Mr. ROSS:

Yes. But because they do so other shipping interests plead it as an excuse for continuing their ships in commission, stating they must do so to meet a national necessity.

It is a matter of pure greed.

Mr. ROSS:

Yes, but my hon. friend's opinion will not settle the matter. \Ve feel that these shipping companies should contribute to an insurance fund, but as long as the law remains in its present form we may be certain that the matter of residence and every other possible objection will be raised by the shipping companies.

Mr. POULIOT:

May I ask my hon. friend a question?

Mr. ROSS:

I will not promise to answer it.

Mr. POULIOT:

I may tell him I am in sympathy with his resolution. But would it not be possible for him to take steps to amend the criminal code and so achieve the purpose that he has in view?

Mr. ROSS:

Mr. Speaker, I am accepting the word of the Prime Minister that this matter really can be settled by an amendment of the shipping act. We ask that that amendment shall be made as soon as the other question that he referred to has been settled. I am glad to accept the advice of the Prime Minister, for I regard what 'he has said this afternoon as a distinct advance towards realizing the object of this resolution.

Motion withdrawn.

Mr. MERCIER (St. Henri):

May I call

the hon. gentleman's attention to resolution No. 30, standing in the name of the hon. member for Montmagny (Mr. LaVergne), that the official name of Canada be changed from "Dominion of Canada" to that of "Kingdom of Canada." I am afraid that if we pass that resolution we shall be obliged to change the Canadian flag again.

A Canadian Flag

Mr. McINTOSH:

Not necessarily. Now,

if our deliberations are loyal and patriotic they will harmonize with the splendid history of the empire, and we, Canadians and Britishers, always venerate our great national, political, imperial and religious heritage. Realizing the great contributions to civilization that have been made by the British Empire, we shall by sane and sensible advocacy safeguard, unify, extend and symbolize the great ideas for which the British Empire stands-here in Canada our national home.

The people of the Dominion from one ocean to the other are watching this debate. All loyal and patriotic Canadians will be anxious to learn the reception of this resolution at the hands of hon. members and the Prime Minister. This being Victoria or Empire day, it is perhaps the most fitting day for a discussion of such a resolution; the discussion is also appropriate in view of the fact that this is the first regular session of the seventeenth parliament of Canada. On this remembrance day, when we should remember the undying splendours and imperishable legacies handed down to us from the Victorian era; when we should remember our responsibilities and our duties to Canada and the empire, and when we should rededicate and reconsecrate ourselves to that continuous labour for freedom, without which freedom is not won, it seems to me the time for our discussion is rather short, but that with a further discussion permitted later on we may be able to go into the subject more fully.

Now, on this day of empire, there are certain calls that come to us, calls of love for the God of nations, honour to the king, obedience to the law, advancement of the highest interests of the empire in peace and war, the cherishing of patriotism, the paying of scrupulous regard to the rights of other nations, the mastery of the principles of citizenship, the following of duty, the acquiring of knowledge, the practice of discipline, the work for others and the considering of the poor and afflicted. These are the commands that come to us on this empire day, the watchwords of which are responsibility, duty, sympathy and self-sacrifice.

With regard to the resolution, Mr. Speaker, which stands in my name on the order paper, might I say that it was inspired by my own national conception of Canada, and that it was not inspired by any province making up Canada. It did not come from Prince Edward Island or New Brunswick or Quebec or Ontario or Saskatchewan, or any other province making up this Dominion.

What about Winnipeg?

Mr. McINTOSH:

Or from Winnipeg

either. It will be seen that the resolution is made up of five major parts. First, the opinion of the house is required on this important resolution; second, a special committee should be appointed to deal with the question, just as the government deals with other resolutions, not only with regard to government measures but also coming from private members; third, the advisability of adopting a Canadian flag; fourth, choosing a suitable symbol to stand for Canada in the flag, and fifth, the placing of the union jack in the union or position of honour to indicate our allegiance to the British crown. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that eighty or ninety per cent of the people of Canada are favourable to this action, and the opposition that comes to this progressive move on the part of the Dominion comes only from a few noisy individuals and a few noisy organizations. The same noisy individuals and organizations will fight us if we decide to amend our constitution; they will fight us as they have fought us in days gone by in the evolution of government, and we may expect their opposition in days to come in any progressive step in the direction of adopting a national flag for Canada, but I do not think we need pay very much attention to opposition of that kind. I believe this flag should represent Canada as a political unit, made up of nine provinces reaching from sea to sea, with the union jack occupying the position of honour -that is the vital position; that is the position of union in that flag, thereby showing the cooperation of Canada with the motherland in the building up of our empire and in making it more permanent than ever.

This being the case, Mr. Speaker, it might be well to say a few words on the Dominion of Canada, with which this resolution is concerned in the way of a national flag. Canada has been defined as consisting of three thousand miles of territory made up of one thousand miles of inland lake and river and sea, plus one thousand miles of boundless prairie, plus one thousand miles of mountain. That is the land from the border northward which is being extended day by day; that is the land for which we want a Canadian flag. Again, Canada has been defined as a mighty potential giant, the head of which rests upon the broad Pacific, whose arms make up the Rockies and the Selkirks, whose body is the great plains of the west and whose limbs are the two great water

A Canadian Flag

systems, the St. Lawrence and Hudson bay. Our duty, as Canadians, is to develop and make out of that giant on the northern shoulder of this continent one of the great nations of the world. And we will do it.

What do the poets say about this great Dominion, this young giant, this Canada, our native land? Poets have a habit of saying a thing and saying it well. Here is what Charles G. D. Roberts, one of our leading poets in the maritimes, says:

O Child of Nations, giant-limbed,

Who stand'st among the nations now

Unheeded, unadored, unhymned,

With unanointed brow,-

The Saxon force, the Celtic fire,

These are thy manhood's heritage!

Why rest with babes and slaves? Seek higher The place of race and age.

O Falterer, let thy past convince Thy future,-all the growth, the gain,

The fame since Cartier knew thee, since Thy shores beheld Champlain!

Montcalm and Wolfe! Wolfe and Montcalm! Quebec, thy storied citadel

Attests in burning song and psalm How here thy heroes fell!

Then in rising splendour the last verse:

But thou, my country, dream not thou! Wake, and behold how night is done,-

How on thy breast, and o'er thy brow,

Bursts the uprising sun!

The uprising sun of freedom and of nationhood. Surely in this Canada of the present day we ought to have a flag, of a national and a Canadian nature, that will symbolize our Dominion throughout the world. Surely! Then what does Pauline Johnson say about Canada? Here are a few lines by Pauline Johnson:

(Acrostic)

C rown of her, young Vancouver; crest of her, old Quebec;

A tlantic and far Pacific sweeping her, keel to deck.

N orth of her, ice and arctics; southward a rival's stealth;

A loft, her Empire's pennant; below, her nation's wealth,

D aughter of men and markets, bearing within her hold,

A ppraised at highest value, cargoes of grain and gold.

Then again Pauline Johnson shows the association of Canada with the empire, in her poem entitled "Canadian Bom":

We first saw light in Canada, the land beloved of God;

AVe are the pulse of Canada, its marrow and its blood: .

And we, the men of Canada, can face the world and brag

That we were born in Canada beneath the British flag.

And lastly Grant Balfour says-and these lines are also beautiful, I think:

Dominion of the North, how vast; Unequalled in the distant past By proud imperial Rome.

The sister zones o'er thee unrolled Two giant belts of white and gold Fair Canada, my home.

It is for this fair Canada, my home, that I am not afraid to stand up this afternoon and tell the members of this house and the people of Canada that the time has arrived when we should, in association with the other selfgoverning units of the empire, have a typical national or Canadian flag.

Now, Mr. Speaker, let me come to the imperial conferences of 1926, 1929 and 1930. At the imperial conference of 1926 a certain amount of splendid work, imperially and nationally, was accomplished, and the work of that conference and the conference of 1929 has been practically endorsed by the conference of 1930. This being the case, it might be well for us to consider for a moment just what that means. In the summary of the proceedings of the conference of 1926 we have the following statement:

There is, however, one most important element in it which, from a strictly constitutional point of view, has now, as regards all vital matters, reached its full development- we refer to the group of self-governing communities composed of Great Britain and the Dominions.

Their position and mutual relation may be leadilly defined. They are autonomous communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect 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.

Further on the statement is made:

And though every Dominion is now, and must always remain, the sole judge of the nature and extent of its cooperation, no common cause will, in our opinion, be thereby imperilled.

In other words, the day has arrived in the history of the empire when there is no longer force or compulsion; and if there is any appearance of compulsion it is only in form and not in fact or reality.

This empire of ours is, of course, the greatest the world has ever seen. It is not a centralized empire; constitutionally it is rather a decentralized one. And since it is decentralized it would, of course, be impossible to have what we might call a federation of the empire because of the differences in characteristics, the varying stages of evolution, the wide spaces geographically dividing one section from another, and our different histories. The pathway to empire greatness, empire solidarity and empire permanency that of self-govern-

A Canadian Flag

ment or autonomy, founded on positive and not on negative ideals, is therefore the pathway to greatness and security.

May I say, Mr. Speaker, that free cooperation and free institutions are the life blood of the empire. Free cooperation is the instrument which makes possible the functioning of its different parts, and the high objectives ever before the empire, of peace, prosperity and security, will most assuredly lead us into greater epochs than we have known in the past. Since there is an entire absence of compulsion in empire building, it means that from now on the empire must adjust itself to new conditions, and new conditions must become subordinate to new ideals.

That brings me to the question of the Union Jack, the flag of the United Kingdom- in other words, the red, white and blue, which signify all that is brave, pure and true, and what it symbolizes in the life of the empire. The Union Jack is the flag of the United Kingdom. It is made up of three crosses, St. George's, St. Andrew's and St. Patrick's, eight blue triangles plus white borders, all of which .is fraught with sacred meaning to the citizens of the empire.

Now, as regards these patron saints, whose lives typify great sacrifice, it might be well to realize just what the flag has stood for in the past. The flag in history has stood for the following:

The flag of the great union of Scotland and England up to 1603, and since 1707 and 1801- the Union Jack, floated on high when the victorious Marlborough went from victory to victory in France and Spain in the war of the Spanish succession.

It was the settled flag of the union when Bonnie Prince Charlie struck for Stuart power once more in Scotland.

It was the flag of Scotland and England when Walpole was named for the first time Prime Minister of Britain.

It waved in the breeze during the Seven Years' war in India, Europe and America; at Plassey, Rossbach, and over Wolfe and his men at the plains of Abraham; battles in which the supremacy of Britain was settled on three continents for good.

It stood for greater freedom of thought and expression when Wilkes dared the authorities in the last half of the eighteenth century to stem his criticism of the government of the day without which liberty of opinion would not have been able all along t'he line for generations to make democracy as stabilized as it is at present.

It blew in the breeze at Trafalgar, Corunna, Waterloo and Khartum, over Nelson, Sir John Moore and Wellington and Gordon.

It was the flag of the United Empire Loyalists and the other bands of courageous pioneers in the wilds of the Canadas and the maritimes when the Canada of the future was taking form on the northern shoulder of the new world.

It was the symbol of the French Canadians of Quebec when they fought with superb courage for local liberty in 1812 against the United States.

It was thrown to the winds of France when the French Canadians led the van at Cour-celette for world freedom.

It waves over India, after centuries of bloodshed and oppression; over the sands of the Soudan, the historic monuments of Egypt, over the cedars of Mount Lebanon, over the hilltops of Palestine, the plains of Mesopotamia and the as yet untamed regions of the northern world and Antarctic wastes.

It was the emblem of freedom that stemmed the advance of tyranny in the world war, and still sweeps the seas in the interests of world peace, world development and world progress and cooperation.

I have described what the flag has stood for in history. Let me now say what it stands for among the nations. It further stands for:

International honour.

National liberty.

Individual freedom.

Empire fellowship.

Maintenance of law and order under democratic institutions.

Constitution in which every man and woman has a voice, in accordance with franchise acts that will in time, we hope, be modernized to the last limit of representative and responsible government requirements.

A system of monarchy providing a vita! link of peace, progress, cooperation and unity among the nations making up the British commonwealth of nations circling the globe.

The traditions and history of the British race in peace, commerce, art, science, literature, law, education, industry and war.

Symbol of the common sentiment animating the British people throughout the centuries.

Rallying point of the common force during the emergency periods in our racial development and without which defeat would have rendered impossible a destiny potentially equal to, if not the superior of, any other world power.

The symbol of law, order and discipline in all military and naval movements, making possible the extension of our empire frontiers from century to century.

A Canadian Flag

Past resolves, past deeds and past heroes, apart from which the finest enthusiasm on behalf of home, family pride, family honour, personal devotion, patriotism or religious zeal; all of. which, in addition to leadership, numerical forces and discipline have been needed in the past to wrench victory from many a haughty and gallant foe.

Distinguishing mark of armies, fleets, departments of government, parties, rulers, officers, families, clans, dominions, kingdoms, empires, commonwealths and nations.

National growth, power, influence, unity and advancement in the cause of liberty.

National pride, glory, honour and protecting power from wrong, within and without our empire and nation's boundaries.

The unity of ideals and righteousness imperially and nationally which shall unite the world in freedom and justice.

And what about a Canadian flag? A Canadian flag would stand for all these things, since Canada is a self-governing unit in the British commonwealth of nations, and for many more-the developments in Canada since 1801.

The vicissitudes and upheavals nationally from -which we have emerged as a portion of the British Empire prior to and subsequent to confederation.

The stirring history of centuries when early Canada was under the influence and sovereignty of imperial France, and when in navigation, exploration, discovery and colonization the foundation work of the Canada to be was grappled with in a spirit of unparalleled courage and devotion.

Institution of representative and responsible government as factors in the development of the country internally, imperially and internationally.

Canada, the Canadian people, their aspirations and visions of continental and world greatness.

The crown and the laws that bind us by golden chains in allegiance to the throne of Britain.

That spirit of sacrifice and sendee which in the late great war brought so many of our men to national consciousness and manhood, and caused so many of them to express a sincere desire for a nationally distinctive emblem.

The further sacrifices comparable with anything in the way of sacrifice in the history of pioneers; sacrifices of the intrepid French missionaries and martyrs of early Canadian history, British missionaries of the Cross, and the mutual sacrifice, courage, cooperation, service, forbearance, devotion and Canadian and

British comradeship that must characterize us as a people if we are to aspire to and attain the great objectives placed wdthin our reach by a thoughtful and beneficial Providence.

All these things would a Canadian flag stand for-a Canada up to date and yet to be.

And may I point out now, Mr. Speaker, that New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Newfoundland have flags of their own, and India will have a flag of its own under its new constitution. Ireland has a flag of its own and so, I believe, have all the self-governing dominions of the empire. The question then arises, what about Canada?

Mr. LaVERGNE: We had a flag of our

own in 1904.

Mr. McINTOSH:

I am coming to that.

What about Canada? We have now a king closer than ever constitutionally, therefore dearer than ever. We have a royal standard which suggests the United Kingdom. We have an empire flag; we have a British white ensign; a British blue ensign and a British red ensign. We have a new governor general's flag, not made up of the union jack as if was a few years ago, but made up in an entirely different way because the governor general now represents His Majesty and not the British government. How terrible our super-loyalists must feel about this. We have a merchant marine flag which is our flag on the seas, since 1892, simply a red ensign with the arms of Canada in the fly. We have a government service flag, tne British blue ensign with the coat of arms of Canada in the fly. On the government buildings outside of Canada such as in Washington, Paris, London and Tokyo, we fly the red ensign as our Canadian flag. We have therefore a Canadian flag in London, but we have not a Canadian flag in Canada. We have a flag which we fly on the Canadian government buildings in Paris and the other world capitals, but we cannot fly that same flag on our own parliament buildings in the Dominion of Canada. That is the situation exactly.

Mr. LaVERGNE: We used to.

Mr. BENNETT:

The hon. gentleman

must be mistaken in what he is saying.

Mr. McINTOSH:

As I go along perhaps

the right hon. gentleman will see that I am not so much mistaken. W.e have not a Canadian flag to be flown ashore except the union jack, which in 1912 was made the official flag of Canada. Before 1904 we had the red ensign with the coat of arm? of Canada in the fly, which flag was our lag from

A Canadian Flag

the days of Sir John A. Macdonald down to 1904. That flag was flown across this country from ocean to ocean, it was the national flag from the Atlantic to the Pacific. However, it was hauled down in 1904. Why? The circumstances surrounding the taking down of that flag have never been made known to the Canadian people, but it was taken down and from 1904 to the present day the union jack has been flown in its place. In 1912 the union jack was made the official flag of Canada by the Secretary of State for the Colonies and from 1912 to 1931 as from 1904 to 1912 the union jack has been flown in Canada as our Canadian flag-something distinctly it can never be. The red ensign, differenced by the Canadian coat of arms, is flying outside of Canada, but it is not the official flag in Canada, it was hauled down and has never been put up.

Mr. LaVERGNE: It was hauled down by

the Liberal party.

Mr. McINTOSH:

I am not concerned so

much with the party that took it down as with the party that will put it up. The time has come when some distinctive flag should be sanctioned by the parliament of Canada. My resolution does not suggest tampering with the union jack, it neither adds to nor subtracts from it, neither divides nor multiplies it, neither squares nor cubes it; it has nothing whatever to do with it. Let the union jack be supreme and let it fly in this country from ocean to ocean but let it be used as an empire flag. I submit that that cannot be considered as a national or distinctive flag for Canada. If it is to be considered as such, why do we use the red ensign in Tokyo and on the government buildings in London? We cannot use the union jack because it would not be distinctive enough. I would like to see adopted a national flag which would be sufficiently distinctive to be used at home and abroad, a flag that would be an honour to us and which -would increase not only the self respect of Canadians at home, but also the self respect of Canadians abroad.

The missing link in our flag chain is the fact that outside of Canada we have what we call a flag

I would not say it is as distinctive as it should be-but inside of Canada we have not a distinctive Canadian flag; our official flag is the union jack. It would appear as though the Canadian people have not as yet awakened to the flag problem because when they do I am satisfied its solution will be almost immediate.

I do not intend to-day to pin myself down to saying what the design should be, my

argument is for a distinctive or a national Canadian flag. That flag should fly all over this country with the union jack, and no loyalist, royalist or patriot in Canada has any business mixing the union jack with the purposes of this resolution. This resolution calls for a distinctive flag, and if I am not mistaken the time is not far distant when we will have such a flag. If one government does not give us this flag, another one will.

Suggested designs of flags received may be divided into six classes. First, we have the flag with the union jack as a base and a maple leaf or some other Canadian emblem superimposed thereon. We should not superimpose anything on the union jack, we should not put on it a maple leaf, a beaver, a wild goose or anything else; we should leave it alone. Hands off the union jack, as our loyalist friends say. Second, we have another set of flags consisting of the blue ensign with the Canadian coat of arms in the fly. Third we have the red ensign with the Canadian coat of arms on the fly. Fourth, we have the white ensign with the same coat of arms. Then fifth, we have other flags containing the union jack in part, and then sixth, another group with no union jack at all. I say however that any proposed distinctive flag should contain the union jack and in it I believe the union jack should be in a position of honour.

This flag question should be taken out of politics altogether. A special committee of this house should be appointed to consider the question, and hear representations made by the leading citizens and organizations in Canada. By doing that there is left in the hands of parliament the control of this important symbol, and I am satisfied that the problem could be solved satisfactorily to ninety-nine per cent of the people of Canada. All it requires is a little attention, a little courage and the utmost cooperation. When this is done the College of Heralds in London is ever ready, when a design is submitted, to take that design and evolve from it a suitable flag. All we have to do is to tell the College of Heralds what we want and we will soon have a flag for this Dominion.

There are three alternatives for the future of Canada. One is absorption by the United States, but I give an unqualified no to that alternative. There should not-and never will-be any absorption of this country by the great republic to the south. Second, there is the pathway of independence, but my answer to that also is an unqualified no. We are now independent, we are free and we are laying the foundations-under the union jack and within the empire of a great

A Canadian Flag

and significant future. What is the last alternative? It is an autonomous community within the British Empire owing allegiance thereto and freely associating with the other self-governing communities thereof. By cooperating with those communities, by building up a great empire, by giving Canadians an opportunity to develop and to be free, and by giving them a national symbol that will indicate their aspirations, objectives and beliefs nationally and imperially, I am sure a brighter day will dawn for Canada.

In conclusion, might I say that if I had time this afternoon I could read resolution after resolution passed at meetings held from ocean to ocean. The weekly newspapers of Canada in national convention, assembled in 1929 in London, Ontario, to the number of lour or five hundred, passed this resolution, unanimously endorsing a national flag:

Whereas we believe it is desirable to adopt a distinctive Dominion flag for Canada, the design of which should include the Union Jack, resolved that we appeal to the parliament of Canada to treat this matter on a non-party basis, and we further appeal to all Canadians, irrespective of race, creed or origin, to cooperate towards the solution of this vital national question.

Even among our Conservative friends on the opposite side, the question of a national flag has been brought up. Some years ago at their national convention in Winnipeg a resolution was submitted, although it did not come to anything-it did not get into the light of day. The conviction of those who framed that resolution, if I remember, from the constituency of South Winnipeg, was that the time had come for the Conservative party to take action on this very important matter. But it did not.

A year or two ago the Canadian Legion in convention assembled at Regina passed the following resolution:

Whereas the question of the adoption of a distinctively Canadian flag is at present agitating public opinion throughout the Dominion of Canada.

And whereas it is believed that the general feeling of the members of our organization is that the Union Jack, under which we fought and under which our comrades died, should be retained as the flag of the Dominion.

Yet, nevertheless, the pressure of public opinion may be such that the adoption of an individual flag will become a question which has to be decided.

It will become more and more every day a question which has to be decided. The resolution continues:

Therefore, be it resolved that this convention instruct the Dominion council that in the event of any concrete proposition for the adoption of a distinctively Canadian flag being presented to parliament, that parliament be advised that no

device will be acceptable to the ex-service men of Canada in which the Union Jack is not the predominant figure, and if the question is to be decided that we strongly recommend the retention of the Union Jack, with some device such as the maple leaf or the Canadian coat of arms superimposed thereon.

We desire to retain the union jack as explained. We should not however interfere with the union jack. We should however have the union jack in the upper left hand corner of any flag in the position of honour-absolutely. The problem boils down simply to this: that we must work out a suitable symbol which wall be emblematic of all the provinces of Canada, Canada as a whole. And in this flag-at no distant date

the union jack will symbolize our association with the empire. Then we can evolve a flag with a suitable symbol and background that will indicate to the world and the nations making up the empire that Canada is a national unit. Such a flag will be a powerful factor in developing national sentiment, in the growth of national opinion from ocean to ocean, in -the building up of national ideas, in inculcating in the minds of our new nationals a love for the Dominion and the empire. And if it succeeds in accomplishing any of these things, we as Canadians ought forever to feel gratified.

Mr. ARMAND LaVERGNE (Montmagny): I am glad to rise in support of the motion moved by the hon. member for North Battle-ford (Mr. McIntosh). I agree with pretty much everything he said. I was, however, rather surprised to hear it come from that side of the house. When I was in the house many years ago as a young member with the hon. member for Quebec East, the very flag that my hon, friend speaks of, which had been floating at the time, was pulled down by the party then in office.

Mr. MeINTOSH: I do not care who pulled it down; I want it put up.

Mr. LaVERGNE: So do I, but I am trying to make clear the history which my hon. friend says is very mysterious. It was not very mysterious. One day we walked up to the house and we discovered that the red ensign with the Canadian coat of arms had disappeared and had been replaced by the union jack. I think it was the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) who protested and the then Minister of Public Works said that he had given orders to have this done. Probably it was incompatible with the nationalistic doctrines preached at that time by my hon. friends from Quebec on the other side, and since then the flag was replaced which had

A Canadian Flag

been floating since the days of Sir John A. Macdonald. That is probably the mystery of which my hon. friend has been speaking. In any case, the flag such as is mentioned in the resolution floated doubtless on all the public buildings of Canada from confederation until 1904 under the Laurier government of the time.

I agree with what the hon. member has said in that I think Canada should have a national ensign. I do not, however, see that it needs very much courage to say so. I do not think it is treading on dangerous ground to assert, and so far as I am concerned, I am not afraid to assert that I am a Canadian first; I believe in Canada first, and I believe, to quote the words of, I think, Sir Wilfrid Laurier: "If the interests of my native land come into conflict with those of the motherland, I would turn to my native land." But now that we have won our liberty and that under the British flag we have the most practical independence and equality as a sister nation in the commonwealth of nations, I do not see why anybody should be afraid to assert that he is a Canadian. As my hon. friend has rightly said, Australia has her flag; South Africa is going to have her flag. The question is now before a committee.

Mr. McINTOSH:

She settled that question on November 11th, 1927. and May 31st. 1928.

Mr. LAPOINTE:

She has her flag.

Mr. LaVERGNE : Ireland has 'her flag and New Zealand has hers. Unless in our country there is lack of pride somewhere, I fail to see why we should not assert all over the empire, all through the world, that we are Canadians and proud of our Dominion of Canada.

The proposition put forward by my hon. friend is most wise. The union jack, the flag of the empire, the flag of our king, has a part in his project and he wants a symbol to link together all the different provinces. We have that in the escutcheon of Canada as it exists to-day, because all the great races of this country are represented in our coat of arms which, with the exception of the maple leaf, was practically the flag of the English kings until the Georges. I think the fleur-de-lis was in the coat of arms *of the English kings until then; it was only under the Georges that it disappeared to be replaced by the repetition of the British lion: lions passant et regardant. I think this proposition should be considered favourably by the house

This is not a criticism, but my hon. friend may have injured his argument somewhat because he has given such a eulogy, and a well

[Mr LaVergne.]

deserved one, of the union jack that I am afraid some of our friends on this side of the house may be inclined to retain it. I think in this project the union jack should remain. There may be some timid people or some very loyal organizations who may protest against a change, but those organizations not very long ago, if we go back in our history, were quite willing to put away our flag because the Prince of Wales, when he first came to Canada, did not recognize it. When we are loyal to the empire, we should first be loyal to Canada. The best way to be a good British subject in the empire is to be in Canada a good Canadian, or in Australia to be a good Australian.

It is strange that questions of this kind are not discussed in any of the dominions of the empire except Canada. It seems to me that here the moment we discuss anything which is purely Canadian we are open to the suspicion of disloyalty. Of course, loyalty has been exploited in this country to a very great extent, and I do not put the blame wholly on one side of the house or on only one party. I see my friend from Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe) smiling at me. I remember, and I am sure that- he does, when the Liberal party was making a tremendously loyal campaign in the province of Quebec in the good old days of 1911, when the Tories of Ontario were quite willing to be allied with the rebels, the so-called nationalists of that day.