The Story of Canada's Flag
The next step was to provide Canadians with their own flag. In 1924 the red ensign was given a new lease in its official life, when the federal government authorized its use on all Canadian buildings outside Canada as well as by the Canadian merchant marine. This meant that the red ensign would be flown from Canada House in London, the office of the Canadian High Commissioner, over the Canadian office in Geneva and over the several legations which were soon to be established at Washington, Paris and Tokyo.
But what flag was to be used inside Canada? It seemed odd, to say the least, that Canadians should be unable to fly inside their country the flag that they were authorized to fly outside the frontiers of that country. But the government of Mackenzie King, which had succeeded that of Meighen in 1921, was reluctant to touch the Union Flag which was still officially the flag of Canada. At the same time there could be no denying the increasing volume of the voices demanding a distinctive Canadian flag. Finally, in 1925, Mackenzie King appointed a committee of public servants to consider and report upon a suitable design for a Canadian national flag. The Privy Council minute read as follows:
The committee of the Privy Council have had before them a report dated 21st April, 1925, from the Minister of National Defence, stating that a distinctive Canadian flag has been authorized to be used by Canadian government-owned vessels and by other vessels of Canadian registry, and that there is throughout the country a desire that there should also be adopted for use ashore a distinctive flag which shall be recognized as the flag of the Dominion of Canada.
The members of the committee included G. 1. Desbarats, Deputy Minister of National Defence; Thomas Mulvey, Under-Secretary of State; A. G. Doughty, federal archivist; Commodore Walter Hose, Director of Naval Services; Major-General H. A. Panet, Adjutant-General; and Group Captain J. S. Scott, Acting Director of the Royal Canadian Air Force.
The committee did not, however, bring in any report. When the flag question was raised in the House of Commons, the supporters of the Union Flag charged King with "flag-waving", an activity engaged in only by unsophisticated Americans, and with disloyalty to the Mother Country. The government's majority was a precarious one, and in answer to a challenge from T. L. Church, of Toronto, the Prime Minister hastened to state that "the government would not for a moment consider adopting a national flag other than by resolution of this House and with the full sanction of the parliament of Canada." He added, "May I say that while I am able to sympathize with the point of view which would have for Canada a distinctive national flag, just as Australia, South Africa and other of the self-governing British dominions have their national flags, I would be proud and happy to have Canada continue in the future as in the past to have the Union Jack recognized as the national flag . . ." Later in the session the Prime Minister informed the House that the flag committee had been dissolved. He would wait "until parliament itself takes action in the matter." Mackenzie King never made the same political blunder twice. He felt that the appointment of the flag committee had been such a blunder. From that time on he left the flag question severely alone.
But because King side-stepped the flag question did not mean that it could be suppressed. With the approach of Canada's diamond jubilee in 1927, J. S. Woodsworth of Winnipeg remarked, somewhat wryly, that the celebration of that event "so far as we can determine will consist very largely of flag-waving ... at a time when we do not have ... a distinctively Canadian flag to wave." King did not rise to the bait. He had just emerged from another election with a small majority; and with T. L. Church denouncing the use of the red ensign on Canadian diplomatic offices in London and Washington and demanding to know if we are not at the parting of the ways so far as our relations with the Mother Country are concerned," the Prime Minister simply refused to become embroiled in a highly emotional controversy which might weaken his political position. Mackenzie King was astute, if not very courageous.
Meanwhile Canada was moving rapidly towards political independence. In 1926 the Imperial Conference accepted the doctrine of equal status for Great Britain and the "dominions". Three years later, the conference of 1929 drafted a series of resolutions which, in 1931, were adopted as the Statute of Westminster. With the passing of this statute by the British Parliament, Great Britain gave up almost all the remaining vestiges of imperial control.
In the same year, 1931, the flag question was raised in the Canadian Parliament. In May, Cameron McIntosh, the Liberal member for North Battleford (Saskatchewan), presented a motion to the House of Commons calling for the appointment of a committee:
for the purpose of considering the advisability of adopting a Canadian Flag, representing Canada as
• whole, and in which the British flag shall occupy
• position of honour, thus symbolizing the Dominion as an equal partner in the Commonwealth of British Nations.
McIntosh's speech was marked by strong feelings of affection for Canada and an equally strong loyalty to Great Britain. Nevertheless he saw the absurdity of Canadians having full authority to use the red ensign outside the boundaries of their own land, but none to fly it officially over the parliament buildings in Canada's capital city. The speech made little impact upon the rank and file of the membership of the House of Commons. Its significance lies in the fact that it pointed the way for others to follow in later sessions.
Three years later, in 1934, C. H. Dickie, the Conservative member for Nanaimo, presented another flag motion to parliament. Dickie's motion stated "that in the opinion of this House, a national flag representing the Dominion of Canada should be adopted." Dickie was not particularly interested in reviving the red ensign. He wanted a new design, preferably a blue Flag with "a glorious autumnal maple leaf, one of that deep, golden, red tint" on the fly. He argued that the ensign, as it existed, was not suitable as a national flag. He said:
This flag has upon it the coat of arms of Canada and is used by our merchant service. It is sometimes flown ashore, but I do not know that we have the right to do that. But the coat of arms is indistinguishable at a distance of two or three hundred yards. It appears simply as a blotch upon the otherwise beautiful banner. The details of any coat of arms are too minute to lend themselves readily to banner purposes.
He was not prepared to insist upon his own idea of what the new flag should look like, except to say "there can be no objection to the use of the maple leaf as an emblem of Canada." "I am all for the Union Jack," he concluded, "but I am also for a cheerful, artistic and beautiful flag for Canada."
The ensuing discussion was rather longer than any previous flag debate; but in the end Dickie's proposals were stifled by a motion for adjournment. Nevertheless Dickie had obtained some support both inside and outside parliament. Among the newspapers which supported his motion was the Whig-Standard of Kingston in which the following editorial comment appeared:
There is no reason why Canada should not have its own distinctive flag. It will make us no less loyal and no less a part of the British Empire. Now that the idea of a distinctive Canadian flag has been publicly adopted by the Kiwanians of Ontario,
Quebec and the Maritime Districts, it is quite possible that the matter will receive wider attention than it has received heretofore, and that something tangible will result therefrom.
This last was still an optimistic hope in 1934. English Canadian imperialists were still strong, in voice if not in numbers. The Sons of England, the Orangemen and the Canadian Legion took the lead in defending the Union Jack as the official flag of Canada. In view of the later stand of the Legion it is odd to find that body rejecting the red ensign and adopting a resolution that "the Union Jack, under which we fought and under which our comrades died, should be retained as the flag of the Dominion." In Welland, Mr. justice Logie ordered the red ensign to be removed from the court house, referring to it as "a monstrosity . . . a cross between an Admiralty flag and a patchwork quilt." In parliament, John R. MacNicol of Toronto expressed the view that the flag motion was a deliberate attack upon the imperial connection ... .. Is there anything that is safe? Is there anything in which we can put our faith? Is there anything that is not going to change?" he asked. "The Union Jack has tradition behind it; it is the official flag of this country and it should not be pulled down."
Dickie brought forward his flag motion again in the session of 1935. This time it was supported by Cameron McIntosh and by Agnes MacPhail. Miss MacPhail remarked that the very fact that Canadians had not yet adopted a national flag was "an indication of our lack of nationhood, that we are still toddling and not walking." Again the Torontonians, John R. MacNicol and T. L. Church, led the opposition to any change; and again the flag motion was killed by an adjournment.
On February 14, 1938, Cameron McIntosh took up the burden of asking for the appointment of a special committee to consider the question of a Canadian flag. He argued that "the desire for a distinctive national emblem in Canada today is practically unanimous" and described his opponents as "a small though noisy opposition." His speech was filled with supporting evidence culled from newspapers in Orillia, Toronto, Stratford, Collingwood, Brockville, Kingston, London, Saskatoon and Montreal.
McIntosh's motion, coming as it did from a private member, had little chance of reaching a vote without the whole-hearted backing of the Cabinet. But it did win greater vocal support in the House of Commons than had previously been the case. Up to this time, with the exception of the intervention of the old "Nationalist" now turned Conservative, Armand Lavergne, French Canadians had been content to sit back and say nothing. On this occasion, however, Vital Mallette of Montreal, J. A. Bradette of Cochrane and H. E. Brunelle of Champlain all spoke on behalf of the McIntosh motion. Support for the appointment of a flag committee also came from 0. B. Elliot of Kindersley, who pointed out that Nova Scotia had its own flag, a flag "176 years older than the Union Jack." Elliot ended his remarks with the rhetorical question, "Are we still a colony?" C. E. Bothwell of Swift Current quoted with approval, lengthy excerpts from a report by the Canadian journalist, Grant Dexter, of his visit to England and Europe at the time of the Coronation of George VI:
It was irritating to a Canadian in England during the coronation celebrations to see this bogus Canadian ensign everywhere. . . . No doubt, if Prime Minister Mackenzie King and his colleagues had done the right thing, they would have asked that these illegal ensigns be taken down and would have pointed out to the British Government that Canada did not want a flag for its own, but preferred to use the British banner. Such a request almost certainly would have been refused. The British . . . would find it impossible to understand why the senior dominion desired to confuse its identity with that of the parent ...
Dexter had also visited France where he discovered that there was no Canadian flag on the war memorial in Amiens Cathedral. "The people of Amiens deeply regretted this was so," he wrote "they had taken the matter up with the government at Paris and had been told that there was no Canadian flag."
In spite of the strong support for McIntosh's motion the supporters of the Union Flag were in no way discouraged. F. C. Betts of London, Mrs. George Black of the Yukon (a staunch supporter of the Imperial Order of the Daughters of the Empire), Gordon Graydon of Peel and others took up verbal cudgels in defence of the flag of Great Britain. Graydon expressed the imperialist point of view when he said "Let us leave the old flag as it is, without changing to a new one at this time."
Evidence of the significance of the flag debate of 1938 is the fact that the Prime Minister, Mackenzie King, and the Leader of the Opposition, R. B. Bennett, both of whom had previously refrained from commenting on the issue, spoke on the McIntosh motion. Bennett, although protesting his strong loyalty to the British Empire, broke with some of his more imperially-minded colleagues by refusing to vote against the motion. Mackenzie King also gave his support to McIntosh. He concluded his speech with the words:
There has never been a time, I believe, when the relations between Canada and the Mother Country were so cordial, so completely friendly, helpful, and co-operative in every way as they are at the present time. The present is the time, then, to consider this question. It will not be disposed of, in my opinion, until it is settled in Canada as it has been in the other dominions. If we do not settle it now, some issue may arise in the course of a few years which will provoke another discussion and lead to the settlement of the question in a manner that may be misunderstood elsewhere. Today there is no possible danger of misunderstanding on the part of anyone in this country, in Britain, in Europe, or elsewhere in the world, as to what Canada has in mind in seeking to have a distinctive national flag.
The motion was not, however, put to a vote. It was allowed to die on the order paper; and the issue remained unsolved in spite of the Prime Minister's heavy-worded blessing.The same story can be told of 1939. Cameron McIntosh showed his courage and tenacity in bringing up his motion once again. But the debate brought to their feet many of the same speakers who had spoken on previous occasions and they said much the same thing that had filled the pages of Hansard in 1938. One of the few new items was the reading of a telegram from the St. Jean Baptiste Society which expressed the Society's wish "to see this country fly a distinctively Canadian flag during the coming visit of our king, George VI."
The flag debate took place in February. Seven months later Canada was at war. There was, of course, no mention of the flag in the debate on the declaration of hostilities with Germany in September. Nevertheless, when the 1st Canadian Division went overseas three months later, it carried with it a gonfalon, or "battle flag." This flag was designed by Colonel J. Fortescue Duguid, Director of the Historical Section of the General Staff at National Defence Headquarters in Ottawa. It included a Union Jack in the canton on a white field. On the fly were three red maple leaves on a single stem (Canada's official emblem on the Canadian Coat of Arms of 1921). A blue roundel with three golden fieurs-de-lis was placed in the upper right hand corner. The flag flew at the masthead of Major-General A. G. L. McNaughton's ship in the convoy bearing the Canadian troops overseas; in England it flew over General McNaughton's headquarters. The flag was new. It was distinctive. It contained something to please everybody and represented all aspects of Canada's history. But it was cluttered and never won the affection of the officers and men of Canada's army. Eventually it ceased to be seen. But some distinguishing flag was required, and so, in 1944, the old red ensign was dusted off and authorized to be flown by Canadian army formations overseas, when servingin the same command or in proximity to British, other dominion or Allied forces.
But if the "battle flag" gained little support from the troops, there was no doubt about their affection for the maple leaf. Once again Canadians emphasized their nationality by the widespread use of the leaf symbol. Canadian soldiers not only carried it on their regimental badges; they used it to designate everything Canadian from roadways to a newspaper.
In Canada there was little desire to raise the flag question while the war was being fought. Wilfrid LaCroix, the member for Quebec-Montmorency, tried to do so in 1942, only to be cut short by Mackenzie King with the remark, "with war conditions what they are, it [the government] would not be justified in asking the House of Commons to debate the matter at the present time." LaCroix, who had assumed the mantle formerly worn by Dickie and McIntosh, tried again in 1943. When he asked the government if it intended to put an end "to the deplorable condition of affairs arising from the fact that in all countries of the world, Canada is the only one which does not possess a flag," the Prime Minister answered, "it is not true that Canada does not possess a flag" and that he was "far from sure that it can be said that the existing condition is a deplorable condition of affairs." To a further question from LaCroix, Mackenzie King reminded the House of Commons that Canada was in a state of war and asked "is this country to have a Flag controversy to be added to the other factors that may make for disunion when above all else unity is required?"
Nevertheless the Prime Minister was concerned about the Flag question. Where there was so much smoke there must be some fire; some Canadians at least wanted a national Flag. In the summer of 1943, during the Quebec Conference, he arranged to fly the red ensign beside the Union flag, and at the same level-although not until he had secured the acquiescence of Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister. Some months later he raised the question in the Liberal caucus.
In his diary he wrote:
Advised that Canada take the Canadian Ensign and accept it at once as her national flag. Not wait to design a special flag. Later a committee could be appointed to consider new designs. As I dictate, I think more and more of the wisdom of having a resolution of Parliament to adopt these two things before the present session is over. I may take up this matter at the meeting of Prime Ministers.
The Flag question was, however, to wait until the end of the war rather than the end of the session.
| PREVIOUS Chapter | Back to Contents | NEXT Chapter |