HISTORY AND : TRAITOR OR SAVIOUR?1 PA C-009092

Portrait of Henri Bourassa in July 1917.

by Béatrice Richard

he conscription crisis exposed a wide ’s Prussians gulf in Canadian society between 1916 and 1918. During that period, Henri y 1916, voluntary recruitment was yielding fewer Bourassa became, through the force of Band fewer enlistments. Up to that time, the majority his personality, the natural leader of all of volunteers had come from English Canada, and TFrench Canadians opposed to compulsory military service. anglophones resented being bled white while French Bourassa, a grandson of the patriote Louis-Joseph Canadians were seen to be sparing their own sons. Papineau, was the founder and editor of the independent The proponents of conscription argued that compulsory daily , a former Member of Parliament, and service would bring order and equality to recruitment.5 a formidable polemicist. He believed that the forced Prime Minister announced, on 17 May “militarization” of the Dominion was only the first 1917, the creation of a system of “selective, that is stage of an apocalyptic “imperialist revolution.” Needless to say gradual conscription, with men being divided to say, these pronouncements were seen as provocations into a number of classes called up as needed.”6 Despite at a time when thousands of Canadians were dying demonstrations involving thousands of opponents in the on the battlefields of the Western Front. The popular streets of , the Military Service Bill received press never missed an opportunity third reading on 24 July 1917, with a majority of 58 votes. to castigate the treachery of “Bourassa the Dirty, fomenter of strife, breeder of rebellion, hater of all things British, Most Liberal MPs from English-speaking provinces cowardly misrepresenter of facts, journalistic snake in voted with the Conservatives on the bill. However, the grass.”2 Even Sir ,3 the Liberal leader despite the implosion of his party, Laurier steadfastly who had been a friend of Bourassa, appears to have refused to join a coalition government. Borden took consistently seen him as a “fanatic and a mentally advantage of his opponent’s political isolation to call unstable individual in the pay of the Roman Catholic an election, but not before enacting a pair of bills designed Church.”4 Was Henri Bourassa a traitor and a madman, as many of his contemporaries asserted? This article will attempt to demonstrate that despite appearances, and Béatrice Richard holds a doctorate in history from Université du although possessed of a highly excitable temperament, Québec à Montréal and is an assistant professor of military history Bourassa, in fact, exerted a moderating influence at the in the History Department and the Continuing Studies Department climax of the country’s most serious crisis. of the Royal Military College of Canada.

Winter 2006-2007 ● Canadian Military Journal 75 Confederation.8 These intrigues were all the more outrageous since the rights of were, at that very moment, being trampled upon in their own country, as evidenced by the prohibition on the use of French in Ontario’s Catholic schools under , adopted in 1912. Why, asked Bourassa, should his compatriots fight abroad to defend the freedoms of other peoples? In 1915, the charismatic French Canadian leader asked rhetorically: “French Canadians are being exhorted to fight the Prussians of in the name of religion, liberty and loyalty to the British flag. But shall we allow Ontario’s Prussians to impose their domination at the very heart of Canada’s Confederation, aided and abetted by the British flag and British institutions?”9 Bourassa’s friend, the Liberal MP for Montmagny, , summed up the view of the vast majority of French Canadians in the following widely reported words: “We must stay here to conquer our freedom. It is not in the trenches of Flanders that we will regain the right to speak French in Ontario.”10

The Blood Tax

number of historians have written about the conflict Abetween Canada’s two founding peoples during the Great War.11 Few, however, have dwelt upon the almost existential underlying issue: Should national 12 PA C-001971 emancipation be paid for in blood? This omission is all the more surprising since the issue of the “blood The Right Honourable Sir Wilfred Laurier, from tax”13 – his term for conscription – pervades all of Bourassa’s 1896 to 1911 writings on the subject. His answer, however, was clear: Canadians should only sacrifice themselves if Canada could to ensure his victory. First came the Military Voters Act, act as an independent country, freed from colonial wardship. adopted by the Commons on 29 August 1917, that gave the vote to all British subjects in the Canadian armed “Canada could certainly have intervened in this forces and to the members of certain British military war as a nation, with no more subservience to units stationed in Canada, and it provided for the casting England than to or Belgium, and reserving of ballots overseas by members of the military. The expressly its full freedom of action for the future. Wartime Elections Act, adopted two weeks later, extended Canada could even have used its participation the franchise to close female relatives of soldiers, but in the war as a means to increase its freedoms, took away the vote from Canadians who had emigrated merely by obtaining from England and its allies an from enemy countries, and also from conscientious acknowledgment of its fully independent role.”14 objectors.7 As a final prelude to the campaign, on 12 October 1917, Borden created a Unionist cabinet which included In Henri Bourassa’s eyes, national independence dissident Liberals. During the election campaign that trumped human sacrifice. This was no mere rhetorical followed, Laurier could count only on the support of device, but rather, the only way he could see to plan French Canadians. The contest naturally focussed on the the conduct of the war in order to achieve Canada’s conscription issue, with the Leader of the Opposition aims. In English Canadian society, and especially in calling for a better organized volunteer system, or, at imperialist circles, by contrast, the terms of the bargain least, a referendum to confirm the legitimacy of conscription. were turned upside down. As the historian Ian Hugh The outcome of the poll, conducted on 17 December 1917, Maclean Miller explains in a study of contemporary showed how divided the country had become, with Toronto society, Torontonians were convinced that their the Unionist government winning 153 seats, and the military commitment Liberals, 82, including 62 in . would be rewarded. In their world view, “By 1916, voluntary Henri Bourassa saw all the manoeuvring as an attempt the Great War was a recruitment was to ram conscription through as the thin edge of an kind of purifying yielding fewer and illegitimate autocratic and military regime that was splitting firestorm from which the country, threatening social strife, and violating the the fewer enlistments.” principle of military autonomy adopted at the time of would rise cleansed and

76 Canadian Military Journal ● Winter 2006-2007 strengthened. By having paid their tribute war in Europe without the consent of the in men, Canadians would have earned “His warnings nation in August 1914 was already an abuse the right to emancipation in the new to the federal of power. Making overseas conscription order.15 This was at odds, to say the compulsory would be yet another abuse government were clear: least, with Bourassa’s position: In his of power.”20 Conscription was to him the view, the war was a divine punishment conscription equaled ultimate expression of British “militarism” HISTORY meted out to Christendom for its “three revolution.” and “” – two terms that he great crimes” against the Catholic Church: used interchangeably – and the unavoidable “the Greek schism, Protestant anarchy outcome of the ever-closer military and the French Revolution.”16 Most important, unlike links established between Britain and the Empire since his English Canadian contemporaries, Bourassa did the Boer War. He denounced this process as a betrayal not believe that the world would emerge renewed of the aims of Confederation, which he believed from the ordeal. In his mind, only an immediate cessation included greater political and military autonomy for of hostilities, with the outcome of the conflict to be the Dominion. Even worse, he feared that the situation arbitrated by the Pope, would allow Christianity would ignite social chaos. By forestalling all to be reunited and avoid the chaos of “godless, amoral, parliamentary debate, the Unionist coalition in favour unprincipled cosmopolitanism.”17 Given that the war of the bill, he wrote, was extending nothing less than did not even have the same meaning, let alone the same “a formal and irreversible invitation to insurrection.”21 political and religious dimensions, in either community, His warnings to the federal government were clear: the advent of conscription could only exacerbate mutual conscription equalled revolution. resentments. The events of 1917-1918 harshly tested Henri Bourassa’s ideals. He well knew that the struggle “Weigh my words: for French Canadians, the against conscription that he was undertaking went to the advent of conscription would trigger a process very existence of the bi-ethnic, bilingual nation he that would soon transform what is now perhaps had always defended as “the free and voluntary association the most peaceful and most orderly people of two peoples with equal rights in all respects.”18 in the Americas into a revolutionary people. Once unleashed, this revolutionary spirit would rage not The conscription bill had hardly been announced only against the military regime, but everywhere: before the nationalist leader registered his fierce in factories, in agriculture, in every area of industry, opposition in a series of articles published in Le Devoir society and politics.”22 from 28 May to 6 June 1917.19 “Committing Canada to An Invitation to Revolution

nce the bill was adopted, Henri Bourassa continued Odenouncing this “invitation to revolution” and the “regime of military terror” that had extended it.23 He prophesied that once the people realized they had been deceived, there would be “an uprising that could surpass in some respects even the excesses of the French Revolution.”24 At a deeper level, conscription was reminiscent of the levée en masse or total mobilization of the revolutionary wars that had ultimately led to the fall of the Papal State in 1870. This prospect was so terrifying to Henri Bourassa that his writings contain some rather wild conjectures on the subject. He went so far as to speculate that “Imperialists” had not only been the originators of the Russian revolution, but were also plotting to ensure the triumph of their “revolution” by overthrowing all of Europe’s monarchies, including the British Crown.25 He warned that unless “war profiteers” were cast out and a “peace without victory” brought about, “universal civil war will succeed international war throughout the world.”26 All during the global conflict, Bourassa again and again called upon the leaders of belligerent countries to submit to arbitration by the Pope, offering them a stark choice: “A Christian peace or social revolution.”27

CMJ collection Nonetheless, Henri Bourassa had not always been so categorically opposed to compulsory military service, Sir Robert Borden and Winston Churchill, 1913 at least, ostensibly. In July 1915, he had opined that

Winter 2006-2007 ● Canadian Military Journal 77 strategy to ensure social peace and order, and, more importantly, to rebuild national unity on a fresh basis. He wagered that “if conscription is accepted unreservedly by an absolute majority of all voters, French Canadians will accept it.”34 On the other hand, a solid Quebec vote against conscription would allow more dovish English Canadians an easy way out of the “nightmare of conscription.” In addition, he saw a plebiscite as a way to make all votes against conscription count, since anti-military opinion was beginning to be felt outside Quebec, especially among farmers, workers, and pacifist groups. This would help avoid “deepening the divide between the two races.”35 But his hopes proved short-lived when the situation started spinning out of control.

Resistance without Violence

n August 1917, Montreal and several cities in Quebec I were roiled by popular demonstrations. From that point on, Henri Bourassa was again forced on the defensive. He repeatedly warned his own camp against the disastrous consequences of resorting to violence, and the dangers of unbridled ethnic :

By calling for violent resistance in the name only of the French race or the province of Quebec, you would be boosting incalculably those hateful

PA C-020240 opponents who seek conscription first and foremost as a way to put the “d....d Frenchmen” in their General Sir Sam Hughes, Minister of Militia and Defence, whose recruiting place. Even those many English and English- initiatives tended to alienate French Canadians. speaking opponents of conscription will join our enemies in crushing any attempted insurrection, the government ought to follow the lead of the US or at least, will give them free rein in restoring Congress and adopt a selective conscription system.28 public peace and order at they see fit. With the Two years later, he still asserted: “This was the only first violent act, martial law will be proclaimed rational method to extract the greatest effort possible and a military regime will be imposed in place from the country, both militarily and economically, and of civil authority. It is not difficult to imagine to recruit a large army without creating chaos in that the government will not entrust the restoration agricultural and essential industries.”29 This was a of order to officers inclined to leniency.36 barely veiled reference to the fiasco to which the extreme volunteering system instituted by former Minister of Militia Henri Bourassa was coming face to face with the Sam Hughes had led.30 But in reality, Henri Bourassa well limits of his activist beliefs. He had to reconcile resistance knew that the French Canadian population, being largely to conscription with a prohibition against any violence. rural, included “a larger proportion of farmers and fathers As an apologist for Roman Catholic Church supremacy, with many children,”31 and selective conscription would be he felt that his personal opposition could not be advantageous for Quebec because farm labour and family allowed to morph into political radicalism. One possible breadwinners would likely be exempted. However, by model for this attitude was the refusal of Pope Pius IX the time the conscription bill was being debated in in 1848 to “collude” in the “satanic” principles of the Parliament, Bourassa had given up on attempts to fine-tune Italian Revolution, even while he condemned the Austrian the enlistment process, and had come to believe instead that occupation.37 Perhaps Bourassa’s dilemma in 1917 was the country could do no more, having already fielded a larger similarly born of a collision between his reactionary proportion of its population (almost 500,000 volunteers, values and his sympathy with a potentially “revolutionary” or six percent of the population) than England, France and cause. The position he eventually worked out was the .32 exceedingly subtle.

As a way out of the impasse, Bourassa proposed The conscription juggernaut was moving along a plebiscite on conscription, in which voters would be freed inexorably, ignoring Bourassa’s proposed alternatives, and from siding with the traditional parties that he held crushing any dissent. The referendum he had suggested to be deeply corrupt.33 Setting aside his enmity with in order “to avoid a dangerous explosion”38 had not Laurier, he actively supported the Liberal platform in this taken place. His proposals to “create a powerful backlash” respect. He believed that a direct popular vote was the best against conscription and to “give full support to the

78 Canadian Military Journal ● Winter 2006-2007 opposition in Parliament” had gone the “blood tax,”40 and even more so, the unheeded, and the bill was adopted in a “The conscription calls to riot by agents provocateurs who matter of weeks. Bourassa felt that he juggernaut was could lead French Canadians down the path could not counsel disobedience to a of disaster at any time. inexorably moving law, however severe. Faced with a fait accompli, he could only express a faint along, ignoring Bourassa’s margin for manoeuvre was HISTORY hope that “as many anti-conscription Bourassa’s proposed all the narrower, since he needed to avoid candidates as possible” would be elected offending those moderate Liberals who alternatives, and in order that the Act might be repealed. had remained loyal to Laurier and still Here again, his calls would fall on deaf crushing any defended volunteerism, as well as Quebec’s ears. Bourassa then worked out a highly dissent.” bishops and a number of nationalists who ambiguous position on “passive resistance” were in favour of the war effort,41 including to conscription. Although he acknowledged Ferdinand Roy, a leading that this could be “a duty on certain occasions,” he hastened lawyer who published a broadside in favour of conscription to restrict the application of this faculty to those with a in 1917.42 If this were not enough, Le Devoir was constantly sufficiently enlightened conscience: skirmishing with a popular press that had become a mouthpiece for the war effort. An editorial in the Toronto Does the conscription bill fall into the category of Mail and Empire of 10 December 1917 asserted that “a vote those tyrannical measures that justify passive resist- for Laurier and his friends would be a vote for Bourassa, ance? For those who believe that war is a crime and against those fighting at the front, against links with Britain an evil in itself, the answer is yes; for all others, it and the Empire, a vote for Germany... .”43 Extreme Unionist would be rash to answer in the affirmative. It is not groups were fond of saying that “a vote for Laurier is a vote enough that a law appears harsh or oppressive for for Bourassa, is a vote for the Kaiser.”44 This spiralling passive resistance to be justified. Any law appears hostility was seen as a threat by certain francophone circles, harsh, oppressive or unjust to someone. What would who felt it important to preserve harmony between the two become of public order if everyone were entitled to communities. Abbé D’Amours, the editor of L’Action resist every law that he does not like?39 catholique, strongly condemned the nationalist doctrine of Bourassa, whom he dubbed the “Castor rouge,”45 in a series The nationalist leader was attempting to draw a line of letters published in La Presse, in which he argued that between “good” and “bad” resistance in the hope of keeping Bourassa’s position was dangerous because it was based on a the cause of French Canadians clearly apart from the “revo- theory of “races” that was destructive to national unity. lution.” In particular, he feared the influence of the labour D’Amours believed that French Canadians would see their movement that was whipping up popular sentiment against rights respected if only they accepted British patriotism. PA C-006859

A demonstration against Conscription in Montreal’s Victoria Square, 24 May 1917.

Winter 2006-2007 ● Canadian Military Journal 79 Political or Cultural Resistance? “contagion” and from provocations coming from all quarters. Of course, the extent to which the grandson of Louis-Joseph espite all the fears, the passions unleashed by the Papineau had a direct influence on the general population D“blood tax” appeared to abate as time passed is debatable. Bourassa was an intellectual with the and the conscription system became a reality. This manners of an aristocrat, remote from his illiterate “people,” can be attributed to the “safety valve” offered by the whose potential for violence he feared. However, the exemption provisions built into the law – the result of editorial line of Le Devoir was widely influential within a compromise or a case of Parliament’s wisdom? – that the local clergy.50 Parish priests were highly attuned to the were widely used for months, with the connivance population, and they made up an influential network of local notables (especially in Quebec where tribunals of resistance against both conscription and revolution, granted proportionally more exemptions than in which was especially strong in rural areas. Indeed, Henri other provinces),46 thereby creating a form of legally Bourassa openly addressed these very local elites in the sanctioned refusal to serve.47 Therefore, although they aftermath of the bloody Quebec City riots that occurred had been unable to prevent the adoption of the in the spring of 1918: “Le Devoir is not widely read in conscription bill, French Canadians appeared well on those circles where riot leaders operate, but it strives to the way to creating an effective underground network reach those opinion leaders who can contain and isolate of resistance against the draft. This attitude is strikingly wildfires.”51 Bourassa was particularly concerned that the similar to a “culture of refusal to serve” – unspoken urban riots could lead to the demise of the fragile balance but deeply rooted – observed in some remote areas that had been achieved by the exemption system. Indeed, of France at the same time, where local populations the troubles had started because federal agents had “traditionally hostile to any outside interference” resisted refused to honour a young man’s exemption certificate.52 the “intrusion of national sovereignty” and jealously Bourassa reached back to the economic argument by warning defended their sense of identity through “a form of the government against “the danger of building up the global cultural resistance that went beyond the mere army to the expense of agricultural production and ship refusal to serve in the army.”48 If this speculation is building,”53 another clear reference to industries where accurate, it would mean that Quebec’s elites made their French Canadians were widely employed. peace with a historic and deeply rooted sense of cultural resistance49. Saving the English Soul

In this context, Henri Bourassa’s key achievement ut, most strikingly, this post-riot editorial betrays the was, not so much in whipping up crowds that needed Bnationalist leader’s feeling of helplessness. His call no convincing, than in keeping a lid on the anti-conscription for appeasement is worlds away from the grandiose cauldron by protecting French Canadians from revolutionary tirades against the “imperialist plot” of spring 1917. How CMJ collection

Sir Robert Borden and Sir Arthur Currie take the salute as infantry of the 4th Canadian Division march past along a dusty French road.

80 Canadian Military Journal ● Winter 2006-2007 could Bourassa not feel subservience as he had feared, the sacrifice of Canadians was “From then on, subdued? The worst case now paving the way towards national independence.55 Bourassa drifted away scenario had become Canada was gaining self-government, as Henri Bourassa had reality, and troops from yearned for so long, under his very eyes, and through from nationalism Toronto had fired war, rather than through the struggle against war. and into a pervasive upon the people of HISTORY Catholicism that Quebec City. The From then on, Bourassa drifted away from nationalism confrontation between and into a pervasive Catholicism that cost him many cost him many the two “founding of his remaining supporters. He was re-elected as a federal of his remaining peoples” that he had MP in 1925, after an absence of 18 years, and later made supporters.” feared for so long had a speech glorifying the Pope before a stunned House of finally happened, and Commons. He even attempted to convert his friend, the four French Canadians socialist MP James Woodsworth, to Catholicism.56 One had been killed. The failure of Bourassa’s national of his most famous followers, , attributed ideal could hardly have been brought home more cruelly. this eccentric behaviour to a hereditary “moral illness” By 1918, Henri Bourassa was exhausted and depressed.54 made up of religious scruples and neurasthenia, which He suffered a series of professional and personal losses, he asserted had been handed down in the Papineau with his Devoir progressively silenced by censorship, line.57 However, Bourassa’s real or supposed mental and more deeply, the death of his wife, Joséphine frailty is not the only explanation for his conduct. In Papineau, following a long illness in 1919, and a few fact, he felt he was continuing the struggle on his only months later, the death of Laurier, to whom he had remained remaining battlefield: religion. Although he had lost the close, despite their disagreements. In the aftermath of the battle against the warlords, he was now launching war, the nationalist leader found himself widowed, with a a crusade to save their souls. He wrote in 1920: “We family of eight young children, isolated and exhausted by struggle against English imperialism in order to save the years of struggle against war and conscription. Most English nation, the English mind, the English civilization, profoundly, history had proven him wrong on a fundamental the English soul from the rule of Satan and restore point: far from relegating the Dominion back to colonial them to God.”58 PA PA-022751

French Canadian officers of the first French Canadian battalion to be formed under conscription, nearly all of whom went to the 22nd Battalion.

Winter 2006-2007 ● Canadian Military Journal 81 Although he continued to preach popular sentiment that he, ironically, “resistance” in order to break the “chain” “Although he had helped to create. While inveighing of imperialism, Henri Bourassa never continued to preach against the “blood tax,” he reassured called for taking up any weapons other the conservative elites of French ‘resistance’ in order than those of the mind and the word. It Canada by denouncing any resort could be argued that despite his nationalist to break the ‘chain’ to disorder and violence. His rhetoric credentials, Bourassa was, in fact, stuck of imperialism, justified French Canadians’ attachment in a “colonized” mentality, by definition to their identity as expressed through Henri Bourassa never powerless, taking refuge in religion and a cultural “refusal to serve,” but giving voice to what Albert Memmi called for taking at the same time, warned them describes as “the self-loathing passive- up any weapons against the temptation of political, aggressiveness of the conquered who i.e. forceful, affirmation of that other than the mind admire their conqueror in spite of themselves identity. Through this ambivalent and cling to the hope that the omnipotent and the word.” attitude, far from being the “dangerous colonizer will turn out to be benevolent.”59 agitator” demonized in many quarters, Such criticisms were probably voiced in Henri Bourassa instead played the his day, but Bourassa remained independent and role of a form of “spiritual advisor,” even of peacemaker unrepentant as always, as suggested by this extract within his own community, by channelling collective from one of his last anti-imperialist tirades: “It is true resentment into a Christian social renewal project. that in writing these lines, I run the risk of confirming Bourassa’s detractors were mistaken in seeing him my reputation (widespread among practical people) only as a madman or a plotter of rebellion. Quite the of a tilter at windmills. But no matter, I am used to it contrary, given the breadth and depth of resistance and in any event, I write for people who take the trouble to conscription in Quebec, Henri Bourassa was probably to think.” the most moderating influence against the threat of uncontrolled popular dissent, and in particular, he Conclusions significantly helped forestall civil war. Ironically, the man his English Canadian contemporaries considered as Henri Bourassa a “traitor to the motherland”? Public Enemy Number One was probably their best ally on WHardly. His Catholic, traditionalist, anti-revolutionary the home front. values led him to exert a moderating influence in the conscription crisis by denouncing the excesses of a

NOTES

1. The writing of this article was funded 5. Minister of Militia Sam Hughes had created 12. The “blood tax” was an expression used in France through a research grant from the Hector- an all-voluntary recruitment system, to such an under the monarchy to designate an honourable Fabre Chair of the Université du Québec extent that enrolment for the expeditionary force, contribution to society. Its current negative à Montréal. at least at the outset of the war, was not directly connotation dates back to the First World War. 2. François-Albert Angers, “La pensée de Henri administered by the government, but rather At the time, it was seen by many as the last tax Bourassa : Le problème de la paix”, L’Action by independent patriotic associations run by payable to the State “that citizens can still be nationale, Montreal, 1954, p. 92. influential economic, social and intellectual physically compelled to pay.” In France, the main 3. Henri Bourassa quarrelled with then Prime circles using the medium of the press. In other form of resistance to this civic obligation was the Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier about the Boer words, recruitment was initially left to private refusal to report for military duty, a phenomenon War and resigned from Parliament to protest initiative. That bizarre system naturally led to chaos, that was more or less widespread from one against sending a Canadian contingent in patronage, and improvisation. In this context, region to the next. (Philippe Boulanger, “Le South Africa without Parliament’s assent. conscription can be seen as an attempt – albeit refus de l’impôt du sang. Géographie de In his resignation letter, he asked “whether unsuccessful – by the government to reassert its l’insoumission en France de 1914 à 1922”, Canada is ready to give up its prerogatives authority over a system that had completely Guerres mondiales et conflits contemporains, as a self-governing colony, its parliamentary escaped its control. No. 188, 1997, pp. 3-25.) freedom, its pact with the mother country 6. Robert Rumilly, Histoire de la province de Québec, 13. Many tend to forget that the Dominion of Canada achieved after 75 years of struggle, and tome XXII, (Montreal: Montréal Éditions, was technically a colony of the British Empire at revert to its former status as a Crown 1951), p. 74. the time. In this context, conscription took on a colony.” This extract foreshadows Bourassa’s 7. Mason Wade, Les Canadiens français de 1760 à very specific meaning, as shown by the literature doctrine about Canada’s participation in nos jours, tome II (1911-1963) ( : on mobilization in French and British colonies in outside wars during the 20th Century. Le Cercle du Livre de France, 1963), p. 160. both world wars. In France, conscription appears (Hommage à Henri Bourassa : Lettre de 8. Henri Bourassa, Le Pape, arbitre de la paix, (among other connotations) as a path to assimilation M. Henri Bourassa à Sir Wilfrid Montreal, Éditions du Devoir, 1918, p. 119. Article and integration into citizenship and therefore a Laurier, Montreal, Éditions du Devoir, published in Le Devoir on 31 August 1917. fairly explicit bargain is made with natives of the 1952, p. 50) 9. Le Devoir, April 20, quoted in Wade, p. 64. colonies: “my blood in exchange for French 4. Mackenzie King wrote in December 1916: 10. Armand Lavergne, quoted in Wade, pp. 92-93. citizenship.” In the British Empire, where “Sir W. regards B. as a fanatic and ill-mentally 11. Sources include Elizabeth H. Armstrong, The conscription was less rooted in political and balanced, and of course swayed by the R. C. Crisis of Quebec, 1914-1918 (New York: Columbia military culture and more of an ad hoc measure, Church.” Journal of William Lyon Mackenzie University Press, 1937), p. 270, and J. L. Granatstein the bargain between the mother country and the King, ArchiviaNet, 12 December 1916 [on line] at et al., Broken Promises: A History of Conscription in colonies was not always as explicit, all the more Canada (Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman, 1985), p. 281. so in the case of Canada, being a “white” settlement

82 Canadian Military Journal ● Winter 2006-2007 colony where potential conscripts lived in the 32. Bourassa (1917), pp. 10-12. By way of 46. The common definition of refusal to serve same type of political culture as Britain and comparison, France’s colonial recruits at the time is the refusal to report to a summons from enjoyed rights equivalent to those of the British. made up only 1.5% of the population of territories military authorities. Sources consulted include Sources consulted include Marc Michel, Les outside France proper. (Michel, p. 193) Patrick Bouvier, Déserteurs et insoumis : Africains et la Grande Guerre. L’Appel à 33. Bourassa (1917), p. 27, and pp. 39-41. It should les Canadiens français et la justice militaire, l’Afrique 1914-1918 (Paris : Karthala, 2003), be noted that Bourassa saw plebiscites as a key part 1914-1918 (Montreal : Éditions Athéna, 2003), p. 193, and Gilbert Meynier, L’Algérie révélée of his national defence policy doctrine. He proposed p. 79.

(Geneva-Paris : Librairie Droz, 1981), p. 793. them at least three times: once about sending an 47. Ibid., pp. 72-73. HISTORY 14. Henri Bourassa, Hier, aujourd’hui, demain, expeditionary corps to South Africa in 1900, and 48. Boulanger, pp. 24-25. Montreal, Éditions du Devoir, 1916, p. 67. twice on the issue of Canada’s contribution to the 49. A number of French researchers have shown 15. Ian Hugh Maclean Miller, Our Glory and Our naval defence of the Empire in 1911. that the issue of conscription is rooted in the Grief: Torontonians and the Great War (Toronto: 34. Ibid., p. 27. very nature of French society and can still University of Toronto Press, 2002), p. 38. It 35. Ibid. be felt in the country’s collective memory. should be noted that the mystique of sacrifice by 36. Le Devoir, 11 August 1917. It should be noted that Sources consulted include: Michel Auvray, blood is prevalent throughout prewar European Bourassa himself endorsed a kind of ethnic barrier by L’âge des casernes. Histoires et mythes du literature. Authors such as Georges Sorel, Charles describing French Canadians as the “only exclu- service militaire (Paris : éditions de l’Aube, Péguy, Rupert Brooke and Thomas Hardy wrote, sively Canadian group” Pariseau et Bernier, p. 91. 1998), p. 326; Annie Crépin, La conscription at least until 1914, about the inevitability of a war 37. After refusing to support the war of independence, en débat ou le triple apprentissage de la that would redeem and purify a world grown old he fled and was later restored to the papal throne nation, de la citoyenneté, de la République and decadent. by the French. Bourassa cites this example in a (1798-1889) (Arras : Artois Presses Université, 16. Bourassa (1918), Le Pape, arbitre de la paix, p. 146. pamphlet about the imminent signing of the 1998), p. 258 ; Philippe Boulanger, Géographie 17. Ibid. Lateran Agreements between the Pope and historique de la conscription et des conscrits 18. Henri Bourassa, La conscription, Montreal, Mussolini. La paix romaine, Montreal, Éditions en France de 1914 à 1922 d’après les Éditions du Devoir, 1917, p. 20. This pamphlet du Devoir, 1929, p. 6). comptes rendus sur le recrutement de l’armée, includes nine articles on the topic published in Le 38. Bourassa (1917), p. 27. doctoral thesis, Paris IV-Sorbonne, 2 volumes, Devoir between May 28 and June 6, 1917 and went 39. Le Devoir, 11 August 1917. 1998, p.615. to press on June 9. Bourassa’s struggle against 40. It should be noted that the labour movement’s 50. Wade,, p. 157. conscription is highlighted in Robert Rumilly’s position about the was remained ambiguous 51. Henri Bourassa, “L’ordre public doit être biography, Henri Bourassa : La vie publique d’un throughout, largely in response to the pacifist maintenu”, Le Devoir, 5 April 1918, grand Canadien (Montreal: Chantecler, 1953), position of the American Federation of Labor, in p. 1. The spring of 1918 had been pp. 570-593, and in a chapter of Warren Alexander line with the United States’ chosen policy of particularly explosive in Quebec, with the Chubb, Henri Bourassa and the First World War “armed” neutrality. Canadian union leaders were conscription crisis reaching its bloody (master’s thesis, University of Saskatchewan, torn between their American allegiances and their climax during the Quebec City riot on 1974, pp. 47-67). See also Wade, pp. 116-194. close links with their British counterparts who 1 April, when four demonstrators were 19. Bourassa (1917), p. 47. were being swept up in spite of themselves by the shot to death by troops despatched from 20. Ibid., p. 38. “anti-Prussian” patriotic wave. Nonetheless, a Ontario. 21. Ibid., p. 40. Article published in Le Devoir on pacifist current did appear within the Canadian 52. Jean Provencher, Québec sous la loi des mesures 6 June 1917. labour movement. Charles Lipton, Histoire du de guerre, 1918 (Montreal : Boréal Express, 22. Ibid., p. 26. syndicalisme au Canada et au Québec, 1827-1959 1971), p. 47. 23. Bourassa (1918), Le Pape, arbitre de la paix, (Montreal : Éditions Parti pris, 1976), p. 252. See 53. Bourassa (1918), “L’ordre public doit être section “Lubie démocratique : Invite à la also Gregory Kealey, “State Repression of Labour maintenu”. revolution”, pp. 117-119. Article published in and the Left in Canada, 1914-1920: The Impact of 54. André Bergevin, Anne Bourassa et Cameron Le Devoir on 31 August 1917. the First World War”, in Canadian Historical Nish, “Henri Bourassa”, L’Action nationale, 24. Ibid., p. 96. Article published in Le Devoir on Review, Vol. 73, No. 3, 1994, pp. 281-314. 1966, p. LI. 24 April 1917. 41. Sources includes René Durocher, “Henri 55. Desmond Morton and Jack L. Granatstein, 25. Ibid., see section entitled “Après la guerre, la Bourassa, les évêques et la guerre de 1914-1918”, Marching to Armageddon: Canadians and revolution”, p. 97 and p. 102. Articles published in Jean-Yves Gravel, Le Québec et la guerre the Great War, 1914-1919 (Toronto: Lester in Le Devoir on 24-25 April 1917. (Montreal : Boréal Express, 1974), pp. 47-75. and Orphen Dennys, 1989), p. 288. It should 26. Ibid. See section entitled “Est-ce la paix?”, p. 125. 42. Like Bourassa, Roy denounced the waste and be recalled that Canada earned the right to Article published in Le Devoir on 1 December 1917. corruption that had surrounded the mobilization sign the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 in its 27. Ibid., p. 146. Article published in Le Devoir on of Canadian troops. But he believed that the past capacity as a country that had contributed to 12 January 1918. could not be undone and complaining would be the victory over Germany, and Canada also 28. Bourassa (1917), p. 10. futile, and that French Canadians had no other obtained an independent seat at the League 29. Ibid. choice but to make common cause with their of Nations. The Statute of Westminster 30. Sources consulted include Gérard Pinsonneault, English Canadian compatriots. Ferdinand Roy, eventually enshrined its autonomy in matters La propagande de recrutement militaire au Canada, L’appel aux armes et la réponse canadienne- of defence and foreign policy, as was the case 1914-1917. Essai en histoire des mentalités, master’s française : étude sur le conflit de races (Quebec for the other Dominions. dissertation, Université de Sherbrooke, 1981, p. 183. City : J.-P. Garneau, 1917), p. 31 and p. 35. 56. Rumilly (1953), p. 723. 31. These lines were written in the summer of 1916 in 43. Wade, p. 162. 57. Lionel Groulx, Mes Mémoires, tome 2 reply to his cousin, Captain Talbot Mercer 44. Ibid. (Montreal : Fides, 1971), pp. 225-257. Papineau, who was fighting with the Princess 45. A patriot (under the pseudonym of l’abbé 58. Henri Bourassa, La prochaine guerre impériale. Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry Regiment in Joseph Prio Arthur D’Amours), Où allons-nous?, En serons-nous?, Montreal, Éditions du France and urging him to support the war effort. Montreal, Société d’éditions patriotiques, articles Devoir, 1920, p. 31. (Quoted by Jean Pariseau and Serge Bernier, Les published between June and September 1916, 59. Albert Memmi, Portrait du colonis, ( Montreal : Canadiens français et le bilinguisme dans les p. 73 . Henry Bourassa was nicknamed Castor L’Étincelle, 1972), p. 114. Forces armées canadiennes, tome 1 (Ottawa: rouge because of his apparently paradoxical 60. Henri Bourassa, La Mission Jellicoe. Nouvelle Department of History and Heritage, Department twin allegiance to conservative ideology and the poussée d’impérialisme (Montreal : Éditions of National Defence, 1987), p. 91. Liberal Party. du Devoir, 1919), p. 31.

Winter 2006-2007 ● Canadian Military Journal 83