersof the Euro-Canadianpopulation consideredtheir own societydemonstrablysuperiorto all othersand viewedthis 'fact' asajustificationfor imposingtheir cultureon otherswhenever theywere able. In this they differedfrom Aboriginalpeople,whose interestoften lay in mutual reciprocityand respectin cultural exchange,a perspectivethat obviatedthe need to demonstrateculturalsuperiority. It is in their approachto thiscentralquestionof imposingculturalvalues that Cole and Chaikin reveal both the ambivalenceof their own position and a Eurocentricbiasthat compelsthem to defendthe motivesof colonial society whiledenyingFirstNationsan equalrightto self-determination. The authorstry, throughoutthe courseof the book, to developan ethicalbasis uponwhichtojudge the potlatchlaw.Yettheyremainunsuccessful because they delay defining their terms of reference.By the time they make this effort, they have already passeda number of subjectiveand apparently unconscious judgments. • Consistently,theyjustify the motivesof colonial officialdom(although,oddly enough, not thoseof the missionaries)until they finally take the ethical stand that 'we have to recognizea role for government,a right to interveneto securesomemeasureof conformityto its own customsand valuesand in pursuitof its goals.'gThis is a right that they do not accordto Native societies,for their defenceof the campaign againstthe potlatchrestson the assertionthat it representeda 'system'that
7 G.M. Sproat,quotedin DouglasCole and Ira Chaikin,An IronHand uponthe People: TheLawagainst thePotlatch ontheNorthwest Coast (Vancouver andToronto 1990), 15
8 On page182appearsthe followingappeal:'If the authorsmaybe allowedsome quitesubjective judgements';incredibly,it seemsthat the authorsare unaware of the numerous'subjective judgments'that havebeen passedin the preceding 181 pages. 9 Cole and Chaikin, An Iron Hand, 181-2
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
547
'itselfwascoercively intolerantof dissent. 'JøAlthoughtheydo not appearto recognizeit, by 'potlatchsystem'theyin factmeanNorthwestCoastAboriginal cultures,in whichthe potlatchwas,in mostcases,deeplyembeddedand inseparablefrom the rest of the culture.NorthwestCoastsocieties,then, unlike Euro-Canadiansociety,are defined as 'coercivelyintolerant of dissent'when their members'interveneto securesomemeasureof conformity to [their] own customsand valuesand in pursuitof [their] goals.' The denial of such a right to potlatching societiesstemsfrom the authors'perceptionof them as being founded on false moral principles. Defendingthe suppression of the potlatch,Cole and Chaikinstate:'the law could be justified to the extent that it soughtto assistthosevictimizedby a systemthat was itself sometimescoercive.To the extent that humans children, the old and women- may have been victimizedby a systemthat, sometimesfrom hygienicinnocence,sometimesfrom the tyrannyof male domination, sometimesfrom avarice, placed statusand prestige above humanistic principles,thepotlatchitselfwasmorallywrong.'J•The crowning irony of this condemnationlies in the choice of moral standards.The authorsvilifypotlatchingsocieties on the groundsof their allegedvictimization of children, elders, and women through a male-dominatedsystem basedon transcendentavariceand the pursuitof statusand prestige.This catalogueof evilsbearsremarkableresemblanceto thosedecriedby EuroCanadiansocialreformerswhen theysoughtthe improvementof their own Western,Christian,capitalistsociety.When Cole and Chaikin ignore this point, refusingto turn their moral scrutinyto the societyof the anti-potlatchers,theyleavethe impressionthat the dominantculturewasfree of the faults attributed
to the Northwest
Coast societies and therefore
that it was
superiorto them. In doingso,Coleand Chaikinseemto revealan unstated ideologicalsympathywith the anti-potlatchcampaign. The decisiveflawin thisworkliesin the failureof the authorsto appreciate their Eurocentric bias and to recognize the cultural integrity of Aboriginal societies.When traditional Native leaders objected to the campaignagainstthe potlatch,theywere consciously actingin defenceof their entire wayof life, just as the Christianconvertswho soughtthe law's enforcementdid soin pursuitof their owngoal- assimilation asan adaptive responseto the colonialinvasion.To utilize thisdisagreement within Native communitiesas an indicationof the moral ambiguityof the potlatch, as Cole and Chaikin do, is a distortionbecauseit ignores the fundamental significanceof the struggle?"Thiswas not an intellectualdisputeover
10 Ibid., 178 11 Ibid., 177-8 12 Ibid., 180
548
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
universalethicalprinciples,but ratheran expression of the existentialcrisis causedwithin Aboriginalsocieties by the ongoingerosionof their subsistence base, the introductionof European diseases,and the missionary assaulton their systemof beliefs.This, it seemsto us, is the issuethat Cole
and Chaikinwishto avoid.The anti-potlatch campaignis neveradequately placedin itscontextasa keyelementof the 'assault on indigenous culture,' in spite of an introductionwhich acknowledges this broader program? Although they take great painsto highlight the altruisticgoalsof antipotlatchers,they are alsoimmenselyrelievedthat the potlatchneverdied out altogether,for had thisoccurred,the chargeof culturalgenocidewould have been irrefutable.As it is, the resourcefulness of Native people in preservingelements of their culture has spared the colonizersfrom a success that would havebeen a disgraceto their descendants. The argumentof Nativeagencyis thusvery usefid to Cole and Chaikin in divertingattention from the role of non-Nativesin the suppression of Aboriginalcultures,but theyapplyit selectively. On the one hand,Native peopleare shownto be activeparticipants in their destinynot onlywhen theysupportthe anti-potlatchlaw and lobbyfor its enforcementbut also whentheyresistand adaptthe potlatchto the hostileconditionsof theban. On the other hand, the right to political and moral self-determination, arguablythe most significantform of agency,is withheld from the First Nationsand, instead,accordedexclusively to the Canadiangovernment. J.R. Miller, in his article 'Owen Glendower,Hotspur, and Canadian Indian Policy,'takesa somewhatdifferent tack.While he concludeswith the caveatthat hisanalysis shouldnot be 'read asarguingthat interferenceand
coerciondid not occur,'•4Miller devoteshimselfthroughoutthe paperto provingthat neither the passsystemnor the law againstNativeceremonial wasenforceable,and that residentialschoolswere not whollypernicious institutions of culturalre-education. In hisattemptto find a nuancedviewof these policies,he producesa very contradictorypicture. Like Cole and Chaikin, he arguesthat the effectsof suchbanson culturalpracticeswere mitigatedboth by their limited potentialfor enforcementand by Native ingenuityin subvertingthem.This, of course,begsthe questionof the law's effectiveness: Why did NorthwestCoastpotlatcherschangethe structureof the potlatch to escapeprosecutionif the law wasunenforceableand therefore non-threatening? Similarly,if residentialschoolswere not asbad aswe havebeen led to believeby their Native survivors,why were their students resisting, makingrepeatedescapeattempts,and destroying schoolproperty
13 Ibid., !
14 J.R. Miller, 'Owen Glendower,Hotspur,and CanadianIndian Policy,'&oeet Promises:A Readeron Indian-White Relationsin Canada (Toronto 1991 ), 340-1
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
549
as Miller describes? If parentsexertedsignificantcontrolovercurriculum and schoolregulations(at one school,that is,whichMiller acknowledges as an isolatedand extraordinarycase),why were Native parentsgenerallyso dissatisfied with the educationsystemand so reluctantto relinquishtheir childrento it?If Nativelanguages were,in fact, not alwaysprohibitedin the schools,whyhavesomanyformerpupilstestifiedto the lossof their ancestral tonguesandtraditionsthroughtheir subjectionto residentialschooling? It is when one posesthis sort of questionthat one is struckby Miller's
idiosyncratic applicationof his evidence.One exampleis his citationof EleanorBrass'sautobiography asproof that someNativestudentswere first exposedto indigenous culturalpractices at residentialschools?Infact,in her book Brasslamentsher inabilityto speakher people'slanguage,which her parents(bothgraduates of a residentialschool)had chosennot to teach their children in part becausethey 'thought we would be held back in schoolif theyspokenothingbut Indian languages to us.'•6AlthoughBrass later made effortsto developproficiencyin Cree, to her great regret her lackof sufficientexposureto it asa child provedan insurmountablebarrier. Here is a casewhere twogenerationsof residentialschoolingdemonstrably resultedin the lossof the Nativetongue;yet thisthought-provoking autobiographyis quotedin the contextof Miller's contentionthat Nativecultures were not alwaysdestroyedin residentialinstitutions. The author himselfalludesto anothersourceof the apparentcontradiction when he commentson the deterrent effect the anti-potlatchlaw may have had. This is the only instancewhere he acknowledges the possibility that thesepoliciesmighthaveproducedresultsthat are not found in documentarysources: namely,psychological ones.For evenif the lawwasunevenly enforced,if agentsdid not alwaysinsistthat Native children attend residentialschools,if the passsystemdid standlargelyas a dead letter, nonetheless,at any point - with a changeof Indian agent,federal government, or legalcode (overall of whichthe FirstNationshad little or no control) - thesepolicieshad the potentialto becomethe coerciveinstruments they were meant to be. This threat alone is significantand cannot be ignored. Further, when these policies werebrought to bear, their impact was momentous, as survivorsof the residential schools attest. Familial relation-
shipswere disturbedevenwhen childrenwere allowedhome for the sum-
15 Learninga fewCree profanitiesand attendingclandestinedanceperformances comprisedthisexposureand can hardlybe seento haverestoredher ancestral culture
to her.
16 EleanorBrass,I Walkin TwoWorld3 (Calgary1987), 13
550
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
mer.•7Indeed,it wouldbeabsurdtopretendthattheoccasional two-day stay with one'sfamilywasin anywaycomparableto growingup in its bosom. Languageswerelost,in part due to residentialschooling,and with themwere lostthe traditionsthat the elderscouldnot shareoverlinguisticbarriers? This wasan avowedpurposeof separatingNativechildrenfrom their families and cultures,and in a great many casesit wasdevastatingly effective. Moreover,while residentialschooltraining can be given some credit for inadvertentlysupplyingNative peoplewith the skillsto fight the Canadian governmentand therefore helping give rise to twentieth-centuryFirst Nationsleadership(as in the caseof Peter Kelly and Andrew Paull), the residentialschoolscan alsobe blameddirectlyfor leadingto the deathsof manymoreNativepeoplethanwereeverled to literacyand articulateness in Euro-Canadianterms.Bythe Departmentof Indian Affairs'ownaccounting, at leasta quarterof all residentialschoolstudentsdied while on schoolrolls or shortlythereafterfrom diseases, predominantlytuberculosis,that they contractedwhile in the institutions.Where post-schooling health couldbe plottedby the department'schiefmedicalofficer,the deathratewasraised to 69 per cent.Whenthesestatistics becamepublicin 1907,Canadians were outraged.But even among thosewithin the departmentwho wanted residential schoolsabolishedon health grounds,there waslittle will to take on the fight to changethe system?Poorlyimplementedas residentialschool policymay havebeen, the mere fact that it waspolicymade it resistantto revision.When Native parents fought against the confiscationof their children,theydid so,in part, becausetheyrightlyfearedthat their children wouldnot returnunscathed. The greatdistances, bothphysicaland cultural, between home community and residential school made it difficult for parentsto protecttheir offspringfrom the dangersthat faced them, both from diseaseand from institutionalpersonnel.The senseof helplessness that ensuedisonlyunderscoredby Miller's accountof the violenceinflicted by irate parentson schoolofficialsand teachers? ø Rather than being evidenceof parental influence over education, such instancesshow the frustrationsof parentswho were denied a consultative voiceor accessto effectivecontrol mechanismswithin the educationsystem. A further inadequacyin Miller's analysisof residentialschoolsis his tendencyto concentrateon parentsto the virtual exclusionof the institu-
tionalexperienceof children.This omissionservesMiller's argumentwell,
17 CeliaHaig-Brown,Resistance andRenewal: Surviving theIndianResidential School (Vancouver 1988), 15-21, 117, 120-1,123 18 Ibid., 15-16, 120-22
19 NationalArchivesof Canada (NA), Departmentof Indian Affairs,RG 10, vol. 4037, file 317021,P.H. Bryce,'Reporton Indian ResidentialSchools 20 Miler, 'Owen Glendower,' 338
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
551
since children's influence over the residential schoolswas surely constrained.In the article,the frequencyof escapeattemptsis cited as proof that the systemcouldnot be effectivein assimilating Nativepeoplebecause so manyremovedthemselves from its grasp.Yet, quite apart from the fact that evensuccessful runaways - themselves a minority- oftenspentmonths, if not years,in the schools beforefindingan opportunityto liberatethemselves,surelythe mostobviousconclusionto be drawnfrom suchescapes is that the children found life in residential schoolsunendurable. And, in fact,
it is hard to find anyonewho wasexposedto them who describesthe experienceasa whollypleasantone, evenwhen theyrecountno incidentsof physicalor sexualabuse. As other researchershave found, Aboriginal people did sometimes benefit, directly or indirectly,from the educationthey receivedin the schools.But scholars,such asJoAnne Fiske,do not use this evidence,as Miller does,to disputethe assimilative and culturallyinvasiveintentionsof schooladministrators, but ratherpoint to the scopefor subversion both on
thepartof students andsomeinstructors? • The residential schools maynot havebeenmonolithicinstruments of colonialoppression, but theyweredesignedto disruptNative homelife,to promoteabhorrenceof Aboriginal tradition, and to train a body of semi-skilled,semi-literatelabourersto fit
intothecapitalist labourmarketwithoutdisplacing non-Native workers.The factthatNativepeoplehavelongbeenawareof the ambivalentlegacyof the schoolsdoesnot, and shouldnot, be taken to provethat the residential schools were not intended
for and did not have the effect of cultural dis-
location.For instance,BasilJohnston'sbook Indian School Dayshasbeen quotedon occasion assupportingthe conceptof residentialschools. Yet he actuallybeginshisaccountbystating:'Justasprivateschools havea placein the educationalsystem,so do the residentialschools,but under vastly different
terms, conditions and formats from those that existed in the
residentialschoolasI first encounteredit.'-•Johnston'saccountof residential schoollife at SpanishOntario is not whollynegative,yet he doesnot
condonethe educational system thatoperatedunderthe assumption that Native children could only be adequatelyinstructedwhen isolatedfrom their homes and families.
Theseare factorsandexperiences thatMiller eitheravoidsor ignoresin tryingto find the shadings of a picturethathasoftenbeenpaintedin stark contrasts.But a nuancedview,which acknowledges that the First Nations were not passivevictims, must be built not only on evidenceof Native
strengthbut alsoon a completeand honestdelineationof the forcesthey
21 Fiske, 'Gender and the Paradox of Residential Education,' 131-46
22 BasilII.Johnston, Indian SchoolDays (Toronto 1988), 12
552
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
were confronting. To deny the full effects of residentialschoolingis to depreciatethe powerof the FirstNationsto withstandthem. Byignoringthe impactof suchcolonialpolicies,Miller trivializesthe Nativeagencyhe seeks to highlight. In a similar vein, Tina Loo wishesto show that the law is not merely a tool of coercion but also has creativeand empoweringpotential even for thosewhoseinterestswere not centralto its formulation.Lookingspecifically at the prosecutionof Dan Cranmer under the anti-potlatchlaw, Loo arguesthat certainfacetsof the legalprocessmediatedthe deleteriouseffect of the law and, in fact, worked to strengthen the authority of the First Nations
who came into contact with it.
Her argumentis basedon twomain premises:first, that the potlatchlaw can be seen as a distinct 'site of struggle'and can be removedfrom the larger context of Native-whiterelationsin British Columbia;and, second, that the law functionswithin a culture of argument in which thosesubject to the law are enabled
to subvert
the intentions
of its formulators.
She
writes:'Becausethe power of argumentis creative,becauseit is all about makinga case,seeingthe lawin thiswayopensup the possibility that people who are subjectto legal regulation can act as well as react. As will be discussed,the potlatchlaw wascertainlyoppressive(it had a coercivedimension) and symbolizedcolonial values,but the Indians who practisedthe ritual not only had successat avoidingprosecution,but they were also successful in arguingtheir cases beforethe court.'" Both premises,we believe,are problematic.First,Loo attemptsto argue that the law can be removed
from the context
of Native-newcomer
relations
in BritishColumbiabecauseit wasnot reallyaboutAboriginalpeopleat all, but ratherwasmerelyan expression of the desireof the recentlyestablished settler societyto define itself. Given that the law, which wasexplicit in its intentionsto facilitatethe eradicationof Nativeceremony,waspassedby the federalgovernmentat the instigationof Indian agentsand missionaries, and thatprovincialsettlersand their governmentwereoftenopposedto the ban and ambivalentabout its enforcement,Loo's argument here is unconvincing. Spuriousthoughit maybe, removingthe functioningof the potlatch law from its assimilationist context enables Loo to conclude that, in the end,
Nativepeople and theircustomary lawtriumphedwhen the amendedIndian Act of 1951 omitted all referenceto the anti-potlatchprovision.While the removalof the provisionwasa belatedvictoryfor Nativepeople,it cannotbe saidthat the customarylaw of the FirstNationsprevailed,sincethe potlatch wasonly one part of that law. On the contrary,sincethe establishmentof
23 Tina Loo, 'Dan Cranmer'sPotlatch:Law as Coercion,Symbol,and Rhetoricin
BritishColumbia,1884-1951,'Canadian HistoricalReview 73, 2 (June1992):137
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
553
colonialgovernmentsin Canada,Native people havebeen, and continue in most casesto be, ruled not by their own law but by the legal systemof a foreignpower.All of Loo'ssubsequent contentionsaboutthe powerof legal argumentmustbe read with an appreciationof that fact. Second,the decontextualizationof the law in this article permitsLoo to make the followingclaim:'While the [Cranmer prosecution]is emblematic of their oppression,it has alsocome to representa triumph. For the Alert BayKwakiutl,the outlawingof the potlatchand the "confiscation" of their masksmark the beginningsof a political consciousness that has led them into the courts to resistthe incursionsof colonial societyand to recover their land and culturalidentity.'-•4 While one couldcertainlyarguethat the Kwakwaka'wakw hardlyneededthe banningof the potlatchto developpolitical consciousness, it is perhapsequallyimportantto remind ourselvesthat the criminalization
of Native
culture
also had
the fundamental
effect
of
removingthe 'siteof struggle'betweenthe FirstNationsand colonialsociety from circumstances that settlersand their governmentwishedto avoid(such as armed insurrection) to one over which the non-Natives had a substantial
degreeof control- thatis,the courts? Loo usesnew and important evidenceto showthat, once in the courts, the Kwakwaka'wakw did not simplythrow up their hands in the face of a foreign legal authority. Rather, drawing on an oratorical tradition and a willingnessto understandthe systemwith which theywere confronted,they were able to draft argumentsthat were sophisticated and compelling.It is significant,asLoo pointsout, that the FirstNationshaveneversubmittedto the colonialpower,but havealwaystried to act in waysthat would benefit themselves,their culture, and the generationsto come. Their ability to create argumentsand to act intelligentlydoes not surpriseus. In fact, it shouldbe self-evident.Where we disagreewith Loo is in her conclusionthat Native ability to resistsomehowdiminishedthe coercivenature of the law. Under prosecutionfor potlatching,the FirstNationswereplacedin a purely defensiveposition,confrontinga powerfulsystemthat soughtaboveall to legitimizeitself.AsLoo stresses in her analysis,the veryexistenceof the ban
24 25
Ibid., 128
The provincialand federalgovernments consideredthe threatof armed struggleon the coastandin the interiorof BritishColumbiareal.In 1887,for instance,Prime MinisterMacdonaldappointeda royalcommission of inquiry into the NorthwestCoastNationsasa meansof hearinggrievancesand thus forestailingthe possibilityof militaryconflictthat would seethe FirstNations rejectthe authorityof foreigngovernments on their lands.The fear of violence in Native territorywasa persistentfactorin 'Indian' policythroughoutthe nineteenthcentury.SeeJo-At•neDrake-Terry,TheSameas Yesterday: TheLillooet Chronicle theTheftof TheirLandsandResources (Lillooet1989),40-2, 45-7, 79, 83, 93-6, 110-11,122, 163, 166, 169, 225.
554
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
forcedthe governmentto pursueconvictions in orderto preserveitsauthority. And this it clearlydid, when the convictionwasbroughtdownand the potlatchers weregiventhe offensivechoiceof eitherbeingimprisonedor ransomingtheir cultural heritagein exchangefor their freedom. Fundamentally,we mustwonder how it wasthat, despitethe argumentscreated and the latitude that Loo claimsis affordedlegal interpretationby the cultureof argument,Dan Cranmerand the other defendantslosttheir case. The resultof the trial, it seems,isbeyondthe scopeof Loo'sargument.The lingering words of the Cranmer prosecutionwere not ones of empowerment, but rather those of Herbert (Mecha) Martin drawn to our attention
in the openingquotationsof Loo'spaper:'We sufferedso.' The otherargumentadvancedherefor the empowering potentialof the law is equallytenuous.The author contendsthat individualmembersof Native communitiescould benefit from the potlatchlaw by employingit againsttheir fellows:'The agents'reportssuggestthat someIndians used the lawto overthrowthe entrenchedhereditarysystemof rank and privilege that existedwithin someNativecommunities. '" This assertionclearlyrests on the premisewe sawin Cole and Chaikin'swork that potlatchingsocieties victimized
some of their
members
and that Euro-Canadian
law was well
adaptedto restructurethem to eliminatethisproblem.Yet the individuals who are cited as havingtaken this approachwere, from the evidencepresented,primarilyvictimsnot of Native culture but of the cultural breakdown that wastakingplace asa resultof internalreligiousdivisionscaused by missionization. Jane Cook, for instance,who 'took an active role in suppressing the potlatch,'wasof mixedparentageandhadbeenraisedbya
Euro-Canadian missionary couple?Shehasbeendescribed as'a formidable super-missionized woman'who 'wasdeadsetagainstall Indian ways,noneof which sheknewmuch about.'" Her effortscannotbe seenas attemptsto reform Kwakwaka'wakwsociety,but rather to destroyit. It is difficult to discernin thisaccountanyempoweringeffectsfor JaneCookof her useof the law.Furthermore,thoughpoliticaland familialfactionswithin the First Nations have used Europeantechnology,alliances,and material culture sincethe time of contactto promotetheir ownends,the useof an alien law designedto suppress cultural integrityis not a value-freeadaptation.Any 'empowering'potential here for Native individualswithin the Canadian legal systemcould only havebeen usedto the detrimentof Native communitiesasa whole.Ultimately,thisis a processfrom whichonly the colonizers havesomethingto gain.
26 Loo, 'Dan Cranmer's Potlatch,' 162 27 Ibid., 162
28 Ibid., 163, quotingHelen Codere in FranzBoas,KwakiutlEthnography, xxvii
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
555
As Dan Cranmer and the otherslearned, the culture of argument of the
Euro-Canadian legalsystem was(andi•) unwillingto accommodate the viewpointof aboriginal people. In a country still reeling from the revelationsof severalinquiriesinto the treatmentof Native people by Canada's justicesystem,it seemsironicthat an argumentshouldbe advancedfor the empoweringpotentialof the law for this samegroup. Like the accusedin the Cranmer case,Delgam Uukw, alongwith the eldersand chiefsof the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'enpeoples,also made sophisticated,compelling arguments.And for a time, it seemedthat they would be heard, that the legal systemwould make room for a new kind of argument,admit a new kind of evidence,viewthe pastin a revivifiedway.But the argumentsof the elderswereignored,and it wasnot merelythe eccentricities of ChiefJustice MacEachern'sinterpretationthat determinedthisoutcome.Fundamentally, the Delgam Uukw case,like the Cranmer prosecutionbefore it, clearly demonstrates that,just asthe law is not colour-blind,neither is its rhetoric able to accommodateall viewpointsregardlessof locationor origin. That is becausethe law, whether it be that concerning rights to the land and resourcesor that prohibitingthe potlatch,is inseparablefrom its political context:
it cannot
be skeletonized.
The skeletonizationof historyis equallyinadmissible.Clearly,MacEachern preferredthe historians''expert' testimonyto that of anthropologists becausehe believedthat historycould be removedfrom politics (and, in makingthis belief explicit,provedthe contrary).Given the way historical documentswere presentedin the courtroom,as evidentiarysubmissions cited not to the primary sourcefrom which they were taken but to other legalcasesin whichtheyhad previously been used,MacEachernmight have beenjustified in his perception.Assembledbefore him were fragmentary factsestrangedfrom their historicalcontext and lacking any sensitivityto the past,MacEachernsimplyaddedthem to the lexiconof legalprecedents generatedby ajudiciary devotedto the dominanceof the imported cultural system.As historian Kerry Abel has pointed out: 'Legal evidence and historicalinterpretationare not the sameconcepts;the perennial problem of distinguishingfact from interpretation can become both urgent and emotional in the courtroom educate
... On the other hand, historians can also
the courts in the broader
context
of the issues at hand.
Narrow
interpretationsof the lawbasedon strictlegal precedentwill serveonly to perpetuatepastinjustices?"As yet, the real valueof the historian'stestimonyhasnot been realized.
29 KerryAbel, 'Introduction,'in KerryAbel andJeanFriesen,eds.,Aboriginal Resource Usein Canada:HL•torical andLegalAspects (Winnipeg1991), 6
556 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
MacEachern'sexampleshouldserveasa reminder to historiansthat we disregardpastand presentpoliticsat our peril. Employingthe acknowledgment of Native agencyasa meansof depreciatingthe impactof colonialism doesa disserviceto our understandingof historyand trivializesthe continued responseof the First Nations to the European 'discovery'of the Americas.The fact that the colonialpoliciesof coerciveacculturationwere not implemented as planned and/or did not produce assimilationcan hardlybe construedasmeaningthat theydid not havea profoundeffecton the people to whom they were intended to apply. There is abundant evidenceof their impact. The studyof Aboriginal strategiesfor survival under alien rule is of criticalimportanceand mustnecessarily be predicated on the recognitionof Nativeagency.By the sametoken,Nativeagencywill never be fully understoodwithout an equal recognitionof the oppressive forces that shapedeveryNative person'slife. By way of analogy,when historiansof the AmericanSouthfirst startedto studythe world madeby enslavedAfrican-Americans, theyintroduceda picture of life under slavery that wasnuanced,in which the traditionalstereotypes were enervated.Yet neverdid theyargueor evenimply that the impactof slaverywasdiminished, or thatitsnefariousqualifiesweresomehow lessened, by theresiliency of those enslaved. Scholars of Canada's
First Nations
under
colonialism
would do well to
learn from their example.When we look for Nativeagency,we mustfirstbe willing to recognizethe fight of FirstNationspeople to politicaland moral self-determination beforewe can assess the impact of 'wardship'on their societies and cultures. We must, further, be able to delineate in full the
realm of colonialpolicyand practicebeforewe can seekto understandthe waysin whichNative people mediatedthe impact of thosegovernmental initiatives.Only then canweproducetrulybalancedand nuancedhistories in whichneitherNativeactorsnor colonialpoweris ignored. Finally,historiansconcernedwith Aboriginalpeoplemustacknowledge thatwe write in a politicallychargedenvironment.Someof usworkon land claims,othersare not directlyinvolved,but asthe GitksanandWet'suwet'en casereveals, neither we nor our works are immune from use and misuse in
Canadiancourtsof law.Beforewe applytheorygeneratedin other contexts to the circumstances of Native-newcomer relations in Canada, we must be
preparedto examineour basicpremisesaswell asthe possibleimplications that our work might havefor Nativepeople living today.We have,in fact, the potential to make a positivecontributionnot only to historicalunderstandingbut also to the processof redressingpast injuries.In writing history,we simultaneously make it; this is a challengeand an opportunity whichwe cannotignore. ROBIN BROWNLIE and MARY-ELLENKELM
NOTES AND COMMENTS
THE EVOLUTION
557
OF PLANT SIZE IN CANADIAN MANUFACTURING, 1870-1910
Plant Sizein a HistoriographicalContext
Little is knownaboutplantsizein Canadafor the 1870-1910period.More information on plant size, however,can enrich our understandingof a number of issuesrelating to Canadian economic, business,and labour history.As one expertsubmittedsometime ago: 'The factoryis the technical unit of industry.It is the unit out of which the business-man must build up his administrativesystem.It is also the unit in which the team-workof
industryismostdirectlyobserved andmostcloselyknit. The changesin the sizeand form of the factoryshould,therefore,throwlight upon the mechanical and other scientificprogressin production;upon the problemsof organizationconfrontingthe business-man and upon the nature of industrial relations. '•
More specifically,concerningthe late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,increasesin plant sizecould serveto indicateif entrepreneurs were taking advantageof economiesof scaleand scope,a processwhich might ultimatelyhaveculminatedin their establishing verticallyor horizontallyintegratedfirmsthat consistof manyrelativelyefficientlow-costplants, either acquiredthroughmergersor constructed anew.The lowerunit costs of productionwould have been a product of the increasedproductivity inducedby the economiesof scaleand scopemade possibleby the larger plants?Detailedinformationon plant sizecan, therefore,serveas a road map pointingthe researcherto industriesthat might be worthyof a more detailedinvestigation. Ultimatelysuchan exercisecanproducea fuller and better understandingof the causesand effectsof increasingplant size.
I JohnJewkes,'The Sizeof theFactory,'Economic Journal62 (1952):237.Jewkes goeson to provideplant sizeestimates for manufacturingmeasuredin termsof employeesper plant for the United States,Canada,Great Britain, Germany, and Australia,largelyfor the 1920sand 1930s. 2 Suchis the argumentof Alfred D. Chandlerin TheVisible Hand: TheManagerial
Revolution in American Business (Cambridge, Mass.1977);Scale andScope: The Dynamics ofIndustrialCapitalism (Cambridge,Mass.1990);and 'Organizational Capabilitiesand EconomicHistory,'JournalofEconomic Perspectives 6 (1992): 79-100, wherehe discusses plant sizein the contextof hispath-breaking interpretationof the evolutionof business enterprisein Americaand Europe from the nineteenth into the twentiethcentury. Canadian Historical Review,LXXV, 4, 1994
0008-3755/94/1200-0557$01.25/0 ¸ Universityof Toronto PressIncorporated
558
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
What little we do knowaboutplant sizein Canadafor the 1870-1910 period comesfrom the work of Richard Cavesand Gordon Bertram. Their estimates,however, are not well grounded empirically, nor are they comparable.Cavesmeasuresplant size in terms of workers per plant,
whereasBertram'sestimates are madein termsof outputper plant."Moreover,both setsof estimatesare constructedat a highlyaggregatelevel. Cavesand Bertrameachdealwith the issueof plantsizein the contextof their more generaldiscussions on the evolutionof the Canadianeconomy in the post-Confederation period. Caves,in particular,presentshisestimates for plant sizeas part of his effort to better situatethe importanceof the boom in Canadianwheat and flour exportsto the developmentof Canadian manufacturingin the 1900-10 period.The relationshipbetweenthe wheat boomand Canadianeconomicdevelopmenthasbeen,of course,one of the mosthotly debatedissuesin Canadianeconomichistory.Cavesfound that
plant sizeincreasedsignificantly, by as muchas 16 per cent from 1900to 1910.He viewsthisbit of evidenceasbeingsupportive of the hypothesis that the 'wheatboom' positivelyaffectedCanadianmanufacturinggrowth,given that he assumes that increasingplant sizewascharacterizedby economiesof scale- increasingplant sizeis assumed, in and of itself,to resultin increased productivityand, thereby,in lower averageproductioncosts. 4 Bertram,in
3 RichardE. Caves,'Export-LedGrowthandtheNewEconomicHistory,'inJ. Bhagwati,ed., Trade,Balance ofPayments andGrowth (Amsterdam1971), 412, estimates plantsizefor plantsemployingfiveor moreworkersin the census years 1900and 1910.Caves,himself,doesnot specifyhowhe measures plantsize. However,it isevidentfrom hissourcematerialthathe measures plantsizein termsof the numberof workersper plant.One problemwith Caves'sestimatesis that he doesnot correct for the inclusionin the direct censusdata, which he uses
to estimateplantsize,of plantsemployingfewerthanfiveworkersor of some plantsthatarenotactuallyin manufacturing. Finally,Cavesdoesnot provideus with anydetailedestimatesfor plantsize.GordonW. Bertram,'EconomicGrowth in CanadianIndustry,1870-1915:The StapleModelandtheTake-OffHypothesis,'Canadian JournalofEconomics andPolitical Science 29 (1965): 183,provides constantdollarestimates for outputper plantfor the 1870sand the 1890sfor the manufacturing sectorasa wholeand,specifically, mentionismadeof rolling mills,railwayrollingstock,and cottonfactories.In Bertram's'HistoricalStatistics on GrowthandStructureof Manufacturing in Canada,1870-1957,'inJ. Henripin andA. Asimakopulos, eds.,Conferences onStatistics, 1962and1963(Toronto 1964),115-17,moredetailedplantsizeestimates areonlyin termsof current dollarsand,therefore,cannotbeusedfor interdecennial comparisons astheydo not takethe pricechangesthat occurredin thisperiodinto account. 4 Caves,'Export-LedGrowth.'Cavesassumes thatincreasing plantsizeis associatedwith increasingoutput per workerbecauseof the effectthe increased sizeof plant aloneis understoodto haveon labourproductivity. Let (MFG/P)-MFG-Pand MFG= (MFG/L) + L therefore, (MFG/P) = ( (MFG/L) + L)- P, wherecapitalletterssymbolizeper annum growthrates,and MFG, P, and L
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
559
contrast,suggests that plant sizeincreasedmostsignificantly from 1870 to 1890 in termsof real grossmanufacturingoutput per plant. It is not clear from Bertram'swork,however,whetherplant sizeincreasedto a greateror lesser extent from 1890 to 1910 than it did from 1870 to 18907
Bertram'sand Caves's plantsizeestimates werefirstpublishedwhen the weight of empiricalestimatessupportedthe view that the 1900-10 period wasin no way a unique one in termsof its economicgrowth or development. Bertram'swork on manufacturing,as well as OJ. Firestone'son nationalincome,havebeenmostcloselyidentifiedwith thisinterpretation. • And it was in this context that Edward Chambers and Donald Gordon, in
their now classicpaper, 'PrimaryProductsand EconomicGrowth:An Empirical Measurement,'came to the conclusionthat the boom in wheat exportsplayed only a small role in the processof Canadianeconomic development. 7 More recentresearch,however,stronglysupportstheviewthat thewheat
refer to manufacturingoutput,population,•andlabouremployment,respectively. Clearly,increases in labourproductivitypositivelyaffectthe growthof manufacturing output per person. See note 3 above.
SeeBertram, 'EconomicGrowth' and 'Historical Statistics,'and OJ. Firestone, Canada• Economic Development 1876-1953,withSpecial Reference to Changes in the
Country's National Product andNationalWealth, IncomeandWealthSeries7 (London 1958).
EdwardJ.Chambersand DonaldF. Gordon,'PrimaryProductsand Economic Growth:An EmpiricalMeasurement,' JournalofPolitical Economy 74 (1966): 315-32. Their resultsare to a largeextent basedon their assumption (319, 325, 326,327) thatstaplegrowthcanhaveno effecton eitherper capitaor labour productivity growthin manufacturing, and indeed,in anynon-stapleeconomic activity.Hence,if resources wereto be allocatedout of the staple(wheat,for example,sector(s)characterized byper capitaoutputgrowth)into other sectorsof the economy,per capitagrossdomesticproductionaccordingto Chambers and Gordon would still increase. The extent of this increase would
be determinedby exogenously generatedgrowthin the non-staplesectors. Chambersand Gordon, in effect,dismissout of hand the possibilitythat technological changeaswellasotherfactorsthatmightbe responsible for increasing labourproductivity mightbe dependenton stapleproduction.One shouldalsonote that in the courseof developingtheir argument,Chambers and Gordon (315-32) refer specifically to plant size.However,theyassumethat there were no economiesof scalein manufacturingand that the wheatboom did not induceanyscaleeconomies in the manufacturing sector.For a critique of Chambers'sand Gordon'sassumptions seeCaves,'Export-LedGrowth.' See alsoRichardPomfret,TheEconomic Development of Canada,2nd ed. (Scarborough,Ont. 1993),202-11,for a theoreticaland empiricalsummaryof the debateon the role staplesplayedin the late nineteenth-and eadytwentiethcenturyCanadianeconomicdevelopment. Pomfret'spresentation favoursthe Chambersand Gordon interpretation.
560
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
boom playeda pivotalrole in the processof Canadiandevelopment.In earlierwork I havefound, for example,that the growthin real per capita Canadian grossdomesticproduct (CD?) and also, specifically,in real Canadianmanufacturingoutputwasmarkedlygreaterduringthe era of the wheatboomthanin anyotherperiodencompassed bytheyears1870-1913. From 1896 to 1913 per capitareal GDPgrewat an annualrate of 4.18 per cent, as comparedwith only 1.52 per cent in the 1871-96period.With respectto manufacturing,per capitareal outputgrewat between3.80 to 4.49 per centper yearin the 1900-10periodascomparedwithbetween0.90 to 2.03 per centper yearin the 1870-1900period.Moreover,the structure of the Canadianeconomyand of the manufacturingsectorin particularis found to havechangedmostsignificantlyin the period encompassed by the wheat boom. 8
Bywayof contrast,per capitareal GDPin Canadain the era of the wheat boom grewat a much fasterclip than in the United States.Americanper capitareal GD?,for example,grewby only 2.48 per cent per annumin this period and by only 1.28 per cent in the 1871-96 period.Americanreal manufacturing outputgrewby 1.60per centper annumfrom 1900to 1910, andby 3.84per centfrom 1870to 1900.9Per capitaGDPgrowthin Canada, for that matter, exceededthat in all other developedeconomiesin the 1896-1913 period. Clearly,the growthin the Canadianeconomyduring its boom in wheatproductionand exportswasin manywaysunique,and my empiricalworkstronglysupportsthe viewthat the wheatboomwasresponsible for the excessgrowth that marked Canadiandevelopmentin the 1896-1913period?ø
8 Morris AItman, 'A revisionof CanadianEconomic Growth, 1870-1910 (A
Challengeto the GradualistInterpretation),'Canadian JournalofEconomics 20 (1987), and 'RevisedReal Canadian GNP Estimatesand Canadian Economic
Growth,1870-1926,'Review ofIncome and Wealth,series38 (1992). Seealsothe importantpaperbyM.C. Urquhart,'NewEstimates of GrossNationalProduct, Canada,1870-1926:SomeImplicationsfor CanadianDevelopment,' in Stanley L. Engermanand RobertE. Gallman,eds.,Long-terraFactors in American Economic Growth, Studiesin Incomeand Wealth51 (Chicago1986),9-94. 9 AItman, 'Revision'
10 To determinewhetherthere is a positiveand possibly causalrelationshipbetweenstapleproductionand economicdevelopment asapproximated by the growthin realgrossdomesticproductper capita,one needonlyestablish whetherthere is a positiverelationshipbetweenan increasein the rate of growthof stapleexportsand either real GDP per capitaor the per capita growthin real output of a particularsector,suchasmanufacturing,in the
economy. Thiscriterioniseasilymetbythe morerecentempiricalworkcited above.To be more rigorousone should,asCaves,'Export-LedGrowth,'419, suggests, determinewhetherper capitareal GDP or sector-specific output(s) grewat a fasterpacein the staple-producing countryascomparedwithother
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
561
The objectof thispaperis to presentdetailedestimates of plant sizefor Canadianmanufacturingfor the 1870-1910period. These estimatesare largely in terms of workers (actuallyworkers and employees)per plant, supplementedby real output (value added) per plant estimates.I also presentdetailedestimatesfor the growthin manufacturingoutput and in labourproductivitysoasto bettersituatethesenewplantsizeestimates. At a minimum, it is hoped that thesenew estimateswill prove to be a useful resourcefor future work that seeksto addressthe issueof plant size and other relatedquestionsin the firsthalf centuryof Canadianconfederation. Finally,the estimates presentedbelowsuggest that,on average,plantsize grewmostin the 1890-1910period,with mostof thisgrowthconcentrated, by sector,in the 1890s.However,medianplantsizegrowthwasmostimpressiveduring the 1900-10 period.I alsofind that outputand labourproductivitygrewmostrapidlyduring Canada'swheatboom. The estimatespresentedin thisarticle,therefore,providefurther, albeittentative,supportfor the view that the wheatboom had a positiveeffect on Canadianeconomic growth and was,in the very least,associated with important changesin Canadianmanufacturing.This, of course,presumesthat increasingplant sizegenerateseconomiesof scaleor scope.Only more intricateand derailed analyses, encompassing factory-specific studies,can serveto affirm or refute
thisproposition? • Estimating PlantSizein CanadianManufacturing Plant size estimates are constructed here for the 1870, 1880, 1890, 1900, and
1910 censusyearsusing the availablecensusdata. Fortunatelyfor us, all thesecensus yearsfall withinthe prosperity stageof the tradecycle?Otherwise,estimatedchangesin plant sizemight simplybe a productof a plant
countriesin the sameperiod 'withequalaccessto technologicaladvances.' This standardis alsomet by the empiricalwork referred to above. 11 SeeBelaGold, 'ChangingPerspectives on Size,Scale,and Returns:An InterpretativeEssay,' JournalofEconomic Literature 19 (1981): 6-15, 21-3, for a critical discussion of the conceptof economiesof scaleand its usein applied economics.Gold is partic•ularly waryof attemptsto establishthe existenceof economies of scalewhen usingaggregatedata,of whichcensusdata categorizedinto major sectorsand subsectors wouldbe a goodexample.SeealsoJ.H. Clapham,'On EmptyEconomicBoxes,'in KennethE. Bouldingand GeorgeJ. Stigler,eds., Readings in PriceTheory (Chicago1952), 119-30. 12 SeeBertram,'HistoricalStatistics,'136, and EdwardJ.Chambers,'Late NineteenthCenturyBusiness Cyclesin Canada,'Canadian JournalofEconomics and PoliticalScience 30 (1964): 393, for the 1900-10 period. Chamberscomesto a similarconclusion for all decennialyearsfallingwithinthe larger1867-1953 period.
562 THE CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
finding itselfat differentpointsin the business cycle,thuslargelyindicating different rates of capacityutilization, as opposedto there being trend changesin the number of workers employed or in the value of output producedper plant. Plant sizeestimatesare presentedin two sets:the first set is for the 1870-90 period and the other is for the 1890-1910period (table 1). Two setsof estimatesare presentedhere, sincethe censuses for 1870,1880,and 1890coverallplants(establishments) whilethe censuses for 1900and 1910excludemostplantsemployingfewerthan fiveworkers.But sincethe censusfor 1900providesus with data on plantsemployingfewer than five workers for 1890 as well as for 1900, one can include the 1890
censusyearin both setsof estimates?The relevantcensusdataare reorganized into the seventeenmajor manufacturingsectorsas specifiedby the Dominion Bureau of Statistics'(DBS)StandardClassification Manual (1948) (table 1). Where possible,the data for thesesectorsare further categorized
into manufacturingsubsectors, againasspecifiedby the DBS(table7).•4 When constructingplant sizeand related estimatesfor the years1900 and 1910, the censusdata have to be adjustedfor the fact that, for a few basicindustries (a handful out of hundreds of basicindustries), the censuses
for 1900 and 1910 include data for plantsemployingfewer than five workers. For 1900, data on plantsemployingfewer than five workersare incorporatedwith the data on plantsemployingmore than four workersfor the
13 In thisarticle,I makeno attemptto adjustthe census-based estimatesfor 1900 and 1910 in order to accountfor the omissionof smallerplantsin theseyears. Althoughsuchadjustments are possiblefor the manufacturingsectorasa whole - but not on a sector-by-sector basis,whichis criticalin thisarticle- theywould still haveto be madeon an arbitrarybasis(see,for example,Altman, 'Revision' and 'RevisedReal CanadianGNP Estimates').We simplydo not knowthe extent to which plantsemployingfewerthan five peoplebecameof greateror lesserimportanceto manufacturingoutput and employmentfrom 1890 to 1900 and from 1900 to 1910.This remainstrue in spiteof a censusof manufacturers takenfor 1905(Census andStatistics, 1907) that coveredplantsof all sizesand madean attemptto distinguishbetweenthe largerand smallerplantsin all manufacturingindustries. The 1905censusdatasuggest that the smallerplants accountfor only 1.66per centof all outputand 2.48 per centof all employment in 1905,althoughit seemsclear that the 1905censusunderreportedon the smallerplants.The extent of this underreporting,however,remains unclear (Bertram 'Historical Statistics,'99). The censusfor 1917 (Canada Year
Book,1919[1920],272-3) isthe nextcensus thatprovides datafor plantsof all sizes,but it offers no basisfrom which to determine the evolution in the
importanceof smallerplantsto manufacturingoutputand employmentin Canada.
14 For detailson my classification of the censusmaterialseeMorrisAltman, 'A Frameworkfor Organizingthe CanadianManufacturingCensusMaterial,
1870-1910,'discussion paper,Departmentof Economics, University of Saskatchewan, 1989.
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
563
butter and cheeseindustryof the food and beveragesector,aswell as for the brick and tile industryof the non-metallicmineralproductssector.This exerciseisrepeatedfor 1910and isextendedto the flour and gristmill and the fish-preserving industriesof the food and beverages sector,the lumber productsindustryof thewoodproductssector,and the lime kiln industryof
the non-metallic productssector.Byincludingdatafor smallerplantsin the datasetsprovidedfor thesebasicindustries,anyestimatesof plant sizethat include such data necessarily bias plant size estimatesdownward.Unfortunately,the censusauthoritiesdo not provideuswith the informationfrom which to determinethe overallimportanceof the smallerplantsto any of the aboveindustries,sinceonly industry-leveldata are offered. Nevertheless, the dataprovidedare sufficientto determinethat the most significantbiasesare introducedthrough the butter and cheeseindustry,
whereaverageplant sizeis 1.9 and 1.7 for 1900 and 1910,respectively. Obviouslyin this industry,plantsemployingfewer than five workersoverwhelmed thoseemployingfive workersor more. Moreover, the butter and
cheeseindustryaccounted for 61.6per centof all plantand 13.3per centof all labour in the food and beverages sector,and 25.0 per cent of all plant and 2.1 per centof all labourin manufacturingasa wholein 1900.By 1910 butterandcheeseconstituted 50.2per centof all plantand 10.5per centof all labourin the food and beverages sector,and 19.7per cent of all plant and 1.3 per cent of all labour in manufacturingas a whole. Thus, by includingthe butter and cheeseindustryin one'scalculationof averageplant size,the relativeimportanceof thisindustryresultsin an averageplant size in food and beveragesof 8.9 workersin 1900 and 8.09 workersin 1910, and in an averageplant sizefor all manufacturingof 23.1 and 26.4 workersin 1900 and 1910,respectively. Once the butter and cheeseindustryis netted out of the computations, however,averageplant sizeincreasesto 30.2 and 32.5 workersfor all manufacturingin 1900 and 1910,respectively (table 1, 1900, 1910). In thisarticle,averageplant sizenet of the butter and cheese industryconstitutes my lower-boundplant-sizeestimates. In spiteof the fact that smallerplantsare includedin the censusreports of someotherindustries, in noneof theseindustriesis averageplantsizeless thanfiveworkersper plant.In thebrickandtileindustry,plantsizewas11.7 and 21.7workersin 1900and 1910,respectively. In 1910plantsizewas11.3 workersin fishpreserving, 6.7 workersin flour and gristmills,19.9workers in lumberproducts, and7.6workersin limekilns.Nettingout thebrickand tile industryfrom the plant sizeestimates haslittle effecton averageplant sizein manufacturing(table1, 1900,1910).However,whenone excludesall of the otherindustriesthatincludedatafor the smallerplant,averageplant sizeincreasesfrom 32.5 to 39.8 workers(table 1, 1910). There is no wayof determiningthe extentto whichthe industryaverages are biaseddownward by the inclusionof data on the smallerplants.If theseindustriesare little affectedby the inclusionof data for the smallerplants,excludingthese
564
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
industriesfrom one'saverages wouldexaggerate averageplant sizein the manufacturingsector.This is especiallytrue for 1910. For this reasonmy plant sizeestimatesfor 1910,whichexcludethe arrayof industriesthat incorporatedataon the smallerplants(table 1, 1900,1910), shouldbe treated asupper-boundplant sizeestimates. However,the focusof thisarticlewill be on my lower-boundplant sizeestimatesas measuredby workersper plant and the growthratesthey generate(table 2). Also,my supplementary estimatesfor plant size,valueaddedper plant (table4), aswell asmy estimates for the growth of manufacturingoutput (table 6), are all lower bound. Theselower-bound estimates serveto biasmyargumentagainstthe hypothesisthat the wheatboompositivelyaffectedCanadianeconomicgrowth. An additionallimitation that characterizes my estimatesis that, with the exceptionof 1870, data are not availableto establishthe distributionof plantsizewithinthe censusgroupings of basicindustries?Therefore,one hasno wayof determiningwhether,whenthe censuslists100 establishments employing200workersin a basicindustrysuchasmeatproductsof thefood andbeverages sector,whichyieldsan averageplantsizeof 2.0, thisaverageis composedof 100 plantsemployingtwoworkerseach,or whetherit consists of one plant employing100workers,with the remainingninety-nineplants employingabout one worker each. The best one can do is to check the averagescomputed.from the censusestimatesfor the larger industrial categories againstthe distributionof plantsizewithinthesecategories(table
7). For 1890,however, it ispossible to goonestepfurther,sincethedataare availablewithwhichto establishthe distributionof plantsizebetweenplants employingmore than four workersand thoseemployingfewer than five (table 3).
15 The paneldatafor 1870hasbeenput into machine-readable form byElizabeth Bloomfieldand Gerald Bloomfieldof Guelph University.A similar project where the panel data are being adjustedfor inconsistencies and errorsis being completedby Kris Inwood, alsoof Guelph University.Althoughthesedata can eventuallybe usedto enrich the findingsof thisarticle,it is unlikelythat the averagespresentedhere wouldbe affectedby the more refined data set.An exampleof one of the potentialproblemsthat canbe unearthedthroughan
examinationof the 1870paneldataisprovidedin a studyof clothproduction by KrisInwoodand PhyllisWagg,'The Survivalof HandloomWeavingin Rural Canadacirca1870,'JournalofEconomic History, 53 (1990):346-58.Theyfind evidencethat the production of wool cloth for the market wasunderreported by the censusenumeratorsin New Brunswick, NovaScotia,and Quebec.This waslargelya productof the enumeratorsnot includingon-farmmarketproduction in their accounting.But the significance of thiserror is not readilyapparent from the evidence.At mostit would haveonly a tiny effect on the industry totals,probablybiasingupwardmy estimateof plant sizefor textile products (seetable 7).
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
565
Apart from the above-mentioned adjustments, the basicplant size, worker per plant estimatespresentedhere simplyinvolvedividingthe relevantestimatesfor the number of workersby the number of plants.The
construction of the supplementary plantsizeestimates measuredin termsof real valueadded per plant involvesa more intricateprocedure.One must first construct nominal
nominal
value added
estimates and then
convert
these
estimates into their constant dollar or real value added counter-
parts.
The censusdatafor rawmaterialsand grossoutput are usedto construct the real value added estimates.These are upper-boundestimatessincethe census-based raw materialestimatesdo not include the costof fuel, power,
and miscellaneous expenses.Data to constructsuch estimatesare only available for 1900. One can use the estimates derived from the 1900 census
data to inflate the raw material estimatesfor all other censusyears.This
procedurewouldreducethe nominalvalueaddedestimates constructed for thispaperby about18 per cent.However,it wouldnot affectour growth rateestimates, except,perhaps,by marginallyincreasingthosegrowthrates using1870astheirbaseyear? Real value added estimatesare generatedby deflating sectorspecific nominal value added estimatesby sectorspecificgrossoutput deflators basedon DBSwholesaleprice index numbers.Two setsof real output estimates are producedin order to constructthe outputper plantestimates, one of which uses1913 as the baseyear for the deflators,while the other uses1890 as the baseyear. The 1890 set of output estimatesis used to generatethe output growthestimatespresentedin this article,sinceit is probable,althoughnot certain,that the estimatesconstructed usingthe
priceindexnumbers with1890astheirbaseyeararethemostreliable? PlantSizeand CanadianManufacturing
Giventhe availabledata,the mostreliableestimatesfor plant sizewhich can be constructedare those for worker per plant. These estimatesdo not
16 Urquhart,'NewEstimates of GrossNationalProduct,'adjuststhe census-based value-addedestimates, usingthe 1900censusdata soasto accountfor the cost of fuel, power,and miscellaneous expenses. AItman, 'Revision'and 'Revised Real CanadianGNP Estimates,' usesthe adjustedestimatesto constructreal manufacturingvalueaddedestimates aswell asreal GDP estimates. 17 The real valueaddedestimates are presentedin MorrisAltman, 'Sectoral ManufacturingGrowthin Canada,1870-1910,the WheatBoom,and the Staple Theoryof EconomicDevelopment,'Twenty-Second General Conference, International Association far Income and Wealth, Flims,Switzerland,August1992.For a detailed discussionon the constructionof real output estimatesin manufactur-
ing seeAltman,'Revision'and 'Revised RealCanadianGNPEstimates.'
566
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
encounter the index number problemsso common in estimatingreal output or capital stock. Nevertheless,my real value added per plant estimates actasan importantcheckon myworkerper plantestimates. '8 The commonlyusedmeasureof averageplant sizeis the simplearithmeticaveragewhichis, in effect,derivedby weightingaverageplant sizein eachof the seventeenmajorsectors by the percentagedistributionof plants amongthesesectors.Sincethisaveragemeasureof averageplantsizeis so significantlyaffectedby the distributionof plants,averageplant sizeindicatesthe plant sizeof the typicalplant.It cannot,necessarily, tell much,for example, about the plant size of the plant where the typicalworker is employed.It is quitepossible for averageplantsizeto be small,whileat the sametime the typicalworker is employedin a relativelylarge plant. For example,80 per centof all workersmaybe employedin one plantemploying 1000people.Yet, averageplant sizecanbe aboutsixworkersif the other 200 plantsin the sectortogetheremploy250 people. In this case,most workersare employedin a largeplant,althoughmostplantsare quite small. To guard againstthispotentialproblem,I estimatemedianplant sizefor manufacturingin order to approximatethe plant size where the fiftieth percentileof workersfindsemploymentor wherethe fiftiethpercentileof output is produced.The medianand arithmeticaveragecan differ if the percentagedistributionof plant and employmentor output among the manufacturingsubsectors differs,and if the differentsubsectors are characterizedby differentaverageplant sizes. On average,from 1870 to 1880 plant size (workersper plant) for all manufacturing increasedby 12 per cent (table2), from 4.7 to 5.3 workers (table 1). In 1890 averageplant sizewas5.1. Median plant sizein 1870, however,was5.2, increasingby 20 per cent to 6.2 by 1880.By 1890median
plantsizewas4.7 workers.From1870to 1890changesin plantsizewere minusculein absolutetermsfor both averageand medianplant size.I also find that the growth of plant size in each of the major manufacturing sectors wassimilarto the averagegrowthpathfor all sectorscombined,with the exceptionof iron and steelproducts,food and beverages, the clothing sector,and the wood productssectors.Finally,it is clearfrom table 1 that only a negligibleproportionof manufacturingworkerswere employedin thosesectors whereaverageplantsizewassignificantly greaterthanaverage. For thoseplantsemployingmore thanfour workers,plant size(workers per plant) increasedsignificantly in both absoluteand percentageterms
18 The number of workersper plant isa goodproxyfor plant sizeif one iscomparingplantsat similarpointsin the business cycle- a criterionmetin this article.SeeAnthonyPatrickO'Brien,'FactorySize,Economiesof Scale,and the GreatMergerWaveof 1898-1902,'JournalofEconomic History48 (1988), for a discussionof the advantages of usingworkersper plantasa measureof plantsize.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
567
from twenty-three to thirtyworkers,or by 34 per centfrom 1890to 1900.By 1910averageplant sizehad increasedonlymarginallyto thirty-twoworkers, or by 8 per cent when usingthe lower-boundestimates(tables1 and 2). Upper-boundestimates,in contrast,suggestan increaseof about 29 per cent. Median plant size,in contrastto the arithmeticaverage,grew most substantially during Canada'swheat boom, increasingfrom twenty-sixto forty-twoworkers,or by 62 per cent.This standsin markedcomparisonto an increaseof twenty-two to twenty-six workers,or of 18 per cent, in the 1890s.This differencein growthratesis primarily the product of median plantsizebeingmuchgreaterthanthe arithmeticaveragein 1910(table1). Thesetwo measuresof plant sizediffer asa resultof important differences in the distributionof plantsand workersamongthe major manufacturing sectorsin 1910. In this year, the percentageof workersemployedin the sectorswith the larger plantsis consistently much greater than the percentageof all plantsin thesesectors. In previouscensusyearsthisdistribution wasrelativelysimilarfor plantsand workers.Therefore,in 1910 the typicalworker wasemployedin a much larger plant than in 1900, even thoughthe sizeof the typicalplantwaslittle differentin 1910 from what it was in 1900 (table 1).
These resultsare to somedegreereinforced by my plant size estimates measuredin termsof real value added per plant (tables4A and 4B and tables5^ and 5B). With respectto the latter measureof averageplant size, however,the arithmeticmean of plant sizeincreasedsubstantially in the 1900-10 period (50 to 60 per cent), evenmore so than it did in the 1890s (about 44 per cent). This increasein plant sizeduring the first decadeof the twentieth century is largely attributableto the unique and massive increasein labourproductivity that occurredin the 1900-10period (table 6B).
I alsofind that the growthin plantsize(workersper plant) amongthe major sectorsfrom 1890 to 1910 deviatesconsiderablyfrom that of the
manufacturing sectorasa whole.ThisdiffersfromwhatI find for 1870to 1890. Nevertheless, averageplant sizegrewmostsignificantlyduring the 1890sin mostsectors,the importantexceptionhere being the transportation sector,whichwasthe only major sectorto experienceits mostsignificantgrowth(70 per cent) in plant sizeduring the period encompassing the Canadianwheat boom. Plant sizein the iron and steelsectoralsogrew markedlyduring Canada'swheatboom,althoughitsgrowthwasevenfaster in the 1890s (table 2).
Sincethe estimatesfor the 1890-1910 period are for plantsemploying morethanfour workers,myestimates, whichdemonstrate an increasein the averageplant size of theserelativelylarger plants,can be significantin understanding plant sizein manufacturing asa whole,but only if one can establishthe importanceof plantsemployingmore than four workersto
568 THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
overallCanadianmanufacturing. This taskisaccomplished in a veryapproximate manner given the availablecensusmaterial, for only the census materialfor 1890allowsone to establishthe significance of the largerplants. Fromtable3 it is evidentthatthe largerplantsmadeup only17 per centof manufacturingestablishments. However,theseplantsemployedabout 74 per centof all manufacturing workersandproducedabout77 per centof all grossmanufacturingoutput? Therefore,althoughthe smallerplantswere predominantin numbersin 1890, they were relativelyunimportantwith respectto labour employmentand production.The only exceptionsto this rule are thosesectorswhere the larger plantsincorporatedmostplants as well as mostworkersand output. Derivationsfrom the 1890 data set also revealthat althoughaverageplant sizefor all plantswasonly 5.1 workers, most workerswere employedand most output was produced in plants averagingtwenty-threeworkers.The low averageplant size is simply a productof the overwhelming numberof smallplantsrelativeto the number of larger plants,and of the verysmallaveragesizeof the smallerplants:1.6 workersper plant (table3). Estimatesfor grossoutputfor the smallerand largerplantsalsoallowfor the constructionof estimatesfor the relative labour productivityof the largerascomparedwith the smallerplants(table 3). On average,establishmentsemployingfiveworkersor morewere only4 per cent more productivethan thoseestablishments employingfewerthanfiveworkers.There are, of course,variationsaboutthe mean,with somesectors,employing23 per cent of all workers,showinglittle or no differencein labour productivity betweenthe larger and smaller plants. In most other sectorsthe larger plantswere, to varyingdegrees,more productivethan the smallerplants. Only in the leather productssector,which employed7 per cent of all workers,were smallerplantsmuch more productivethan the largerplants. Theseestimates suggest no clearpositiverelationshipbetweenplantsizeand labourproductivityacrosssectorsfor a givenyear. By focusingon levelsand changesin plant size among the seventeen major manufacturingsectors,this article has, to this point, ignored the evolutionof plant sizewithin each of the major sectors.Only a systematic examinationof plant size,and the percentagedistributionof employment within the major sectors,can reveal the extent to which relativelylarge plantsplayedan importantrole in the employmentof labour.Spacelimitationsprecludesucha detailedmicro analysishere. Nevertheless, for inter-
19 SeeKrisInwood andJohn Chamard,'RegionalIndustria|Growthduring the 1890s:The Caseof the MissingArtisans,'Acadiensis 16 (1986): 108, for a significantreconstruction of the 1890censusestimates on a provincial basisto accountfor the shareof smallfirmsin total provincialmanufacturing output. The censusitselfprovidesdata only for Canadaasa whole.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
569
ested researchers,table 7 containsa detailed breakdownof plant size, measuredbyworkerper plant,for eachof the seventeenmajormanufacturing sectors.What becomesclear from an examination of theseestimatesis that for everycensusyear, the averageplant sizeestimatesfor the major sectorsexaggeratethe importanceof the smallerplants.In many of the major sectors,one findsthat a largepercentageof workerswere employed in plantsthat were much largerthan average.On the other hand, although there are subsectors with plant size less than the sector average,these
subsectors are of much greaterimportanceto the shareof plantsin the sectorthan to the shareof employment. OutputGrowthin CanadianManufacturing
I havealreadynoted that the outputgrowthestimatesthat will be discussed
in thisarticlepertainto plantsof all sizesfor the 1870-90period,and to plantsemployingmore than four workersfor the 1890-1910period.These growthestimatesare, therefore,consistent with my plant sizeestimates. The annual growth estimatesfor total manufacturingvalue added (table 6A) clearly suggestthat the annual growth rate experiencedin the 1900-10 period marked an important break with the growth experience of the previousthree decades.Growthin the 1900-10 periodwasabouttwicethat of the 1870-80 period (9 per cent as comparedwith 4.8 per cent per annum),the nextmostrapiddecadeof extensive growth? øIt isimportantto note that the extensivegrowthestimatesfor the 1890sand for the 1900-10 period,which of courseare for largerfirms, are similarto what I estimate, elsewhere, for plantsof all sizes. 2• The 1900-10 period, however,did not mark a break with the pastfor nine out of the seventeenmajor manufacturingsectors,althoughgrowthin this period was relativelyhigh for all seventeensectors.Extensivegrowth ratesvariedfrom period to period,and betweensectorswithin eachperiod. Of thosesectorsexperiencingtheir mostrapid growthin the firstdecadeof the twentieth century,food and beverages,iron and steel products,and transportationequipmentwere the most important with respectto their contributionto total manufacturing outputand employment,representing 38 per centof outputand 35 per centof employmentby 1910.Thesesectors experiencedannualgrowthratesof about8, 13, and 16 per cent,respectively, in thisdecade.The iron and steelproductssectorwasthe mostimportant
20 All of the growthestimatespresentedin tables6A and 6B differ but little from thosegrowthratesgeneratedusingreal valueaddedestimatesgeneratedby outputpricesdeflatorswith differentbaseyears.SeeAltman, 'SectoralManufacturingGrowthin Canada.' 21 See Altman, 'A Revision of Canadian Economic Growth,' 98.
570 THE CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
of thesethree. The mostrapidlygrowingsectorof the 1900-10 period,electrical apparatusand supplies,grewby over 18 per cent per annum,but it contributedlessthan 2 per cent to total manufacturingoutputand employment.
Labour productivitygrowthof 4.0 per cent in the manufacturingsector as a whole during the 1900-10 period representsa major breakwith the near stagnantgrowthperformancethat marked the 1880sand 1890saswell as with the more respectablegrowth record of 2.0 per cent per annum achievedin the 1870s(table613).With the exceptionof five sectors, sector specificlabour productivitygrowthin the 1900-10 time-framewasvigorous. However,relativeto the growthperformanceof previousdecades,onlythe labourproductivitygrowthin the food and beverages sectorof 7 per centin the 1900-10 period markeda radicalbreakwith the past.Nevertheless, labour productivityalsogrewmore quicklyin the 1900-10 time-framethan in the previousthree decadesin the rubber products,iron and steelproducts, transportationequipment, non-metallicmineral, and chemical products sectors. But in iron and steelproductsand in transportation equipment,for example,labourproductivity growthfrom 1900to 1910wasnot muchgreater than the growth realized in the 1880s.The '1880swasalsoa decadeof relativelystronggrowthfor the clothing,non-metallicmineralproducts,and chemicalproductssectors.The poor labourproductivitygrowthrealizedin mostof the other sectorscausedthe aggregateproductivitygrowthrate to be as low as it wasin the 1880s.Labour productivitygrowthvaried considerablybetweensectorsboth within and acrossdecades.However,what was
souniqueto the 1900-10periodwasthe vigorousproductivitygrowthperformanceof so manysectors,simultaneously, in the sametime-frame. Thesesectorspecificgrowthestimatesrevealthe complexnatureof the interactionamongCanada'smajormanufacturingsectors which,ultimately, made the first decadeof the twentiethcenturya golden age of Canadian manufacturinggrowth.What needs to be emphasizedhere is that three sectors- food and beverages, iron and steelproducts,and transportation
equipment- all closelytied to thewheatboom,led the process of vigorous manufacturinggrowth in Canada.It is also clear from theseestimatesthat
the substantial growthin plantsizemeasuredbyvalueaddedper plantfrom 1900 to 1910 is largelyattributableto the impressive labourproductivity growthperformancethatcharacterized thisperiodf-•
22 Growthof real valueaddedper plant is givenby the growthin the numberof workersper plant plusthe growthin real valueadded per plant. For a detailed discussion of sector-specific growthratesin manufacturingseeAItman, 'Sectoral ManufacturingGrowthin Canada.'Here I find that labouremployment grewby 3.1, 3.6, 2.3, and between3 and 4 per cent per annum in the 1870s, 1880s,1890s,and the 1900-10 periods,respectively. Thus,giventhat total
NOTES AND COMMENTS
571
Conclusion
The evidencepresentedin thisarticledemonstrates that averageplant size in Canadian manufacturingincreasedmost significantlyin the 1890sand from 1900to 1910.Estimates of medianplant sizefurther suggestthat plant sizeincreasedmostsignificantly in the latter period,the decadethat coincidedwith the Canadianwheatboom.And it wasonlyin the 1900-10period that labourproductivitygrowthin manufacturingwasof anyconsequence as comparedto what tookplacein the previousthree decades.Thus, the new estimatesof plant sizeofferedhere,when combinedwith my new output growthestimates, provideadditionalsupportfor the propositionthat the 1870-1910periodwascharacterized bya discontinuous growthprocess, with a majorbreaktakingplacewith the wheatboom.Althoughthesefindings providesome tentativesupportfor the suggestionthat the wheat boom, increasesin averageplant size,and increasesin labour productivitywere statistically related, thesefindingscan in no wayproveCaves'sassumption that thesethreevariableswerecausallyrelated.Thesefindings,however,do point to the need for further researchin ascertainingthe role that increasing plantsizeactuallyplayedin the growthof the Canadianeconomy. My plant sizeestimatesalsodemonstratethat the Canadianexperience differed in importantwaysfrom the American.PatrickAnthony O'Brien showsthat the growthof plant sizein Americanmanufacturingwasmost significant duringthe 1870sand 1880s,levellingoff thereafter. 2"By1890the plant sizeof firmsin Canadaemployingmore thanfour workerswassimilar to that of firmsin the United Statesin sectorswith few hand and neighbourhood industries:approximatelytwenty-twoworkers. By 1910, however, averageplantsizein Canadastoodat betweenthirty-threeandfortyworkers, ascomparedwith onlytwenty-five workersin the United States. -ø4 It is also noteworthythatplantsizein Canadaincreased duringperiodsof both low and high ratesof labour productivitygrowth,whereasin the United States the growthin averageplantsizetaperedoff duringthe 1890sandfrom 1900 to 1910, decadesof relativelylow labour productivitygrowth in American manufacturing?How thendoesoneexplainthe largedifferencein average
manufacturinggrowthis equalto the growthin labourproductivityplusthe growthin labouremployment,the importantdiscontinuityin total decennial growthregisteredin the 1900-10periodis largelyattributableto the spurtin labourproductivity growthrealizedin the firstdecadeof the twentiethcentury. 23 O'Brien, 'FactorySize,'645-6 24 Table 1, and O'Brien, 'FactorySize,'646, table2 25 Altman,'A revisionof CanadianEconomicGrowth,'98, table5, presents Canadianand Americanlabourproductivitygrowthratesthat are largely derivedfromRobertE. Gallman,'The UnitedStatesCommodityOutput, 1839-1899,' in Trend•s in theAmerican Economy in theNineteenth Century, Studiesin
572 THE CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
plant sizebetweenthesetwo countriesby 1910,aswell as the differencein the timingin the growthof plant size?It ishopedthat by paintinga seriesof somewhatabstractpicturesof earlyCanadianmanufacturing,the detailed estimatespresentedin this article on plant size, manufacturingoutput growth,and labourproductivitygrowthcan help addresstheseand other questionsrelated to plant sizeand the manufacturingsectoras a whole during the first forty-oddyearsof Canadianconfederation. MORRIS ALTMANUniversity of Saskatchewan
Income and Wealth 24 (New York 1960), 56, table A-5. These estimatessuggest
thatlabourproductivity in the United Statesdeclinedfrom 3.1 per centper annumin the 1869-99periodto 1.0 per centin the 1899-1909period.Seealso JohnKendrick,Productivity Trend•in theUnited States (Princeton1961),136,465, whoestimates thatlabourproductivity in the UnitedStatesdeclinedfrom 1.4 per centper annumfrom 1869to 1899to 0.7 percentin the 1899-1909 period.
This isa much-revised versionof a paperpresentedto the SecondWorld Congress of the CliometricsSociety,Universidadde Cantabria,Santander,Spain,in June 1989.This article hasbenefitedfrom commentsand suggestions made by three
anonymous referees, byKrisInwood,LouiseLamontagne, andBobOlley,andby participants at theWorldCongress. The standardcaveatapplies.Research for this paperwas,in part,financedby a grantfrom the SocialSciences and Humanities ResearchCouncilof Canada.The final versionof thispaperwasdraftedduring the author'stenureasVisitingHalbert Professor of CanadianStudieswith the Department of Economicsat the HebrewUniversityofJerusalem,whoseexcellentfacilities were greatlyappreciated.
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
575
TABLE 1 (continued)
Notes:The 1900and 1910estimates omit the butter and cheeseindustryof the food and beverages sectorsinceit includesdataon smallerplants.The bracketed1900estimatesexclude data on the brick and tile industryof the non-metallicminteral.productssector.The bracketed 1910estimates excludedataon thebutterandcheese,fishpreserving, andflour andgristmill industriesof the food and beverages sector,aswell asdata on the lumberproductsindustryof the wood productssectorand the bricksand tilesand lime industriesof the non-metallic mineral productssector.The bolded 1910estimatesfor the total number of workersand plantsincludedata for the latter three industries.Other plantsare thosefor which the census providesno data on the number of employees.Seethe text for further detailson the constructionof theseestimates. NF and NM refer to non-ferrousand non-metallicrespectively. Sources:Census of Canada,1870-1,vol. 3 (Ottawa1875); Census of Canada,1880-1,vol. 3 (Ottawa 1883); Census of Canada,1890-1, vol. 3 (Ottawa 1894); Census of Canada,1900-1, vol. 3 (Ottawa1905); Census of Canada,1911,vol. 3 (Ottawa1913).The 1890estimatesfor the larger plantsare basedon date in the 1900-1 census.
TABLE
2
Growth of Plant Size, 1870-1910 Plants of all sizes
1880/1870 1890/1880
Plants with 5 workers
1890/1870
1900/1890
or more
1910/1900
1910/1890
Food &bevs
1.54
0.94
1.45
0.90
0.72
0.65
Tob & tob prods Rubber prods Leatherprods Textile prods Clothing Wood prods Paperprods Printing& publ Iron & steelprods Trans equip NF metal prods Electricalprods Petrol & coalprods NM min prods Chemicalprods
1.36 1.06 1.30 0.98 1.08 1.20 0.92 1.22 1.01 0.99 0.50
0.91 0.53 0.82 0.87 0.59 1.12 0.92 0.96 1.11 1.00 1.31
1.24 0.56 1.07 0.85 0.64 1.35 0.85 1.17 1.11 0.99 0.65
1.15 1.02 1.45
1.83 1.32 1.00
2.11 1.35 1.45
1.03 0.64 1.63 1.58 1.89 1.25 1.62 1.12 1.54 1.61 1.36 2.80 0.94 0.84 2.67
1.23 1.56 1.27 1.00 1.60 0.86 1.11 1.10 1.31 1.70 1.05 1.67 1.32 1.88 0.96
1.26 1.00 2.07 1.57 3.03 1.08 1.80 1.23 2.01 2.74 1.43 4.68 1.24 1.59 2.58
Miscmfgprods
1.12
0.70
0.78
1.66
0.90
1.49
TOTAL
1.12
0.97
1.09
1.34
1.08
1.44
Median
1.19
0.76
0.90
1.18
1.62
1.91
Notes and sources: See table 1 above. NF and NM refer to non-ferrous and non-metallic,
respectively.
580
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
TABLE 7A
PlantSizein the MajorManufacturing Sectors,1870-90 Plants of all sizes
1870
Plant
%of
1880
%of
size workers plant Food and beverages Meatprods Dairyprods Canning& preserving Grainmill prods Bakeryprods Beverages Confectionery
Sugar
5 4 14 2 3 7 3 90
Misc
7.71 4.68 10.44 8.57 4.85 1.07 38.52 55.70 20.59 22.48 13.22 5.87 1.28 1.36 2.78 0.10
Plant
%of
1890
%of
size workers plant
5 3 24 3 3 6 4 63
3.94 3.79 8.29 14.08 32.89 6.68 24.92 44.90 15.26 22.01 9.25 7.14 0.20 0.26 3.61 0.28
Plant
%of
%of
size workers plant
3 2 6 2 3 6 9 85
2.95 4.19 6.01 13.80 56.97 41.02 11.04 20.31 7.95 13.17 6.05 4.49 4.38 2.24 3.43 0.18
11
0.62
0.17
9
1.64
0.86
9
1.22
0.59
TOTAL
3
100.00
100.00
5
100.00
100.00
5
100.00
100.00
Leatherprods Boot& shoerepair
4
73.07
65.72
4
67.70
65.02
3
68.60 69.05
Leather tanneries
4
16.52
17.96
5
19.73
14.91
5
16.84
22
1.90
0.35
15
2.43
0.56
2
10.66
19.71
2
12.13
20.05
Gloves and mittens
Misc
3
TOTAL
4
10.41 100.00
16.32 100.00
4
100.00
100.00
3
100.00
10.34
100.00
Textile prods
Cottongoods Wooliengoods
93 6
9.86 0.78 174 75.17 89.76 5
Silk & artificial silk
1.57
0.11
Dyeing& finishing 3 Laces,tapes,& bindings Canvass prods 5 Carpets,mats,& rugs Cordage,etc.,& bags 18
1.40
3.41
4
1.22
2.37
0.07
0.10
5.96
2.44
18 1 24
0.27 0.11 3.95
Coated fabrics
10
0.13
0.10
10
Misc
16
7.40
3.41
30
7
100.00
100.00
7
TOTAL
106
27.29 1.13 297 58.04 92.62 4 107
35.94 0.76 43.99 76.48 1.34
0.08
0.11 0.59 1.18
4 10 4 2 15
1.22 1.89 0.49 0.32 1.55 2.29 4.01 14.82 4.38 1.81
0.15
0.11
33
0.56
7.40
1.78
28
6.52
1.45
100.00
100.00
6
100.00
100.00
0.11
Clothing Men, women, & kids
6
Knit goods Corsets, girdles,etc. Fur goods& hats
22 0 3
Misc TOTAL
3 7
87.42
1.43 0.00 0.28 0.28 100.00
93.87
7
86.49
0.42 0.00 0.66
19 0 2
4.92 0.00 0.15
0.66 100.00
2 7
0.15 100.00
94.04
1.87 0.00 0.45 0.45 100.00
4
88.36
95.47
8 0 13
4.38 0.00 5.14
2.39 0.00 1.64
3 4
0.18 100.00
0.23 100.00
Wood prods
Saw& planingmills
6
7
80.56 68.93
9
81.48 66.65
Furniture
5
81.89 69.91 9.09
9.20
5
10.70
13.33
5
10.10
Boxes and baskets
5
1.48
1.46
7
1.87
1.59
5
2.82
3.91
Misc TOTAL
2 5
7.54 100.00
19.43 100.00
3 6
6.87 100.00
16.15 100.00
2 7
5.60 100.00
15.79 100.00
13.65
NOTES
AND COMMENTS
581
TABLE 7A (cont'd) Planes of all sizes
1870
Plant
% of
1880
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
1890
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
% of
size workers plant
Iron & steelprods
Agricimplements Blacksmithing
10 2
9.00 3.10 36.12 77.08
16 2
9.79 2.19 33.33 74.86
21 1
10.37 1.95 27.55 83.22
Fabri & structural
steel
Hardware & tools Homes
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
74
1.01
0.05
10
1.98
0.71
17
2.61
0.52
17
2.72
0.63
0.21
0.09
0.14
0.07
7
0.73
0.43
8.09
& busin
machinery Machinery(incl. boilers)
Primaryiron & steel Sheetmetalprods Wire & wireprods
8 15
36.30
126 3 38
4.90 8.72 2.14
7
8.43
13
29.12
16
38.54
0.14 9.80 0.20
93 3 44
4.48 0.17 178 10.27 11.92 6 3.39 0.27 16
8.92 3.40 4.32
Misc
5
0.65
0.47
13
6.87
TOTAL
3
100.00
100.00
4
100.00
Trans equip Auto repair,etc. Bicycles& parts Boats& repairs
0 0 2
Motor vehicles
Railroad& equip Shipbldg& repairs
0
28 18
0.00 0.00 2.00
0.00 0.00 4.64
0 0 2
0.00
0.00
0
2.47 0.41 130 43.13 11.13 16
1.90 100.00
0.00 0.00 2.42
0.00 0.00 5.85
0.00
0.00
19.52 27.91
9.52
0.19 2.11 1.08
12
2.44
0.81
4
100.00
100.00
0 13 2 0
0.70 173 8.39 22
0.00 0.90 4.42 0.00
28.59 16.97
0.00 0.32 11.92 0.00
0.77 3.66
Misc
3
52.40
83.82
3
50.15
85.06
3
49.11
83.32
TOTAL
5
100.00
100.00
5
100.00
100.00
5
100.00
100.00
NF metalprods Aluminumprods
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
Brass& copperprods
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
36
0.00
0.00
2.64 24.74
Jewellery& repairs, etc.
Whitemetalalloys
3
14
70.44
31.83
29.56 68.17
3
60.09
0.97
1.09
7.21
21
2.08
11.15
100.00
4
100.00
100.00
0.00
20
TOTAL
6
100.00
100.00
3
Misc
94.31
16
0.00
TOTAL
2
5.18
0
4.02 1.88 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.33 41.65 28.06 3.86 0.33 28.77 57.50 18.40 10.79 0.00 0.00
87.62
1.09
Misc
NM min prods Abrasiveprods 10 Asbestos prods 0 Cement,hydraulic 11 Clayprods& pottery 7 Glass& glassprods 53 Lime& gypsum prods 2 Stoneprods 8 Concreteprods 0
97.82
14
19 0 14 7 71 2 7 0
100.00
1.79 0.00 1.12
0.39 0.00 0.32 42.23 23.11 5.62 0.32 27.31 62.83 19.77 12.05 0.00 0.00
0 8 13 9 57 2 8 0
4.03
0.00 0.00 0.14 0.11 1.51 0.73 45.15 29.81 7.75 0.84 19.34 48.49 23.41 19.02 0.00 0.00
10
2.50
1.11
9
2.16
0.99
17
2.71
1.00
5
100.00
100.00
4
100.00
100.00
6
100.00
100.00
582 THE CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
TABLE 7A (cont'd) Plants of all sizes
1870
Plant
% of
1880
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
1890
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
% of
size workers plant
Chemicalprods Acids, alkalis & .salts
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
Explosives & ammuns
7
0.85
0.56
15
2.75
1.26
Fertilizers
2
29.02
72.74
2
16.26
48.63
0
0.00
27
7.91
2
7.39
1.93 21.81
Med & pharm'alpreps 5
2.22
2.23
7
6.93
6.74
3
Paints & varnishes
6
2.03
1.67
9
8.89
6.74
7
12.14
10.83
Soaps,etc. Compounds Toilet preps Vegl oil mills Primaryplastics
4
9.14
10.43
6
15.15
16.42
5
11.62
14.24
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
8 0
0.91
0.56 0.00
20 0
0.63 0.00
0.21 0.00
23 8
1.01
0.00
0.36
0.30 0.30
22 5
55.83 100.00
11.82 100.00
16 7
49.38 100.00
20.00 100.00
10 7
52.63 100.00
33.23 100.00
Misc TOTAL
6.94
0.00
17.36
Miscmfg prods Brooms, etc.
0
Musical instrs
12
Pens,pencils,etc.
0.00 21.00
0.00
11
31.94
31.93
9
16.60
21
31.41
15.44
24
14.52
12.13
40.98
12.53
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
equip 3 Sportinggoods& toys 25
1.43 3.16
3.95 1.19
7 9
2.24 0.87
3.16 1.05
3 3
1.34 4.35
3.27 9.54
ProFl & sc instrs &
Misc TOTAL
9 9
74.40 100.00
78.26 100.00
7 11
33.54 100.00
48.42 100.00
5 7
38.81 100.00
62.53 100.00
Paper
Paperboxes&bags Pulp& paper
0 36
Misc TOTAL
2 29
0.00 0.00 98.19 77.78 1.81 100.00
22.22 100.00
Printing,publishing,& alliedindustries Commercial printing 13 13.77 12.37
16 39 18 30
16
13.19 24.29 76.42 58.57 10.39 100.00
17.14 100.00
20.31 15.92
13 49 33 27
16
27.82 57.06 63.25 35.58 8.94 100.00
7.36 100.00
13.62 11.28
Engraving,stereotyping, etc.
12
Publishing & printing 11 TOTAL
12
4.86
4.84
81.36 82.80 100.00
100.00
19
11.14
11
68.56 76.62
13
100.00
7.46 100.00
Notes and sources: See table 1 notes and sources, and text, note 13.
14
13 14
7.06
6.69
79.32 82.03 100.00
100.00
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
TABLE
583
7B
PlantSizein the Major ManufacturingSectors,1890-1910 Plants with 5 or more workers
1890
Plant
% of
1900
% of
size workers plant Foodand beverages 15 Meat prods 0 Dairy prods Canning& preserving 27 Grain mill prods 11 Bakeryprods 11 Bevs
Confectionery Sugar
Plant
% of
1910
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
% of
size workers plant
2.46 0.00
3.61 0.00
42 32
5.42 0.28
2.58 0.18
53 33
8.08 0.70
2.24 0.31
64.90 6.94 5.82
53.34 13.60 11.41
19 12 26
53.50 10.89 15.33
55.54 18.98 11.66
12 7 31
36.84 15.54 19.16
45.64 32.43 9.06
16
7.38
10.53
22
10.89
27 215
5.67 5.15
Misc
16
TOTAL
22
1.68 100.00
4.61 23 0.53 316 2.37 100.00
21 20
8.94
8.27
22
0.21 2.84
0.18 0.18
55 157
2.44
21
2.60 100.00
100.00
15
1.91 3.91 2.97 100.00
7.41
0.50 0.36 2.05 100.00
Leather prods
Boot& shoerepair
43
Leather tanneries Gloves & mittens Misc TOTAL
19 41 9 29
Textile prods Cottongoods
Wooliengoods
331 29
Silk & artificial silk
107
70.07 20.13 3.46 6.34 100.00
47.03 30.77 2.45 19.76 100.00
74 28 44 26 47
43.57 6.31 505 37.16 61.17 40
19.01 4.51 11.95 100.00
41.06 32.45 4.86 21.63 100.00
90 33 46 33 60
51.81 7.62 464 29.77 55.56 34 173
67.69 14.60 6.19 11.52 100.00
44.91 26.16 8.10 20.83 100.00
49.37 7.97 19.25 42.31
1.63
0.73
0.00
0.00
14
0.98
3.40
47
3.44
5.40
39
bindings 15 Canvasprods 11 Carpets,mats,& rugs 18 Cordage,etc.& bags 43
0.55 1.16 1.72 4.80
1.70 5.10 4.61 5.34
0 14 37 64
0.00 1.54 2.56 6.30
0.00 7.94 5.08 7.30
34 24 89 79
Coated fabrics
43
0.65
0.73
0
0.00
0.00
Misc TOTAL
34 48
7.78 100.00
10.92 100.00
35 74
4.58 100.00
9.84 100.00
Clothing Men, women, & kids
13
84.79
92.18
18
58.73
37
68.85
Knitgoods
37
5.13
1.93
71
10.36
3.86 122
17.46
6.03
Corsets,girdles,etc. Fur goods& hats
44 21
2.81 7.13
0.88 480 4.79 33
18.96 10.68
1.04 8.54
2.51 10.12
0.98 12.87
Dyeing& finishing
0
64.53
2.54
1.10
11.19 21.43
Laces,tapes,&
85.66
0.49 2.24 4.25 6.71
1.10 7.14 3.57 6.32
0
0.00
0.00
33 75
3.96 100.00
9.07 100.00
108 33
78.62
Misc
10
0.14
0.21
38
1.27
0.89
30
1.07
1.51
TOTAL
14
100.00
100.00
26
100.00
100.00
42
100.00
100.00
Wood prods
Saw& planingmills
21
Furniture Boxes and baskets
23 23
84.72 83.90 9.33 2.51
25
82.01 84.71
21
82.73 87.42
8.54 2.26
40 25
10.95 4.02
46 23
10.48 3.63
7.16 4.13
5.08 3.47
Misc
13
3.44
5.30
20
3.01
4.00
18
3.16
4.03
TOTAL
21
100.00
100.00
26
100.00
100.00
22
100.00
100.00
584
THE
CANADIAN
HISTORICAL
REVIEW
TABLE 7B (cont'd) Plants with 5 or more workers 1890
Plant
% of
1900
% of
Plant
% of
1910
% of
Plant
% of
% of
size workers ,plant size workersplant size workersplant Iron & steelprods Agricimplements Blacksmithing
45 7
Fabri & structural steel Hardware & tools Home
14.36 1.74
11.09 8.52
60 7
18.42 0.20
16.62 124 1.60 7
13.19 0.16
7.60 1.78
74
1.48
0.70
146
2.36
0.87
207
3.14
1.09
28
3.79
4.78
51
5.64
5.98
58
5.16
6.42
18
0.91
1.75
28
1.42
2.77
39
1.13
2.07
34
51.81
54.26
46
50.32
59.33
54
186 17 40
12.98 3.86 5.86
& busin
machinery Machinery(incl. boilers)
Primaryiron & steel Sheetmetalprods Wire & wireprods
2.45 176 7.82 43 5.13 87
5.70 0.46 14.61
1.75 346 0.58 71 9.04 106
48.88
64.56
8.58 1.78 0.68 0.69 17.73 11.94
Misc
32
3.23
3.50
32
0.86
1.46
47
1.35
2.07
TOTAL
35
100.00
100.00
54
100.00
100.00
72
100.00
100.00
Trans equip
Autorepair,etc. Bicycles& parts Boats& repairs Motor vehicles
Railroad& equip Shipbldg& repairs Misc TOTAL
NF metal prods Aluminumprods Brass& copperprods Jewellery& repairs, etc.
0 20 10 0
192 24 13 25
0 2 15
White metalalloys
22
Misc
30 4
TOTAL
NM rain prods Abrasive prods Asbestos prods Cement,hydraulic Clayprods& pottery Glass& glassprods Lime& gypsumprods Stoneprods Concreteprods Misc TOTAL
0 10 20 13
73 14 20 0 18 16
0.00 1.16 1.56
0.00 1.43 3.92
0 28 11
0.00
0.00
0
39.04 4.99 253 22.91 23.53 65 35.33 100.00
66.13 100.00
18 39
0.00 2.86 0.98
0.00 4.03 3.63
0.00
0.00
47.95 12.95 35.27 100.00
77.02 100.00
0 39
0.00 0.00 38.50 30.26
35.64
27
54.53
10.11
61.84
0.95
31
4.02
3.95
13.24
1.91
23
2.95
3.95
100.00
100.00
31
100.00
100.00
0.00 0.00 0.15 0.24 1.74 1.34 51.10 63.18 9.57 2.07 11.64 12.88 22.46 17.38 0.00 0.00 3.34
2.92
100.00
100.00
20 15 65 12 69 5 15 0 22 13
305
7.46 215 7.86 84
0.00 0.00 46.34 87.02
4.78
12 10 8
24 67
2.39 100.00
5.53
1.22
65.91 20.52 8.23 6.53 17.48 100.00
49.85 100.00
0.00 0.00 34.56 31.30
32
61.55
25
63.48
3.89
5.22
0
0.00
0.00
33
100.00
100.00
29 16 102 22 14.21 2.74 69 7.29 18.93 13 8.99 7.87 20 0.00 0.00 12 3.96
1.67 1.06 19.15
0 36
1.87 1.25 0.40 0.34 5.61 1.14 57.68 65.34
100.00
0.30 0.16 2.40
49 25
1.41 1.25 1.02 1.63 10.62 2.63 42.89 49.88 15.37 5.63 3.96 7.88 14.55 18.00 5.06 10.50 5.11
2.63
100.00
100.00
Chemicalprods Acids, alkalis & salts
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
40
1.80
2.01
NOTES
AND
COMMENTS
585
TABLE 7B (cont'd) Plants with 5 or more
1890
Plant
% of
workers
1900
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
1910
% of
size workers plant
Plant
% of
% of
size workers plant
Explosives & ammuns 35
9.82
5.78
56
6.68
5.35
69
4.34
Fertilizers
3.27
6.36
11
0.75
3.21
23
2.05
4.02
3.47
8.09
23
31
21.58
30.92
46 35
10.80 9.12
10.44 11.65
11
Med& pharm'alpreps 9 Paints & varnishes
Soaps,etc. Compounds Toilet preps Vegl oil mills Primaryplastics
14.45 17.34
32 25
14.58 28.88 6.78 7.73
9.63 13.90
2.81
18 13
12.92 10.98
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
89
55.28
27.81
85
40.64
21.29
23
1.27
1.16
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
12
0.34
0.58
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
Misc
26
57.93
46.24
34
8.19
10.70
26
9.67
16.87
TOTAL
20
100.00
100.00
45
100.00
100.00
45
100.00
100.00
Miscmfg prods Brooms, etc. Musical instrs
Pens,pencils,etc.
0
0.00
0.00
31
14.91
20.74
27
10.54
15.28
42
55.85
34.01
62
49.57
34.07
78
43.86
21.83
0
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
13
0.44
1.31
9 8
1.16 3.89
3.40 12.24
20 0
5.84 0.00
12.59 0.00
32 11
7.13 1.15
8.73 3.93
Prof'l & sc instrs &
equip Sportinggoods& toys Misc TOTAL
20 26
39.10 100.00
50.34 100.00
39 43
29.68 100.00
32.59 100.00
29 39
36.89 100.00
48.91 100.00
Paper
Paperboxes& bags Pulp& paper
24 51
26.24 42.73 44 64.80 50.00 118
Misc
49
8.95
7.27
61
10.68
15.95
53
9.51
15.95
TOTAL
39
100.00
100.00
81
100.00
100.00
90
100.00
100.00
Printing,publishing,& alliedindustries Commercial printing 28 13.77 10.84 Engraving,stereotyping, etc.
30
Publishing & printing 20 TOTAL
22
7.08
5.06
79.16 84.10 100.00
100.00
33 17
23 24
21.48 39.88 53 67.83 44.17 136
22.74
16.57
0.56
0.79
76.70 82.64 100.00
100.00
Notes and sources: See table 1 notes and sources, and text, note 13.
41 15
20 27
23.70 39.88 66.79 44.17
47.85 31.15 0.72
1.25
51.43 67.60 100.00
100.00
586 THE CANADIAN
LETTER
HISTORICAL
TO THE
REVIEW
EDITORS
As co-authorsof Dieppe:Tragedyto Triumph,we would have welcomeda balancedand impartialreviewof our book, howevercriticalit might have been.
It would surely not have been difficult for the editors of Canadian HistoricalReviewto find someonein the historicalcommunitywho was capableof producingan unbiasedappraisal.We havebeen reviewedby
almosteverymajornewspaper and magazinein Canadain the pastyearand-a-halfand,with rare exceptions,criticallyacclaimed. A truly disinterestedreviewerwould have applied the double blind principle in the spirit of scholarlyevaluationand fairness.Instead, the CanadianHistoricalReview committedwhatwe regardasa lamentableerror in judgment in selectinga reviewerwho wason record ashavinga thesison Dieppe that wasdiametricallycontraryto our own and who had been publiclyoutspokenin hishostilityto our bookduringthe eighteenmonthssince it waspublished.The conflictof interestis heightenedby another fact of which the CanadianHistoricalReview wassurelyaware:the reviewer'sbook on Dieppe and our own are both activelymarketedin direct competitionwith each other in book stores across Canada.
That an academicpublication of your stature would permit and encouragesuchbiasis a gravedisappointment. BRIG.-GEN. DENIS WHITAKER and SHELAGH WHITAKER Oakville
SEVENTY-FIFTH
ANNIVERSARY
TheCanadianHistorical Review is celebratingseventy-five yearsof publication in 1995.With the September1995issue,commissioned to coincidewith the 18th InternationalCongress of HistoricalSciencesto be held in Montreal, 27August-3September 1995,the CHRwill launcha newgraphicdesign.The specialanniversary issuewill featurearticlesbyMarleneShore(York),Jean Paul Bernard (UQ/tM),Joy Parr (Sl•U),and Donald H. Akenson (Queen's), and reviewessays by PeterWaite and GraemeWynn.
