"KINGDOM OF CANADA"

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 138, 9 December 1930, Page 16

"KINGDOM OF CANADA"

SUGGESTION NOT NEW

THE OLD FIVE KINGDOMS

(By "W.F.") To Many of whose who read in Thursday's "Evening Post" of the proposed move to be made in the Canadian Parliament to change the official designation of the country from "Dominion" to "Kingdom," the change would appear to embody in concrete form the tendencies now patent in the relations of the States of the British . Commonwealth of Nations.; So far, however, from such a proposal being novel, the idea behind it is almost j as old as the first germs, of the overseas] expansion of Britain. The first British colony was Virginia, the development of which was entrusted to a company, on the coat-of-anns of which was engraved the words "En dat Virginia quintum," and the same motto appeared on a new seal adopted by the colony in 1663. Here the iinespiessdj noun is "reguum"—"Behold, Virginia gives the fifth, (kingdom)"—and implies the equality in some respects of Virginia with the four other kingdoms, England, Scotland, Ireland, and, after the absurd pretensions of the time, France. After the Union of England and Scotland in 1707, another seal, copying a motto adopted some years previously, substitutes the word "quarturu" for "quintum," the word "eoronam" being implied—"Virginia gives the fourth (crown)." No doubfc these inscriptions are rather prophetic than indicative of actual circumstances, but the idea underlying them was to the fore when the representatives met at Quebec to discuss the terms under w]iich the > Dominion, of Canada was ultimately constituted. ... ' ... . Consistent with his declaration that the delegates had in view, "the noble, object of; a great British monarchy in connection--with:" tire ""British Empire, and •indcr the British Queen," Sir John Mac-, doii'ald, the foremost among the advocates of union, stated his preference for "the Kingdom of Canada" as the designation of the new nations they were welding, and he wished "an imperial alliance with the Kingdom ;of Great Britain and Ireland, with the Crown as the sufficient bond of union."'. -. ' '• The earlier drafts of the constitution, in accordance with this spirit, spoke of "the Kingdom of Canada," but in opposi-' tiori to Canadian wishes Lord Derby insisted on the words being changed to "the Dominion of Canada," on the plea that the proposed title would prove an offence to the United States. Speaking of this incident;, professor G. Wrong, writing in ■.'•'The Federation of Canada/ says: "It was a far-reaching mistake not to make Canada a kingdom. The word would express its exact relation to the British Crown, . and also the equality of status with the Mother Country which it is now so' desirable to foster. Moreover, 'Kingdom' -has an historical fitness relative to the word ''Empire/ The tradition of Europe is that many kingdoms may be included in one Empire. Within the British Empire there is a dependency like India so vast that it takes the name of an Empire by itself. . . . Perhaps it is not too late, and we shall yet see the Kingdom of Canada, cue of the various kingdoms under our common.Sovereign. More than any other, this title would negative the impression' that Canada is' a dependent State." Words, however, that might have been appropriate in 1917, the date in which the above was written, might well have given a false impression in 1567, and it is very questionable whether even in 1917 they represented the true nature of the case. The Balfour declaration was not made until 1926, but it seems at last to recognise the force of Professor Wrong's contention. Its definition of the status of the Dominions is clearly expressed: "They are autonomous communities within the British' Empire, equal' in status, in no way subordinate one to another in respect of their domestic or external affairs, though.united,by,a common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations." If the Balfour declaration is a correct statement of the position, the word "Kingdom" to denote the status of a British Dominion is fitting, but there is the important factor to be considered that the Balfour declaration is merely a declaration of policy which has no force in law, and which has not had time to crystallise into legal custom. Mr. J. H. Morgan, K.C., lecturing recently at University College, London, on "The Legal and Political Unity of the Empire," pointed out that the attainment of the complete j equality of status envisaged by the Balfour dcclaratiou involves the repeal of innumerable statutes of the Imperial Parliament, a process which, in his opinion, would involve the disintegration of the Empire. Whether such a result would actually occur is a matter for argument, but one might hazard the opinion that constitutional practice has developed so far that a mere change of name will make no difference, and if the Canadian people ire behind the new move, there is no adequate excuse for withholding the new title.