Book Review: Canada: Mr. Prime Minister 1867–1964
| Published date | 01 March 1965 |
| Date | 01 March 1965 |
| Author | Ramsay Cook |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070206502000119 |
| Subject Matter | Book Review |
124
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
provinces,
I
feel
safe
in
recommending
this
book
to
anyone
who
finds
that
his
local
newspaper
does
less
than
justice
to
the
news
from
the
rest
of
the
country:
the
coverage
of
the
year's
events in
each
of
the
provinces
is
excellent.
Australia'n
National
Univer8ity
DAVID
COR•3Er
MR. PRIME
MINISTER
1867-1964.
By
Bruce Hutchison.
1964.
(Toronto:
Longmans.
394pp.
$7.50)
Mr.
Hutchison's
new
book
will
neither
disappoint
his
many
ad-
mirers, nor satisfy
his
numerous
critics.
It
is
written
in
the
same
loose,
always personal, style
of
his
many
previous
works.
Despite
its
title
and
its
attempt
to
define
the
rules
of
successful
prime
ministership,
it
is
not
a
study
of
a
public
office
so
much
as
a
chronicle
of
the
per-
sonalities
who
have
held
that
office.
Its
judgements
are
undocumented,
the
book
being
a
work
of
vulgarisation.
Five
of
our fourteen
prime
ministers
are
judged
successes,
eight
failures, with
the
jury
still
out
in
the
case
of
Lester Pearson.
Of
the
successes,
only
Borden
will
surprise
some
readers.
If
such
judgements
can
be
made,
this
one seems
just,
though
for
the
wrong,
and
orthodox,
reasons:
Borden
advanced
Canadian autonomy.
The
leader
who
wins
Mr.
Hutchison's
highest grade
(and this
should
not
surprise
readers
of
the
Incredible Canadian)
is
Louis
St.
Laurent. Is
that
because
Mr.
St.
Laurent
seemed
more
like
an
English
Canadian
than
most
of
his
compatriots?
Mr.
King
has
not
become
any
more
credible,
though
Mr.
Hutchison
seems
to
like
him less
than
ever;
still
he
judges
him
a
suc-
cess
especially
on
his
performance
during
the
Second
World
War.
But
the
author's
deepest
antipathies
are
saved
for
his
chapter
on
"The
Lost
Prophet."
While
based
on
Peter
Newman's
work,
the writing
is
wit-
tier
and
more
pointed
(Donald
Fleming, a
combination
of
Pecksniff
and
Sir
Galahad).
One
can
only
hope
that
the
choice
of
adjective
to
describe
the
prophet
is
accurate
in
prediction
as
well
as
judgement.
There
is
an
old-fashioned
air
about
this
book
which
is
best
seen
in
the
author's attitude
toward
Dominion
autonomy
and
provincial auton-
omy.
He
remains
a
Liberal
nationalist
of
the
Dafoe
school
on
both
these
matters.
Thus
he
carefully
marks
every
step
toward
Canadian
autonomy
and
never,
for
a
moment,
questions
the
end
result.
Moreover,
he
refuses
to
accept
any
new-fangled
notions
about
decentralization
or
the
idea
of
"two
nations."
He
invariably
refers
to
French and
English
Canadians
rather
awkwardly
as
"races,"
a
word
that
carries
a
fin
de
sic7le
nostalgia
despite
its
regrettable
revival
in
the
terms
of
refer-
ence
of
the
B.
&
B.
Commission.
He
speaks
about Mr. Pearson's
"concessions"
to
Quebec,
and
entertains
the
gravest
doubts
about
the
"erosion"
of
federal
power.
Mr.
Hutchison
is
an
admirer
of
French
Canada
but
he
has
very
little
understanding
of
the
depths
of
the
cur-
rents
of
nationalism
in
today's
Quebec;
his
fondest
hope
(one doubtless
shared
by
most
of his
readers)
is
that
Premier
Lesage
will
turn
into
a
new
St.
Laurent
or
Laurier.
"O0i
sont
les
Libereaux
d'antan?"
he
seems
to
wonder.
To continue reading
Request your trial