STATUS OF CANADA

Southland Times, Issue 20014, 30 October 1926, Page 12

STATUS OF CANADA

CLAIM TO BE A NATION. SEVEN POINTS IN ARGUMENT. Toronto, September 4. For a generation Canadian statesmen have been declaring Canada to be a nation. Since the war the formula has been “equal status within the Empire,” a formula of words accepted as readily by British as by dominion statesmen. For 60 years Canada has been a self-governing dominion, free, her school children have been assured from outside interference or domination. Yet, it is argued, in theory Canada remains a colony. To the outaide world she is a dependency of Great Britain and nothing more. Her status, say some, is inferior to that of the poorest independent State. Theoretical inferiority might not be a serious matter if no practical considerations are involved. Those who are content with things as they are say no practical considerations are involved. But there are restless spirits who say they are not so sure. Seven points are enumerated by a writer in the Toronto Star to demonstrate what he terms Canada’s national inferiority. Firstly there is the office of Governor-General, whose retiring occupant has raised an acute issue. The issue here is not the correctness or otherwise of Lord Byng’s action. It is not the question of his fitness for the office or the fitness of any of his predecessors. The issue is as to the method of his appointment. The Governor-General is selected by the British Government. By what principles of responsible Government, it is asked, does Mr Baldwin or any other Prime Minister assume to name a Governor for Canada? “Where is the use of using words about equal status while a Government of a sister nation nominates our chief executive?” asks the writer. It is urged that there is no reason why the Governor-General could not be appointed by the King on the advice of the Privy Council for Canada. Secondly, Canada as a nation, it is contended, should have powej to amend her own Constitution. At present her Constitution, the British North America Act, is an enactment of the British Parliament and can only be amended by legislation in that body. New Zealand can amend her own Constitution, but not Canada. Thirdly, it is asked how the theory of equal status can be made to conform with the doctrine "if Britain is at war, Canada is at war.” Fourthly, if Canada is a nation it is necessary that Canada should have her own diplomatic and consular services like, for example, Portugal and Peru, and cease “sponging” on Great Britain. The issue of appointing a Canadian Ambassador at Washington, mysteriously held up for six years, is a case in point. Fifthly it is claimed for Canada that she should have complete freedom in the matter of making treaties. Both in this and in the previous point it is urged that there should be the utmost co-operation between the British nations. All that is asked is an abolition of the assumption of superiority and inferiority. “Westminster has no greater right to veto Ottawa than Ottawa has to veto Westminster.” Sixthly, it is submitted “there ought to be an end to talk of dependence by Canada upon British military and naval power.” Seventhly, Ifhere is the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Why, it is asked, if it is a good thing to send law suits to be settled from Canada to England, would it not be a good thing to provide that lawsuits be sent for settlement from England to the Supreme Court of Canada? “It is a tawdry Canadianism that is willing to allow England to pay the cost of a Court to settle Canadian lawsuits.” So far constituitional relations have been allowed for the most part just to grow like Topsy. It is argued in some quarters that this is corect procedure, that political development meets its greatest success when it marchee in the rear. To it is replied that Canada has been marching in the rear for 60 years and that progress in clearing up the points at issue has not been rapid. Moreover, “when anything turns up to solve one of these questions it is sure to be an unpleasantness, and you never can tell where an unpleasantness will land you.” For these reasons it is urged that the points at issue should be clarified and pressed to a settlement, either by the Imperial Conference, which hopes to hold a meeting this autumn, or otherwise. But the Imperial Conference, since the war, has been side-stepping the vital questions of inter-imperial relations. Self-government as practised in Canada, despite the exceptions noted in the foregoing, is of course almost all-embracing, though there is still difficulty in getting a certain type of mind to accept the implications of self-overnment. For example, it came as a great shock to many persons' to find that the Bishop oi London, who a few days ago came to Toronto to perform the marriage ceremony for his niece, w« not allowed to do so under Ontario law, and the Attorney-General of the province refused, or was unable to find a way to get round the difficulty. The bishop read some of the service but the local rector had to tie the knot.