PERSON KNOWN AS HER MAJESTY WHO ACTS THROUGH THE COUNCIL
(1) Extraits des Debatea of the House of Commoni. Le chiffre de la colonne est indiqué' après chaque citation.
Le 12 juillet 1904, en comité général: —
Mr. MACLEAN. Am I to undcrstand that clause 77 (1), as it now stands, limits the Canpdian militia in their service outside of Canada to the defence of Canada?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Vts.
Mr. MACLEAN. Not for the c<-fencc of the empire?
Sir 1 REDERICK BORDEN. No.
Mr. MACLEAN. Is this clause the same as the clause in the old Act?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Not precisely.
Mr. MACLEAN. What was the clause under which the government sent out Canadian troops to South Africa?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. They volunteered for service and were sent out as impérial troops under a spécial agreement with the impérial government, partly paid by the British and partly by this government, and the Militia Department organized those volunteers. They did not corne under the Militia Act at ail.
Mr. MACLEAN. Then the active miltia of Canada, under this proposed Act, could not be sent outside this country by the government to take part in the defence of the empire, except under a spécial contract as in the case of the troops sent to South Africa.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Yes. —(6488-89)
Mr. MACLEAN. I would ask the minister if it is not the case that under the old section of the law as it now stands the militia of Canada could be used for the defence of the empire and sent out of this country for that purpose? But under the proposed law that is strictly prohibited.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. No. I am advised, and was advised at the time of the South African trouble, for instance, that under the law we could not do that.
Mr. SAM HUGHES. Could not do what?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. That we could not send the militia to South Africa for service; under the law we were not able to do so. The présent law lias been changed, as I say, in conformity with that view, and in sympathy with the idea which, as I said, controls the militia of the mother country and the militia of every one of the colonies of the empire, where you will find precisely the same clause. — (6494-95)
Mr. OSLER. What is the meaning of the words "for the defence of Canada?"
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Suppose that Canada were invaded it might be the very best means of defence to immediately send an army into foreign territory.
Mr. OSLER. Quite so, but is not the existing law better and more défini te; which says:
"Her Majesty may call out the militia, or any part thereof, for active service either within or without Canada, at any time that it appears advisable to do so, by reason of war, &c."
Mr. SAM HUGHES. I think there is no question as to the right of the government to send troops anywhere for the defence of the empire. If Canada wished her troops to take part with the impérial troops anywhere clse than in Canada for the immédiate defence of the empire, that could be accomplished as was done in England during the South African war, when whole régiments of English militia, enrolled only to serve in the British Isles, volunteered for service in South Africa. — (6500)
Le 1er août 1904, en comité général: —
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN : The troops we sent to South Africa were not sent under the militia law at ail. They were sent under a spécial arrangement; they went as volunteers. The same thing could be done at any time. It certainly would not be done under the militia law, either as it was or as we propose to make it, because there is no essential différence. Notwithstanding the fact that my hon. friend from Colchester (2) questions my possession of common sensé, I still believe that the Act as we propose it
(1) Devenue l'article 69 de la Loi.
(2) Mr. Gourley.
Is essentlally the samc in that respect as it was before, tlie object being to makc clear
the actual intention (8079)
The very fondamental idea of a militia force always has been, and is now, hom* defence. In every portion of the British empire, without any exception, the same principle is laid down which is found in the Bill before the House — that the militia of that particular part of the British empire, including the British islands themselves, shall b« limited in their service to the particular part of the empire in which they live. I hava taken the trouble to examine the old militia laws of the différent provinces which made up the Dominion of Canada, and in every one of thosc provinces we find the samc limitation (8080)
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. But you hâve altered the terms of the section from what they were before as to calling out the militia. Why do you require to do that if you hâve parliament summoned within fifteen days? Is not that a sufficient safeguard so far as concerns the use to which the militia might be put? It seems to me to be the greatest possible safeguard, and a proper safeguard, because in parliament you hâve the voice of the country acting upon the government and directing them in what the will of th» country is.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. I hâve cxplained that there was no object except to make quite clear what the intention of the Act was. I think therc never was any doubt as to the meaning of the Act, although the words perhaps were not so clcar as they ought to be. "For the defence thereof," those words hâve been introduced so that it might be quite clear that the calling out of the militia to serve outside the country could
not be doue except for the purpose of the defence of Canada The same idea is con-
tained in ail the militia laws of ail parts of the empire and it did not seem to me that there would be any doubt upon that point. A good deal has been said this afternoou about this being a rétrograde step. I do not understand that this law in its spirit différa in any may from the old law.
Mr. GOURLEY. Why not leave the old Act?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. I am sure my hon. friend would not prétend to say that under the law as it is to-day the government could send a corps of the militia upon foreign service.
Mr. GOURLEY. I hâve not the slightest doubt of it; you could send them anywhere.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. I am quite prepared to come to close quarters on that question and I am quite prepared to say that in so far as the militia are concerned I do not believe it is in the interests of the militia that a provision of that kind should be made.
Mr. GOURLEY. Why, every man in Canada wants to go.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. I do not think the hon. gentleman himself would seriously contemplatc a proposition by which the government would hâve authority to order the militia to serve a thousand miles away from Canada.
Mr. GOURLEY. Why not? What are we hère for?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.. It is for the hon. gentleman to explain that. I do not think that any thoughtful man looking at the condition of things in this young country
Mr. GOURLEY. Explain yourself. Tell me what you mean.
Some hon. MEMBERS. Order, order.
Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER, Order.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. —would seriously propose to euact a statute which would place in the hands of any government the power of ordering out the militia to serve in distant parts of the world.
Mr. BARKER. That is the old Act.
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. It is not the old Act I hâve taken the trouble to go to the statutes of old Canada and of the various provinces in this Dominion and there I hâve found that not one of them contains a provision by which the militia can be sent outside of the province itself. That being the case it seems to me that we may just as well understand where we are and I accept, fully, absolu tel y and entirely, myself, th» responsibility for the proposition which is contained in this clause. — (8087-88)
Mr. R. L. BORDEN Everything that the hon. gentleman said might be con-
ceded and still no good reason shown for making this change in the law. The law which he proposes to change is this :
"Her Majesty may call out the militia, or any part thercof, for active service either within or without Canada, at any time when it appears advisable so to do by reason of war."
What is the practical effect of it? The practical effect of it is that it leaves th«
whole matter absolutely in the judgment of the executive of this country
Therefore, to ail intents and purposes, the hon. gentleman is leaving the law as it was before except that ho is adding certain words which he secs fit to insert in this statute advertising as it were that Canada is taking a little step away from the rest of the empire. That is what I do not like about it. It is the same in effect as it was before, precisely the same, but on the face of it it is not the same as it was before. It will not be considered as it was before by those who are looking on in foreign countries (8089)
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Mr. Chairman, I must say that I cannot see how there can be any misunderstanding. I cannot see why anybody in the world, the impérial authorities, for instance, will misunderstand the commonwealth of Australia or any one of the colonies, in which precisely the same restriction or even a more stringent restrictions exists. Who is to call it in question? I can tell the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) that as a matter of fact this proposed Bill has been before the impérial authorities for a whole year. It was before the impérial authorities on the occasion on which I had the honour to attend a meeting of the Defence Committee. It wa» discussed clause by clause and exception was takcn to every clause to which objection could be taken, and I assert that the impérial authorities absolutely approved of thi» clause and I am hère to make that statement. — (8090)
Mr. BARRER. — If the words "for the defence thereof " are not in
this amendment, the whole law must be changed. I object to thèse words as absolutely unnecessary according to the statement of the Minister of Militia himself. He is conveying not only to the empire at large, but to every other people, that Canada has laid down distinctly in its statutes that it will never use its militia except for the defence of Canada.
That is what I object to in the words proposed by the Minister of Militia. If we are to say openly to the world that we will never do anything with our militia, under any circumstances whatever, except for the mère defence of our country, why do we belong to the British empire ? (8094)
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. — The hon. gentleman has asked, with an
affectation of much anxiety, what the world will think, and what the rest of the British empire will think of Canada — though I hâve told him over and over again that upon the statute-book of every colony of the British empire is to be found precisely the same provision as he is now criticising. And, Sir, upon the statute-book of the mother country herself, the hon. gentleman will find this:
"Section 12, part 3. Any part of the militia shall be liable to serve in any part of the United Kingdom but no part of the militia shall be carried or ordered to go out of the United Kinigdom."
Why, the hon. gentleman out-Herods Herod. He is more loyal than the King. But let him look at the statute-book of that colony which, I believe, according to its population and means sent more men and spent more money than any other part of the British empire, in the South African war— I refer to New Zealand— and in the Militia Act of that colony he will find the following:
"The Governor may, by a proclamation in the "Gazette", direct the commander of the forces, to draw out with ail convenient speed ail of the defence forces therein for actual service, and to lead the said forces into any part of the district or colony which may seem best and to which such forces can be lawfully taken."
And the same tliing is true of the law of Australia:
"Members of the defence force who are members or the military forces shall not be required, unless they voluntarily agrée to do so, to serve beyond the limits of the commonwealth and those of any territory under the authority on the commonwealth."
Does the hon. gentleman wish this country to cmbark upon the dangerous procceding of preparing to take part in foreign wars? Is that the policy of the hon. gentleman? I think we hâve enough to do to attend to our own affairs. And, in my humble opinion, we shall beat serve the empire by making ourselves solid at home and preparing to défend our own soil (8097-98)
C8 Conférence Coloniale de 1907 0)
The Prime Minister <Sir Henry CAMPBELL BANNERMAN) : 1 think the
views sometimes taken of the proper relations of the Colonies to the Mother Country with respect to expenditure on armaments hâve been, of late, somewhat modified. We do not meet you to-day as claimants for money, although we cordially recognise the spirit in which contributions hâve been made in the past, and will, no doubt, be made in the future. It is, of course, possible to over-estimate the importance of the requircnients of the over-sca dominions as a factor in our expenditure ; but however this may be, the cost of naval defence and the responsibility for the conduct of foreign affairs hang together
Thèse Conférences were formerly more or less identified with great cérémonial occasions. This is, I believe, the first that has been specifically summoned for the purpose of business. I wish to say a word hère about a désire that has been felt with regard to the period between the Conférences that there should be greater means than at présent to continue in the interval the definite communications which the Conférences make necessary. We shall hope to find some method of meeting this désire. I an» not going to enumeratc, still less discuss and criticise, the various schenu-s more or less ambitions which have been put forward, but I will just make a remark applicable to ail such proposais. We found ourselves, Gentlemen, upon freedom and indépendance — that is the essence of the British Impérial connection. Freedom of action on the part of the individual state, freedom in their relations with each other, and with the Mother Country. Anything which militâtes against that principal would be wholly contrary to the genius of our race and our polirical ideals, and would sooner or later be disastrous (p. 5 et 6)
Sir Frederick BORDEN : It should be pointed out at once, that so far as the
Dominions beyond the seas arc concerned, at any rate so far as Canada is concerned, we have no authority under our Militia Law to do anything beyond expend money and make préparations for tho defence of Canada itself. We are absolutely limited in words to that. We cannot call our Militia out for active service for any purpose beyond the defence of Canada. Although Canada took part in the troubles in South Africa, it was done by a force which volunteered specially for the purpose and made a spécial contract for that purpose. I do not see very well how any responsibility could be under-
taken to supply any force for any other purpose without an amendment in the law
Lord TWEEDMOUTH (First Lord of the Admiralty) : What I have in the
first place to ask is, that you should place confidence in the Board of Admiralty, and In the présent Government, for the future safety of the country. We welcome you, and we ask you to take some leadiug part in making more complète than it is at présent the naval defence of the Empire. I wish to recognise ail that our cousins over the sea have done in conséquence of décisions of former Conférences. I know that you gav« to the Government and to the Admiralty, with a free and unstinting hand, the help that you thought you could manage to give. Gentlemen, I have on!y one réservation to make, and in making it I ask that, as we have proved ourselves successful in the past, you should put your trust in us now. The only réservation that the Admiralty désire to make is, that they claim to have the charge of the strategical questions which are necessarily involved in Naval Defence, to hold the command of the naval forces of the
(1) Minute* of Proceedings of the Colonial Conférence, 1907 — [Cd 3523] 1907. Les pièces annexées au rapport ont été publiées dans un volume à part : [Cd 3524].
country, and to arrange the distribution of ships in the best possible manner to resist attacks and to défend the Empire at large, whether it be our own islands or the dominions beyond the seas. We thoroughly recognise that we are responsiblc for that defence. We want you to help us in that defence. We want you to give us ail the assistance you can, but we do not corne to you as beggars ; we gladly take ail that you can give us, but at the same Unie, if you are not inclined to give us the help that we hope to bave from you, we acknowledge our absolute obligation to défend the Kinc's dominions across the seas to the best of our ability.
Now, there is, after ail, only one sea that laps around ail our shores. The sea is the link that joins us together. It was the reason of your upspriuging. It is our first defence. It is the origin of our great commerce. It is the outlet and inlet of our exports and our imports, and it is to us in thèse islands the channel through which we get the food and raw material which are so necessary to our vast population. There is one sea, there is one Empire, and there is one Navy, and I want to claim in the first place your help, and in the second place autho'rity for the Admiralty to manage this great service without restraint (p. 129)
Dr. SMARTT: I take it that the proposition the Admiralty make is that they
would encourage the spirit of local defence and local assistance for naval purposes, and that the best direction in which that could take cffect would be either in the direction of submarines, or I suppose the Admiralty would also be prepared to consider the question of destroyers.
Lord TWEEDMOUTH : — Certainly.
Dr. SMARTT : — I should take it that the submarine is a ship that only cmploys a small number of the most highly trained experts ?
Lord TWEEDMOUTH : — That is so.
Dr. SMARTT : — She is not a vessel that will go far out to sea, whereas in the establishment of the destroyer class, you would at once imbue your peoplc with the spirit of s;amanship and the idea that they were rendering greater service, be cause they could go some littlc distance out to sea, and that would be a great incentive to devcloping a naval spirit amongst our people.
Lord TWEEDMOUTH : — I think the development of submarines is going to be such in the future as almost to supersede the destroyer ; that it will hâve a much larger sea range, and it will be not merely a défensive vessel, but a very distinctly offensive one. — (p. 479)
Mr. BRODEUR : Our situation is a différent one to that of the othcr Colonies, and should be treated as such. I think, however, it would be only fair that I should state to-day that the position of Canada has not becn properly represented as far as Naval Defence is concerned. I sce by a document which bas been laid befor* us that we are supposed not to hâve spent any money at ail upon Naval Defence. That document shows what has been spent by the United Kingdom, by Newfoundland, Australia, New Zeeland, the Cape, Natal, and when it cornes to speak of Canada, it is simply stated there that the Naval expenditure is none. I may say at the outset that in view of the Treaty which was made in 1818 between the Impérial Government and the Government of the United States, it was formally stipulated that the Americans should hâve the right to corne and fish on our shores, and that they should hâve the right also to come into our harbours when they are looking after their fishiug. Outside of that, they hâve a right also, in virtue of that Treaty, to go to some parts of Canada to fish on the same footing as the Canadian British subjects. This particular situation, which was created in Canada by that Treaty, induced the British Admiralty to look after the defence, or after the protection of Canada, aginst the peaching of thèse American fishermen. That duty was performed, and .that protection was given to our own people during many years by the British Admiralty, but for some time, especially since 1885, absolutely nothing has been done by the British authorities. Ail expenditure in connection with that Fisherics Protection Service has been carried on, incurred, and made by the Canadian Government
I must also say that this obligation which we are carrying out to-day is to a certain extent not simply a local obligation but an Impérial obligation, because that
obligation wa« incurred in virtue of treaties, those treaties having been passed bctweei» Grrat Britain and the United States without, of course, the consent of Canada. — (139)
Mr. BRODEUR : There was a discussion in previous years to the cf fect that
we should contribute something directly to the British Navy. I may say with regard to that, there is only one mind in Canada on that question, and if it was necessary I should h", able to quote the remarks inade lately in a article published by Sir Charles TUPPER, whù is certainly one of the men best qualified to speak in Canada, upou the question. I think, perhaps, I might mention what hc said in regard to that. He said : " It is known that from the outset I hâve felt the interests of Canada and the true " interests of the Empire to be opposed to the demand for Colonial contributions to the " Impérial Navy ", and " I maintain that Canada has discharged that duty in the manner " most conducive to Impérial interests.." So it shows that both aides of politica in Canada agrée with the policy which has been going on for «orne years there. He adds, also, in that article, that " Canada protects her fisherics by her own cruisers, and when ■ the Impérial Government expressed a wish to be relieved of the expense of maintining " the stratégie points at the harbours of Halifax and Esquimalt the Canadian Govern- " ment at once relieved them of that large expenditure, amounting to 185,000 I. per an- "num" (p. 481)
Dr. SMARTT (Cape Colony) : — Would I be in order in nioving this Naval Resolution after the discussion yesterday ? I do not think it will take any tinie because it is a resolution which requires no remarks to make it acceptable to the Conférence : " That " this Conférence, recognising the vast importance of the services rendered by the " Navy to the defence of the Empire and the protection of its trade, and the paramount " importance of continuing to maintain the Navy in the highest possible statc of effi- " ciency, considers it to be the duty of the Dominions beyong the Seas to make sucli " contribution towards the upkeep of the Navy as may be determined by their local " législatures — the contribution to take the forin of a grant of money, the establish- " ment of local Naval defence, or such other services, in such manner as may be decided " upon after consultation with the Admiralty and as would best accord with their " varying circumstances."
CHAIRMAN (Lord ELGIN, Colonial Secretary) : — I may say I communicated witli the First Lord of the Admiralty what occurred, and he desires me to say he leaves himself entircly la the hands of the Conférence with regard to any modification or omission of the worc's referring to the Admiralty. Otherwise he has no objection to it. — (p. 541)
Sir Wilfrid LAURIER : — I a m sorry to say, so far as Canada is concerned, we cannot agrée to the resolution. We took the ground many years ago that we had enough to do in [thst] respect in lour] country before committing ourselves to a gênerai daim. Thi Governemcnt of Canada has donc a great deal in that respect. Our action was not undertstood, but I was glad to sec that the First Lord of the Admiralty admitted we had doue niucli more than he was aware of. It is impossible, in my humble opinion, to hâve a uniform policy on this matter : the disproportion is too great between the Mother Country ond the Colonies. We hâve too much to do otherwise ; in the Mother Country, you must remeinber, they hâve no expenses to incur with regard to public works ; whereas, in most of the Colonies, certainly in Canada, we hâve to tax ourselves to the utmost of our resources in the development of our country, and ws could not contribute, or undertake to do more than we are doing in that way. For my part, if the motion were pressed to a conclusion, I should hâve to vote against it.
Dr. SMARTT : — But the public works to which you refer are of a reproductive character which are vital to the interests of your Dominion.
Sir Wilfrid LAURIER : — Some of our railways bave never paid a cent of interest or expenses
Dr. SMARTT : — Stlll, it is developing and opeuing up the country to an enormous extent. Ail the colonies are building developing railways of a character which may not be revenue-producing for years. I thought the wording of this resolution would hâve specially met your views because you will find to make such a contribution towards the
«pkeep of the Navy it may take the form either of a great of money, or thc estiblishment of a local defence force or other services. I understand Canada suggested strongly the other day that some of their other services were in the nature of local defence.
Sir Wilfrid LAURIER : — I hâve said ail I hâve to say on the nubject.
CHAIRMAN : — I think it is a pity to pass the resolution if it is not unanlmous.
Dr. SMARTT : — I should like very inuch to hear the opinions of the représentatives of the other portions of the Empire.
Mr. DEAKIN : — I hâve no hésitation in entering into the discussion if desired ; but if we are not going to pass the resolution is it worth whileV
Dr. SMARTT : — I think it is a great pity we do not pass something. We hâve done so niuch iu the way of pious affirmation, that I am anxious we should do something of a practical character.
Sir Wilfrid LAURIER : — It can bc passed if there is a majority. For my part, I must vote » gains t it.
Sir Joseph WARD : — To do auy good we would require to be unanimous about it
Dr. SMARTT : — Yes, I suppose so.
Mr. Winston CHURCHILL : — It is not much good to hâve a résolution at ail if we cuiniot be unanimous.
CHAIRMAN : — I think we had better not proceed any further just now.
Sir Wilfrid LAURIER : — We, of the différent Dominions beyond the Seas, hav« tried to be unanimous up to the présent time. I am sorry to say this is a question upon which we could not be unanimous. Therefore, Dr. Smartt can move it If he chooses, or withdraw it. But if he presses it I should hâve to vote against it. — (p. 542-543)
Vœu du 29 mars 1909 Texte proposé par M. FOSTER (1) :—
"In view of hcr great and varied resources, of her geographical position and national environments, and of that spirit of self help and self respect which alone befits a strong and growing people, Canada should no longer delay in assuming her proper share of the responsibility and financial burden incident to the suitable protection of her exposed coast Une and great seaports."
Texte suggéré par sir Wilfrid LAURIER (2) :—
"This House fully recognises the duty of the people of Canada, as they increase in numbers and wealth, to assume in larger measure the responsibilities of national defence.
"The House réaffirma the opinion, repeatedly expressed by représentatives of Canada, that under the présent constitutional relations between the mother country and the self-governing dominions, the payment of any stated contribution to the impérial treasury for naval and military purposes would not, so far as Canada is concerned, be a satisfactory solution of the question of defence.
"The House has observed with satisfaction the relief afforded in récent years to the tax-payers of the United Kingdom through the assumption by the Canadian people of considérable military expenditure formerly charged upon the impérial treasury.
"The House will cordially approve of any necessary expenditure designed to promote the organisation of a Canadian naval service in co-operation with and in close relation to the impérial navy, along the Unes suggested by the admiralty at the last Impérial Conférence, and in full sympathy with the view that the naval supremacy of Great Britain is essential to the security of commerce, the safety of the Empire and the peace of the world.
"The House expresses its firm conviction that whenever the need arises the Canadian people will be found ready and willing to make any sacrifice that is required to give to the impérial authorities the most loyal and hearty co-operation in every movement for the maintenance of the integrity and the honour of the Empire."
(1) Votes and Proceedings, 1909, Mardi 29th, page 494.
(2) Debates House of Commons, l'JO'J, March 2'Jtii, Col. 3512-13.
Rédaction sultation avec M
définitive proposée jxir sir Wilfrid LAURIER, après con- M. BORDEN, et votée à l'unanimité (1): —
"This House fully recognizes the duty of the people of Canada, as they increaae in numbers and wealth, to assume in lnrger measure the responsibilities of national defenec.
"The House is of opinion that under the présent constitutions! relations between the mother country and the self governinjr dominions the payment of regular and periodical contributions to the Impérial treasury for naval and military purposes would not, so far as Canada is conctrned, be the most satisfactory solution of the question of defence.
"The House will cordially approve of any necessary expenditure designed to promote the speedy organization of a Canadian naval service in co-operation with and in close relation to the Impérial navy, along the Unes suggestcd by the Admiralty at the last Impérial Conférence, and in full sympathy with the view that the naval supremacy of Britain is essential to the security of commerce, the safety of the Empire and the peacc of the world.
"The House expresses its firm conviction that whenever the need arises the Canadian people will bc found ready and willing to make any sacrifice that is required to give to the Impérial authorities the most loyal and hearty co-operation in every movement for the maintenance of the integrity and the honour of the Empire."
Le lendemain, lord GREY télégraphie au ministre des Colonies (2) :
