[To THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Sir A. Macphail's defence of the Quebeckers will vastly entertain all Anglo-Canadians. One might wonder whether even Englishmen will swallow it ! Possibly one of the English provinces did object to Conscription. But prior to Conscrip- tion the five million British-Canadians had contributed over 300,000 men. Something under two million French-Canadians had furnished about 16,000 ! The figures were taken at the moment from the Canadian official returns. Where does the analogy come in unless to emphasize the wholesale shirking of the Quebeckers. Comment is needless, save to note the fact that French Canada alone of oversee communities had a double obligation, since both the country of their allegiance, whose liberal treatment of them since 1763 is unique in history, and the mother country of their race were struggling for their existence. In 1917 I happened to be for some weeks in the town to which practically all the Canadian wounded were consigned. If Sir Andrew had heard the bitter and contemptuous language used by all these men anent their French compatriots at home, he would hardly be so complacent in his remarks re inter- racial relationships, if indeed he is not writing with his tongue in his cheek, which some of his astounding statements would almost suggest. Does he really imagine that the part played, or rather not played, by French Canada in the Great War was calculated to raise the French-Canadians in the not too exalted opinion of them already held, rightly or wrongly, as every one knows, by the bulk of their British compatriots ? It will never be forgotten by this or future generations, as I trust and believe the behaviour of Southern Ireland in like ease will never be forgotten by the British nation. Again, there is no Church in the world that brings more pressure to bear on secular and political affairs than the Ultramontane Church of Quebec, or does it more subtly and secretly. A politician, or even a writer, who defied the Bishops, would stand a poor chance indeed. Sir Andrew must surely lie pulling the leg of the English reader.
Possibly the attendance at Government schools may slightly exceed that in Ontario. But of what like are a large portion of• the rural schools in French Canada, where the secular education is notoriously defective, and calculated rather to foster bigotry and local prejudice; often, as is frequently said, a mere preparation for the "Premiere Communion"! Go to the home of an average habitant and discuss, or try to, ordinary common affairs with him and his family, 'and then pay a like visit to an average Ontario farmer's household. The veriest stranger to the country would not require much further testimony to the respective results of the two educa- tional systems, as regards the masses !
Sir Andrew's claim to the superior manufacturing activities of Quebec needs no comment, as he follows it by the monstrous absurdity that Quebec is more than the equal in agriculture of Ontario. Save for a few districts, the habitant, though somewhat improved of late, is almost as primitive in agri- culture as he is, ignorant in all other respects. Ontario, on the other hand, for half-a-century has ranked with the best farmed and most progressive portions of the adjoining States of the Union, as eiery one knows.
Lastly, I believe I am right in stating that the English minority in Montreal pay 75 per cent, of the rates. And as a final word, English people do not usually understand that the social cleavage between English and French Canadians is, and always has been, absolute. There' is practically no coalescing. The exceptions are negligible. It is a pity, but there it is.—
Previous page
