province in exchange for their votes on the railway. In frustration, Macdonald mused whether the French in Canada could ever be satisfied: “I had to circumvent a rather ignoble plot to cause a stampede of my French friends, by offering them, for their semi-insolvent province, large pecuniary aid. The plot failed, but this combination of the French to force the hand of the government of the day is a standing menace to Confederation.”
As if Macdonald needed more trouble, in early July 1884 Louis Riel slipped back into Canada from the United States. Macdonald issued orders to keep Riel under close observation: “I don’t attach much importance to these plots but my experience of the Fenian business has taught me that one should never disbelieve the evidence of plots or intended raids merely because they are foolish and certain to fail ...One cannot foresee what they ...under Riel’s advice, may do.”
Nevertheless, Macdonald wanted to address the legitimate needs of the Métis in a responsible manner. The Manitoba Act (1870) set aside 1.4 million acres of land for the Métis. That worked out to 240 acres of land for each child, and 160 acres of negotiable scrip to the head of each Métis family. Macdonald knew the dangers of passing out scrip: “The scrip is sold for a song to the sharks and spent in whiskey and this we desire above all things to avoid.”
But political agitation from the Métis was enormous and Macdonald relented in an uncharacteristic moment of weakness. In the House of Commons, Macdonald outlined his fear: “I do not hesitate to say that I did it with the greatest reluctance. I do not easily yield if there is a better course open; but at the last moment I yielded and I said: well for God’s sake, let them have the scrip; they will either drink it or waste it or sell it; but let us have peace.”
Macdonald was prepared to be open minded and even generous with Riel. He wrote to the governor general. “There is, I think, nothing to be feared from Riel. In his answer to the invitation sent to him, which was a temperate and unobjectionable paper, he spoke of some claims he had against the government. I presume these refer to his land claims, which he forfeited on conviction and banishment. I think we shall deal liberally with him and make him a good subject again.”
As expected, Riel made demands for his people to the Canadian government, amounting to some two million acres of land. But Riel also demanded benefits for himself: $100,000 and a job, and offered to end the turmoil if his personal demands were met. Macdonald reported to the House of Commons that Riel, “. . . came in for the purpose of attempting to extract money from the public purse. Of course, that could not be entertained for a moment.”
Whatever settlement might have been negotiated with Riel ended on March 26, 1885, when forces clashed at Duck Lake. Macdonald’s first response was all business. “This insurrection is a bad business but we must face it as best we may. . . . the first thing to be done is to localize the insurrection.” Macdonald sent in the military. Transporting the troops gave the cash-strapped railway its first real test.
Riel and his followers were defeated at Batoche in what could hardly rank as a significant military accomplishment because the outcome was never in doubt. But Riel’s surrender on May 15, 1885 was cause for celebration in Ottawa. Macdonald wrote to Tupper, “Canada as you will see is delirious with enthusiasm on the return of our volunteers. This has done more to weld the provinces into one nation than anything else could have done.”
The trial of Louis Riel on six counts of treason began on July 20, 1885. Riel’s counsel presented an insanity defence, which lasted all of one day, and which Riel himself rejected. The Chief Justice said, “he seems to have had in view, while professing to champion the interests of the Métis, the securing of pecuniary advantage for himself.” Six jurors of English and Protestant stock convicted him of treason and Judge Hugh Richardson handed down the sentence of death by hanging. One of the jurors later remarked that the conviction might easily have been connected with the murder of Thomas Scott.
Macdonald was unmoved by pleas for clemency for Riel from French Canada, writing to the governor general: “I don’t think that we should by a respite anticipate—and as it were court—the interference of the Judicial Committee.” In other words, Macdonald did not want his government to intervene in a judicial matter, hardly a surprising statement for an elected official.
However, just as the last spike was about to be driven on the national railway, a solitary moment of great triumph, Macdonald’s government was besieged by division in his party and in the country over the fate of Riel. In response, Macdonald launched an inquiry into the state of Riel’s mental condition. A commission of three doctors, two English and one French, was asked to report on Riel’s current mental state. In issuing instructions to the commission, Macdonald was very precise: “Remember that the jury have decided that he was sane when his treasons were committed, and at the time of his trial. . . . I need scarcely point out to you that the inquiry is not as to whether Riel is subject to illusions or delusions but whether he is so bereft of reason as not to know right from wrong and is not to be an accountable being.”
The report of the commission concluded that Riel was accountable for his actions. In a letter to Macdonald, one commissioner, Dr. Jukes, added that Riel was “a vain ambitious man, crafty and cunning, with powers in a marked degree to incite weak men to desperate deeds. He seeks his own aggrandizement, and in my opinion, if he can attain his own ends, will care little for his followers.” Dr. Lavell was of the same opinion. The French commissioner, Dr. F.X. Valade, disagreed: “I have come to the conclusions that he is not an accountable being, that he is unable to distinguish between wrong and right on political and religious subjects, which I consider well-marked typical forms of insanity under which he undoubtedly suffers, but on other points I believe him to be sensible and can distinguish right from wrong.”
At its meeting on Wednesday November 11, the Cabinet confirmed that it would allow the verdict of the court to stand and would not pardon Riel or commute the sentence. In response, 19 Québec MPs telegraphed Macdonald to express their disapproval and disappointment.
In one of the more monumental underestimations in Canadian political history, Macdonald thought that the aftermath to the Riel execution would be short-lived: “He shall hang though every dog in Québec will bark in his favour.” Macdonald tried to reassure his French-Canadian supporters: “Keep calm resolute attitude—all will come right. . . . we are in for lively times in Québec, but I feel pretty confident that the excitement will die out.” Macdonald’s assessment was that a megalomaniac seeking financial gain for himself could hardly command a sustained following. Riel was hanged on November 16, 1885.
The reaction astonished Macdonald. As if he himself had convicted, sentenced, and pulled the lever of the gallows, Macdonald was referred to, particularly in Québec, as the prime minister of a “hangman’s government.” Riel was cast as a Christian martyr, sacrificed to Orange fanaticism. Liberal leader Wilfrid Laurier inflamed the bitter feelings by claiming that had he lived on the banks of the Saskatchewan River, he would have taken up a rifle against the Canadian government. However, Laurier’s siding with Riel revealed a rift among Liberals, particularly between Laurier and his Ontario colleagues, who had no common ground with Riel. The Liberal predicament was similar to the one Macdonald faced: commute Riel’s sentence and face outrage in Ontario; allow the execution and face fury in Québec.
The Québec legislature took Riel’s side when the question of his execution came up for debate in May of 1886. The challenge of being both a French Canadian and a Conservative was overwhelming to most Quebecers. Giving expression to Québec resentment was a new political party, “le parti national.” Called by the Mail newspaper “the party of race and revenge,” it was the first political party formed along the lines of race. French Québec was distressed not just with the Conservatives, but also by being in Canada.
Macdonald’s trouble with national unity went further than Québec. Because of a weak economy, declining federal subsidies, and cutbacks in shipbuilding, the popular view among Nova Scotians was that they had made a mistake in joining Canada. On May 7, 1886, W.S. Fielding, the Liberal leader, proposed a resolution in the Nova Scotia legislature for the repeal of the Union and a referendum on the matter. The resolution passed with a clear majority. Macdonald interpreted Nova Scotia’s dissatisfaction as, once again, a plea for “better terms,”