Canadianism you propose to call his. In the Senate Debates on Thursday, November 28th, 1912, on page 64 will be found these words spoken by the Honourable Senator Cloran, who all through his speech deprecated taking any action whatever in connection with Imperial co-operation or federation of any description, and who also says, "No European power can place a soldier on our shores or fire a shot at sea against us without the United States saying, 'No, it won't be done.' There would be our protection." Then he goes on, “As long as we are tied up with Downing Street and the other interests in England, the United States has nothing to do but permit us to be attacked by Russia, Japan, or China, one of which, probably in a hundred years from now, will be among the mightiest nations on earth." That is his conception of the development of a loyal Canadian, pro-British, pro-Imperial spirit. It is not necessary to say that the man is a traitor. (Hear, hear) He occupies a position which might enable him to thwart the will of the people; he is a Senator and might assist in throwing out some measure adopted by us. He avowedly says he is in favour of the United States protecting us, rather than having us tying ourselves up to Downing Street in any way. I say the man should be stripped of his senatorial dignity, and I think we are recreant to our duties and aspirations if we allow such things as that to go unchallenged. The first time I read the report I was so disgusted I could hardly be patient about it; at the present time I am not less impatient about it, and therefore I read it to you. (Applause)

The point I indicated to you, that is whether Canada shall continue to float along under the protection of the British flag without incurring any expense or any risk, or whether we shall have some strength and some pride -at least enough to enable us to say: "Let us proceed in the proper way to a solution of what may have seemed in the past a difficult problem." Look at Palestine. Palestine is the birthplace of Christianity; there is no liquor drunk in Palestine; the positive and negative conditions are there in perfection, and yet

Palestine is the most God-forsaken desolate hole on the face of the earth. Why? Because the people have no spirit; and the people who would continue to brag and boast of being a nation, as some of our people are forever doing, haven't got the first spark of nationality or nationhood, namely, a pride in themselves and a desire to pay their way like honest men. What would you think of us as individuals if we proceeded to hang to the coat-tails of some great man, and occasionally relieved our gnawing stomachs by sitting at his table or picking up the crumbs on the floor? What would you think if we went out and boasted of our pride and manhood? What would you say? Rotten manhood, nothing in it. Neither is there in that alleged Canadian spirit which can allow matters to go on thus any longer. It seems to me that the lesson that we should learn and take to heart and preach and exemplify, is that which was preached by the Honourable George Brown at the time of Confederation. You will remember at that time when all these difficulties arose in the country, Sir John Macdonald wished to bring about a legislative union, but the Honourable George Brown said, "No, let there be provincial autonomy, at any rate in all matters of the character that have been outlined in the British North America Act since." This was agreed to; Honourable George Brown was the chairman of the committee which dealt with the matter. To him really belongs the credit of being the Father of Confederation in Canada. There is a disposition sometimes to deprive him of that right, but it does not matter; the records speak for themselves; he was the great heroic figure at the basis of Canadian Confederation. It has worked out to perfection; we find that leaving matters of trade and commerce-(which we do not require to deal with in an Imperial way at all)-matters of the criminal law and so on, to the Federal House, all the things that the provincial people wish to deal with are incorporated in the Act and specially delegated to the provinces chiefly interested, so that they have the utmost liberty with regard to their provincial or domestic concerns. Now this has worked out perfectly satisfactorily. Of course we have

a row occasionally, but we cannot get along without some system of binding ourselves together, unless of course we are a lot of wild Indians or anarchists, in which event we are incapable of subjecting ourselves to a proper measure of law or administration. But since that has worked out so perfectly, why does it not suggest itself to us that we apply it to Imperial concerns? (Applause) Since it is responsible government we want, why let us have it as we have it now. The Imperial Conference, the Colonial Conference, the Imperial Defence Committee, or whatever you choose to call it— let that be a body advisory or otherwise, but let it be understood that we are not shirking our duty, and that we are prepared to make an arrangement; and believe me, there's the pith of the present struggle. Are you prepared to make an arrangement with Great Britain, with Australia, with New Zealand, and the other Dominions beyond the Seas, or are you not? If you are not prepared, you cannot convince me that you have got any Imperial spirit or any desire to co-operate. (Applause) If you want to co-operate, say that you are going to cooperate. Look at marriage. Marriage is a sentiment, we trust the purest and noblest of sentiments. How long would living together be permitted or how long would it last without the introduction of the contractual relation? We have a contract that is signed, sealed, and delivered. Because sentiment cannot be trusted, sentiment varies, but if you have sentiment you have that which sentiment prompts, that is the desire to come to an understanding; and if you have the real Imperial sentiment, a desire to co-operate, you will say, "Let us form a contract for a certain length of time, revocable if you will, but make a contract." Do not say responsible government when it is not a case of responsible government. All I have got to say is if I were England I would leave Canada to its fate. People that talk like that do not deserve decent treatment; they are not fair; they are not honest, if I must say it. Anybody who treated me like that would be treated in a very peculiar way in return if they kept it up very long. There has got to be some fair play shown in the matter. Now I

have here the minutes of the Colonial Conference; they are the official minutes which I took the trouble to bring with me because copies sometimes do not satisfy people. Here is where I think the trouble began; the cloven hoof appears here. In the discussion of naval defence on May 8, 1907, Mr. Brodeur who spoke for Canada at the request and by the announcement of the Prime Minister of Canada, and of course Canada is the country that speaks here I am not saying that any political party spoke it, Canada spoke it, and you will see presently what Tupper said, and I entirely disagree with what he said. Mr. Brodeur said:

"Lord Elgin and Gentlemen,-I have nothing to say except to thank heartily Lord Tweedmouth for having been good enough to recognize what Canada has been doing in regard to its defence." And then he goes on to say, "There was a discussion in previous years to the effect 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 be able to quote the remarks made lately in an article published by Sir Charles Tupper, who is certainly one of the men best qualified to speak in Canada upon the question. I think, perhaps, I might mention what he said in regard to this. He said, 'It is known that from the outset I have felt the cause of Canada and the true interests of the Empire to be opposed to the demand for colonial contributions to the Imperial Navy,' and 'I maintain that Canada has discharged that duty in the manner most conducive to Imperial interests.'

That is, gentlemen of the Empire Club, by doing nothing and pretending to protect her fisheries. So it shows that both sides of politics in Canada agree with the policy that has been going on for some time there. This is in 1907, the announcement to the Conference of what we are prepared to do, that is, we are not prepared to do anything. And how absurd, in my opinion, it is to talk about our sincerity in refusing the creation of an Empire, when we consider that the whole theory of cooperation is involved. Any man who declines to co

operate with another in the interests of peace, is open to the suspicion that he has an arrière pensée of some sort. The people in civilized countries co-operate for what purpose? Not for the purposes of rivalry and conflict, but for the purpose of producing peaceful conditions. Do we not want that one country in this world should co-operate with another in order that misunderstandings may be done away with and that these countries may come together from time to time to devise means for quieting and allaying feelings that arise and that might ultimately produce conflict? Isn't that what we want? If it is not what we want, then I am very seriously mistaken. If people decline therefore to come forward and to co-operate on a definite understanding, it is because they want to be by themselves; they want to establish a separate individuality, and the more separate individualities you have in the world the greater the likelihood of conflict and war. It is only by cooperation towards a proper end that peace can possibly be maintained, either in the world at large or in our domestic concerns. (Applause)

Now I wish to quote something further. At the Naval Defence discussion continued on May 9th, 1907, Dr. Smartt said, "Would I be in order in moving this naval resolution after the discussion yesterday? I do not think it would take any time because it is a resolution which requires no remarks to make it acceptable to the Conference." This is the resolution: "That this Conference, recognizing the vast importance of the services rendered by the Navy in 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 state of efficiency, considers it to be the duty of the Dominions beyond the Seas to make such contributions towards the upkeep of the Navy as may be determined by their local legislatures, a contribution to take the form of a grant of money, the establishment of local naval defence, or such other service in such manner as may be decided after consultation with the Admiralty, and as will best accord with their varying circumstances."