DOCSLIB.ORG

Te Constitution Act, 1982 and the Crown

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Te Constitution Act, 1982 and the Crown !e Constitution Act, 1982 and the Crown: Twenty-Five Years Later Kenneth Munro* In a splendid ceremony on Parliament Hill and exercises all prerogatives of the Crown with- on 17 April 1982, Her Majesty proclaimed the in the federal sphere of jurisdiction. %e third el- Constitution Act, 1982.1 When the Prime Min- ement consists of the ten Lieutenant-Governors ister and premiers had met in November 1981 to who reside in their respective provincial capi- develop procedures for patriating and amend- tals and exercise the prerogatives of the Crown ing our Constitution, they failed to propose any within the provincial sphere. While sovereignty revisions with respect to the monarchy, except is divided within Canada between federal and for section 41(a) of the Constitution Act, 1982. provincial jurisdictions,4 the Queen combines Under this section, the unanimous agreement the two in her own person, giving unity to these of the Governor General, Senate, House of three elements of our Maple Crown. Commons, and the legislative assembly of each province is required to amend the Constitution Any discussion about the Crown over the in relation to “the o#ce of the Queen, the Gov- past twenty-&ve years would naturally examine ernor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a the powers of the Crown which are derived from 5 province.”2 In e$ect, by entrenching the monar- two sources: statute and common law. Parlia- chy in the Constitution, our leaders determined ment has conferred wide powers on our Crown that Canada would remain a constitutional to administer and to legislate. Since these are monarchy in perpetuity. %e twenty-&'h anni- delegated powers, they are subject to change by 6 versary of the proclamation of the Constitution Parliament. We o'en think that the monarch Act, 1982 provides an appropriate occasion to holds o#ce because of hereditary right, but this remind ourselves of the nature of our Canadian is not the case. Since the Glorious Revolution in Crown and to ask whether this institution can Britain in 1688, the Sovereign holds o#ce at the evolve, or has evolved, to meet the needs of Ca- will of Parliament. In addition, since the Statute 7 nadians. of Westminster was passed in 1931, Canada has had a role in the selection of its monarch be- %e Canadian Crown, the only constitu- cause that statute reads: tional monarchy in all of continental America except for Belize, is made manifest in a team [A]ny alteration in the law touching the Suc- cession to the %rone or the Royal Style and of persons: the &rst is the monarch who lives Titles shall herea'er require the assent as well outside the country. We share the person of our 3 of the Parliaments of all the Dominions as of Queen with &'een other countries. She has un- the Parliament of the United Kingdom.8 failingly carried out her role, rooted in Canadi- an tradition and experience, albeit shared with Indeed, the Parliament of Canada changed members of the Commonwealth of Nations of the royal style and title of our Sovereign under which she is the Sovereign. the Royal Style and Titles Act of 1953,9 thereby making the Queen, on 28 May 1953, o#cially %e second element of the Canadian Crown Queen of Canada. is the Governor General, who resides in Ottawa Constitutional Forum constitutionnel !" Several powers were speci&cally granted to pointed out that legally “the Governor General the Sovereign in the Constitution Act, 1867,10 can exercise any of the Queen’s powers in Can- and the amendments made in the Constitu- ada.”15 %e converse is not true, however; “the tion Act, 1982 did not change these powers. For Queen cannot exercise the Governor General’s example, the Queen authorizes the Governor powers because they are conferred on him, and General to appoint deputies, she is command- not on the Queen, by the British North America er-in-chief of the armed forces, and she decides Act.”16 Where a function is purely ceremonial or where the national capital is to be located. In does not require the production of some instru- addition, Parliament consists of the Queen, the ment of lawful e$ect, the Queen can o#ciate; Senate, and the House of Commons; the Queen otherwise, she cannot unless Parliament passes may appoint Senators; Royal Assent is given in a royal powers act similar to the one passed in the Queen’s name; and the Queen may admit Australia in 1973.17 %erefore, the Queen might new provinces and territories.11 give Royal Assent to legislation at the federal level or open Parliament, but she could not ap- Even though no modi&cation was made by prove an order-in-council or e$ectively replace statute to the institution of the Crown in 1982, the Governor General during a royal visit.18 the powers exercised by the Governor General, in particular, have changed over the past twen- While the Letters Patent purports to del- ty-&ve years. %e Governor General’s duties egate all royal powers in relation to Canada to have expanded and the powers have increased, the Governor General, Mallory has noted an not because of the legislated changes embed- apparent “understanding at the time that all ded in the Constitution Act, 1982, but because matters which prior to that time had been based several Governors General and their respective on direct advice to the Sovereign would not be governments have interpreted the Letters Pat- transferred to the Governor General without ent Constituting the O!ce of Governor General the consent of the Palace.”19 However, over the of Canada (Letters Patent) in the broadest pos- years, Canadian governments have sought and sible manner. In her memoir, Adrienne Clark- received the Sovereign’s consent to transfer a son wrote that: great deal of the Queen’s remaining power to the Governor General. For example, with the estab- Even many politicians don’t seem to know that lishment of the Order of Canada in 1967 and the &nal authority of the state was transferred the Order of Military Merit in 1972, the Queen from the monarch to the Governor General 20 in the Letters Patent of 1947, thereby making became the Sovereign of these orders, while Canada’s government independent of Great the Governor General became the chancellor of Britain. %is means that it is the Governor these two Canadian orders with their respective General who is the guarantor of responsible chancelleries and the secretary of the Canadian government and of our parliamentary democ- system of honours housed at Rideau Hall.21 Al- racy.12 though state visits by Governors General pre- date the issuance of the Letters Patent (Lord %e Letters Patent was issued on 1 October Willingdon made a state visit to Washington 1947 by King George VI, and conferred on the in 1928),22 these visits have become, since the Governor General “all powers and authorities days of Governor General Roland Michener, an lawfully belonging to Us in respect of Cana- important function performed by the Governor 13 da.” Former Governors General and consti- General rather than the Queen. While statute tutional scholars have focused on this phrase. dictates that the Governor General must seek Jules Léger has written that since 1947, “the the Queen’s consent to travel outside Canada,23 Governor General had been authorized to ex- the Queen has encouraged her Governors Gen- ercise all the powers and authorities of the Sov- eral to pressure the Canadian government into ereign with regard to Canada, but in practice, letting them undertake such state visits. In his a few o#cial acts . had continued to be per- biography of Michener, Peter Stursberg claims 14 formed by the Sovereign.” Likewise, the noted that Michener told him that the Queen encour- constitutional authority, James R. Mallory, has aged him to go abroad on visits as Canada’s () Volume 17, Number 2, 2008 head of state. In conversation with Michener, During the royal visit to Edmonton in the the Queen said: summer of 1978, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau discussed his proposal for constitutional reform I go abroad representing the Commonwealth with the Queen. A few months before, the min- but I’m always accepted as the Queen of the ister of justice, the Honourable Ron Basford, United Kingdom. I can’t represent Canada on these state visits. I think that you should, in had gone to London to present the proposed your role [as Governor General], encourage changes to the Queen, who “was quite happily your Government to send you on these vis- satis&ed that nothing would be changed in the 29 its.24 Crown’s essential relation to Canada.” With the Queen’s approval, the government proposed He did just that and so did subsequent Gover- a White Paper, and then legislation in 1978, nors General. In these and other areas, the Ca- which modi&ed the Crown’s statutory position nadian government, the Queen, and the Gov- in Canada. ernor General have worked together to expand the interpretation of the Letters Patent to en- Trudeau’s June 1978 White Paper on consti- large the role of the Governor General. Other tutional change — A Time for Action30 — was examples abound. followed by detailed dra' legislation: Bill C- 60.31 Editorial comment in the English press in Jules Léger claimed that a'er “her visit in Canada focused on what Trudeau was trying October 1977, Her Majesty agreed that certain to do to the Queen. As Richard Gwyn noted: diplomatic functions be ‘repatriated’ to Cana- “By raising the Governor General to the new da.”25 Consequently, new arrangements related status of ‘First Citizen’ of Canada, who would to diplomatic appointments and the various open and dissolve Parliament in his own name exchanges connected with them were made in rather than in Hers, Trudeau appeared to be 1977.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Housing Corporation
    St. Lawrence & False Creek : A Review of the Planning and Development of Two New Inner City Neighbourhoods CPI #10 U.B.C. J.D. Hulchanski Oct. 1984 nn1• per Scliool o! Com.munity anL1.Re31ona 1 Plann1ng University of British Columbia Vancouver, British Columbia I SSN; 0828-2390 ST. LAWRENCE& FALSE CREEK: A REVIEW OF THE PLANNINGAND DEVELOPMENTOF TWO NEW INNER CITY NEIGHBOURHOODS CPI ff 10 D. Hul chans ki October 1984 U.B.C. PLANNING PAPERS Canadian Planning Issues, #10 University of British Columbia SCHOOLOF COMMUNITY& REGIONAL PLANNING 428, 6333 Memorial Road Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5 Canada ST . LAWRENCE AND FALSE CREEK: A REVIEW OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TWO NEW INNER CITY ~EIGHBOURHOODS John David Hulc hanski Assistant Pr of essor School of Community and Regi onal Planning Universit y of Brit1sn Colombia Vanc ouver October 1984 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was undertaken with the finan cial assistance of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation . Research assistants Leigh Howell, Barbara Maass and Barbara Sanford helped collect data in Toronto and Vancouver. The staff of the City of Toro nt o Housing Department and the False Creek Development Group were especially help­ ful in provid ing full access to necessary research materials. In particular , I wish to thank Keith Ward, Co-ordinator of Program Planning for the City of Toronto Hous i ng Department and Cameron Gray, Develop­ ment Co-ordinator for the False Creek Development Group for their patient and prompt responses to numerous requests for information. While the assistance provided by CMHCand by these individuals and thejr agencies is gratefully acknow­ ledged , the y bear no responsibility for any faults, omissions or for the opinions expressed in this study.
    [Show full text]
  • The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada
    Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 31 Issue 1 Volume 31, Number 1 (Spring 1993) Symposium: Towards the 21st Century Article 2 Canadian/Australian Legal Perspectives 1-1-1993 The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada Peter W. Hogg Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Special Issue Article This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Hogg, Peter W.. "The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 31.1 (1993) : 41-61. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol31/iss1/2 This Special Issue Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada Abstract The Charlottetown Accord of 1992 was a set of proposals for amendments to the Constitution of Canada. These proposals were designed to achieve a national settlement of a variety of constitutional grievances, chiefly those arising from Quebec nationalism, western regionalism, and Aboriginal deprivation. The Accord was defeated in a national referendum. In the case of Quebec, the defeat of the Charlottetown Accord, following as it did on the defeat of the Meech Lake Accord, has made the option of secession relatively more attractive, but there are sound pragmatic reasons to hope that Quebec will not make that choice.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Folder: Honour Without Courage
    Project by Levi Orta Montreal, 2013 In Quebec, 85% of the population rejects the monarchy as a model of representation for Canada; the monarchy justifies itself as a cultural tradition of the country. I am interested in linking the concepts of “representation” in art and “representation” in politics, triggering a perversion of both. The project uses a fictional event where I save the life of a woman disguised as Queen Elizabeth II in order to apply for the “Star of Courage”, a decoration awarded by the representative of the monarchy in Canada by order of the Queen. The whole application process, the proofs of the heroic action, and the expected granting of the medal are part of the project. It is one representation that meets another, the realities of art and politics dissolving into each other and becoming accomplices. … Au Québec, 85% de la population rejette la monarchie comme modèle de représentation du Canada ; la monarchie justifie l’implémentation de ses pratiques comme un sujet de tradition culturelle du pays. Je suis intéressé à lier les concepts de « représentation » dans l’art et de « représentation » dans la politique, afin de provoquer une perversion de ces représentations. Le projet consiste à utiliser un incident fictif lors duquel je sauve la vie d'une femme déguisée en Reine Elizabeth II afin de soumettre ma candidature à la nomination de la « Star of Courage », une décoration décernée par la monarchie canadienne sur ordre de la Reine. Tout le processus d’application, les preuves de l’action héroïque ainsi que l’octroi tant attendu de la médaille font partie du projet.
    [Show full text]
  • ARCHIVAL THEORY and ORAL HISTORY DOCUMENTS by WILMA
    ARCHIVAL THEORY AND ORAL HISTORY DOCUMENTS by WILMA MACDONALD B.A., Simon Fraser University, 1980 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHIVAL STUDIES in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Library, Archival and Information Studies We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1995 © Wilma MacDonald, 1995 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date / Jjtflrs /f<?S~. DE-6 (2/88) f ABSTRACT This study was undertaken to examine in which circumstances archival theory, method and practices may be applied to oral history documents, with regard to appraisal and arrangement and description procedures, and in which circumstances they may not. With the ever increasing quantity of oral history documents being created today, there has been little acknowledgement that oral history collections form a significant portion of archival holdings, and a corresponding lack of archival literature to assist the archivist in dealing with these documents. Oral history documents have often been isolated from any evidence that they form part of the organic and natural activity of a person, organization or institution.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Crown and Honours
    The Crown and Honours: Getting it Right Christopher McCreery I N T R O D U C T I O N In the words of that early scholar of Commonwealth autonomy, Sir Arthur Berridale Keith, “The Crown is the fount of all honour.”i The role of the Crown as the fount of all official honours in Canada is a precept that is as old and constant as is the place of the Crown in our constitutional structure. Since the days of King Louis XIV residents of Canada have been honoured by the Crown for their services with a variety of orders, decorations and medals. The position of the Crown in the modern Canadian honours system is something that is firmly entrenched, despite consistent attempts to marginalize it in recent years. Indeed honours are not something separate from the Crown, they are an integral element of the Crown. A part that affords individuals with official recognition for what are deemed as good works, or in the modern context, exemplary citizenship. Just last year we witnessed the Queen’s direct involvement in the honours system when she appointed Jean Chrétien as a member of the Order of Merit. While many commentators and officials in Canada seemed confused as to just what this honour is – the highest civil honour for service – people did realize how significant it was, in large part because it came not from a committee or politician, but directly from the Sovereign. With this paper I will delve into the central role the Crown and Sovereign play in the creation of honours and I will also explore the areas where attention and reform are required in the Canadian honours system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Welsh Seal of the National Assembly for Wales
    The Welsh Seal of the National Assembly for Wales The Great Seal of the Realm is the chief seal of the Crown, used to show the Monarch's approval of important state documents. The practice of using this seal began in the reign of Edward the Confessor in the eleventh century, when a double-sided metal matrix with an image of the Sovereign was used to make an impression in wax for attachment by ribbon or cord to Royal documents. The seal meant that the monarch did not need to sign every official document in person; authorisation could be carried out instead by an appointed officer. Between 2007 and 2011 proposed Measures passed by the National Assembly for Wales were subject to “Royal Approval”. Separate Great Seals exist for Scotland and Northern Ireland and, from 2011, a Seal for Wales now exists. Royal Assent Royal Assent is the Monarch's agreement to make a Bill into an Act of the National Assembly for Wales. Royal Assent is conferred by the Monarch signing Letters Patent under the Welsh Seal. The Monarch's agreement to give her assent to a Bill is automatic. Student Research Look for examples of Seals using your school library, local library and the internet. Also research Signet Rings which were worn as jewellery and used by individuals to seal their initials or coat of arms into wax seals on important documents and letters. Form of Letters Patent “ELIZABETH THE SECOND by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and Territories Queen Head of the Commonwealth Defender of the
    [Show full text]
  • The Governor Genera. and the Head of State Functions
    The Governor Genera. and the Head of State Functions THOMAS FRANCK* Lincoln, Nebraska In most, though by no means all democratic states,' the "Head o£ State" is a convenient legal and political fiction the purpose of which is to personify the complex political functions of govern- ment. What distinguishes the operations of this fiction in Canada is the fact that the functions of head of state are not discharged by any one person. Some, by legislative enactment, are vested in the Governor General. Others are delegated to the Governor General by the Crown. Still others are exercised by the Queen in person. A survey of these functions will reveal, however, that many more of the duties of the Canadian head of state are to-day dis- charged by the Governor General than are performed by the Queen. Indeed, it will reveal that some of the functions cannot be dis- charged by anyone else. It is essential that we become aware of this development in Canadian constitutional practice and take legal cognizance of the consequently increasing stature and importance of the Queen's representative in Canada. Formal Vesting of Head of State Functions in Constitutional Governments ofthe Commonnealth Reahns In most of the realms of the Commonwealth, the basic constitut- ional documents formally vest executive power in the Queen. Section 9 of the British North America Act, 1867,2 states: "The Executive Government and authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen", while section 17 establishes that "There shall be one Parliament for Canada, consist- ing of the Queen, an Upper House, styled the Senate, and the *Thomas Franck, B.A., LL.B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Meritorious Service Cross 1984-2014
    The Meritorious Service Cross 1984-2014 CONTACT US Directorate of Honours and Recognition National Defence Headquarters 101 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, ON K1A 0K2 http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddhr/ 1-877-741-8332 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2014 A-DH-300-000/JD-004 Cat. No. D2-338/2014 ISBN 978-1-100-54835-7 The Meritorious Service Cross 1984-2014 Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, wearing her insignia of Sovereign of the Order of Canada and of the Order of Military Merit, in the Tent Room at Rideau Hall, Canada Day 2010 Photo: Canadian Heritage, 1 July 2010 Dedication To the recipients of the Meritorious Service Cross who are the epitome of Canadian military excellence and professionalism. The Meritorious Service Cross | v Table of Contents Dedication ..................................................................................................... v Introduction ................................................................................................... vii Chapter One Historical Context ........................................................................ 1 Chapter Two Statistical Analysis ..................................................................... 17 Chapter Three Insignia and Privileges ............................................................... 37 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 55 Appendix One Letters Patent Creating the Meritorious Service Cross .............. 57 Appendix Two Regulations Governing
    [Show full text]
  • Discretion and the Reserve Powers of the Crown
    Discretion and the Reserve Powers of the Crown Peter H. Russell The decision of Governor General Michaëlle Jean to grant prorogation when requested by Prime Minister Harper in 2008 and 2009 led to considerable debate among students of Parliament as to the discretionary power of a governor general to reject advice of a prime minister. This article agrees with those who believe that Mme Jean did not err in acting on those specific requests but rejects the idea that it would violate constitutional convention for a governor general to ever refuse such a request from a prime minister. It further argues that in the Westminster system the monarch or her representative, in exercising any of the Crown’s legal powers in relation to Parliament, retains the right to reject a prime minister’s advice if following that advice would be highly detrimental to parliamentary democracy. That rationale applies equally to prorogation and to dissolution. recent article by Nicholas MacDonald and scholars, that “in this democratic age, the head of state James Bowden1 quite rightly stressed that or her representative should reject a prime minister’s Ain the democratic age the reserve powers advice only when doing so is necessary to protect of the Crown should be rarely used. They say that parliamentary democracy.” Those words of mine are “most scholars” agree that it is only under the “most quoted, with what I take to be approval, by MacDonald exceptional circumstances” that the governor general and Bowden in their article. The justification for the may reject the prime minister’s advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Translating the Constitution Act, 1867
    TRANSLATING THE CONSTITUTION ACT, 1867 A Legal-Historical Perspective by HUGO YVON DENIS CHOQUETTE A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Law in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada September 2009 Copyright © Hugo Yvon Denis Choquette, 2009 Abstract Twenty-seven years after the adoption of the Constitution Act, 1982, the Constitution of Canada is still not officially bilingual in its entirety. A new translation of the unilingual Eng- lish texts was presented to the federal government by the Minister of Justice nearly twenty years ago, in 1990. These new French versions are the fruits of the labour of the French Constitutional Drafting Committee, which had been entrusted by the Minister with the translation of the texts listed in the Schedule to the Constitution Act, 1982 which are official in English only. These versions were never formally adopted. Among these new translations is that of the founding text of the Canadian federation, the Constitution Act, 1867. A look at this translation shows that the Committee chose to de- part from the textual tradition represented by the previous French versions of this text. In- deed, the Committee largely privileged the drafting of a text with a modern, clear, and con- cise style over faithfulness to the previous translations or even to the source text. This translation choice has important consequences. The text produced by the Commit- tee is open to two criticisms which a greater respect for the prior versions could have avoided. First, the new French text cannot claim the historical legitimacy of the English text, given their all-too-dissimilar origins.
    [Show full text]
  • Margaret Atwood to Receive 2018 Adrienne Clarkson Prize for Global
    NEWS RELEASE For Immediate Release Margaret Atwood ot receive 2018 Adrienne Clarkson Prize for Global Citizenship Celebrated author and activist to be honoured at 6 Degrees Toronto TORONTO, July 18, 2018—The Institute for Canadian Citizenship (ICC) is pleased to announce Margaret Atwood as the 2018 laureate of the Adrienne Clarkson Prize for Global Citizenship. The prize will be presented in Toronto on September 26. “Margaret Atwood will be the first woman and the first Canadian to receive the Prize,” said the Rt. Hon. Adrienne Clarkson. “We want to honour this remarkable citizen of Canada for all she has edon in her personal and professional life to make us aware that we are citizens of a country like Canada and of a planet that is our precious earth. In her brilliant writing career and her personal activism locally, nationally and internationally, she is a dynamic force in the world today.” Established in 2016, the Adrienne Clarkson Prize for Global Citizenship is awarded annually to a leader whose life work has demonstrated a steadfast commitment to the ideals of belonging and inclusion. Through words, actions and results, recipients encourage thought, dialogue, approaches and strategies that strive to remove barriers, change attitudes and reinforce the principles of tolerance and respect. The first two recipients were His Highness the Aga Khan (2016) and Ai Weiwei (2017). Atwood’s literary works and social activism galvanize people everywhere. Her brilliant writing and dedication to civic participation demonstrate a fearless commitment ot the ideals of belonging and citizenship, dan ot the principles of tolerance and respect.
    [Show full text]
  • The Order of Military Merit to Corporal R
    Chapter Three The Order Comes to Life: Appointments, Refinements and Change His Excellency has asked me to write to inform you that, with the approval of The Queen, Sovereign of the Order, he has appointed you a Member. Esmond Butler, Secretary General of the Order of Military Merit to Corporal R. L. Mailloux, I 3 December 1972 nlike the Order of Canada, which underwent a significant structural change five years after being established, the changes made to the Order of Military U Merit since 1972 have been largely administrative. Following the Order of Canada structure and general ethos has served the Order of Military Merit well. Other developments, such as the change in insignia worn on undress ribbons, the adoption of a motto for the Order and the creation of the Order of Military Merit paperweight, are examined in Chapter Four. With the ink on the Letters Patent and Constitution of the Order dry, The Queen and Prime Minister having signed in the appropriate places, and the Great Seal affixed thereunto, the Order had come into being, but not to life. In the beginning, the Order consisted of the Sovereign and two members: the Governor General as Chancellor and a Commander of the Order, and the Chief of the Defence Staff as Principal Commander and a similarly newly minted Commander of the Order. The first act of Governor General Roland Michener as Chancellor of the Order was to appoint his Secretary, Esmond Butler, to serve "as a member of the Advisory Committee of the Order." 127 Butler would continue to play a significant role in the early development of the Order, along with future Chief of the Defence Staff General Jacques A.
    [Show full text]