And it is on the plea of making better Canadians that the promoters of "national schools" are drifting from the very basic principle of our educational system, from the law and spirit of our Constitution. Our form of Government, as we all know, is dual. Matters of education are relevant to the Province. The more the Province will abdicate its claims, and submit to the growing influence of the Federal powers, the greater will be the danger of losing the political equilibrium of Confederation. Unstable equilibrium, once disturbed, is hardly ever re-established. The centrifugal forces of the Province protect our liberties against the possible excesses of the centripetal forces of the Federal Government. Any movement that tends to break the harmony of these forces is, we claim, anti-Canadian. The Premier of Quebec speaking to the Deputy Ministers of Education and Superintendents of Public Instruction, at an inter-provincial Conference sounded this note of warning: "The absolute control by each Province of its educational system is the keystone of our Confederation; and the whole structure of Canada would crumble away if any attempt were made at suppressing that which holds its several parts together." (Nov. 4, 1921.) Quebec is blamed for being the great obstacle to the realization of the dreams of our nationalizers. Quebec, we maintain, is the most sane Province of the Dominion, and the greatest help to the maintenance of Confederation. This is now an admitted fact by every serious and broad minded Canadian. Its conservatism acts, we would say, as the governor on the complicated machine of Canadian political life. It regulates its speed and keeps it within the limits of safety. Moreover, we ask, how could a system which would deny the principles and rights of over forty per cent. of the population be rightly and justly named "national"? No one has the right to assume the monopoly of "nationalism."

"The self-appointed or State-appointed nationalizer, we would say with Father Millar, S.J., ignorant of our real history or its true meaning, is fast becoming a menace to the sanity of our laws and to the supreme wisdom of a traditional national policy." [2]

And what will be the consequences of this levelling uniformity that crushes parental right and fuses the powers of Provinces into a Federal unit? The Prussian ideal is the answer. We all know what that means and where it leads. Its principles are the solvents of what remains of Christianity—unconscious to many, it is true—in the political life of our country. The armies that our boys fought on the fields of Flanders were formed and trained in the national schools of Germany.

V.—A British Reason

The great misfortune of many who clamour against our separate schools is their total ignorance of our history and of the spirit that the liberty-loving Fathers of the Confederation have breathed into our laws. To them "national reasons" may not appeal. This is very often the case of the average Westerner. The West is in its making and has no past behind it. This fact alone can explain how easy the Western mind is open to influences opposed to the spirit of our Canadian institutions. It has no traditions, and traditions are the hidden roots that plunge down into the soil of history, into the hearts of past generations, and give to a people, its real national life. Therefore, a "British reason," a reason founded on British traditions, on the British way of doing things in the Colonies, may make a stronger appeal to our Western mentality.

Freedom and fair play for every citizen within the Empire, the recognition of racial and religious rights, have been the strength and success of the British Government in its Colonial policy. (We underline "colonial policy" for, we cannot say the same of England's policy with Ireland—) We would quote here what a well known Western public man wrote some years ago when, under the pen-name of "Daylight" he discussed the "Separate School problem" in the columns of "The Regina Leader," January 3rd, 1916.

"In conclusion there are one or two general remarks I should like to make. It has always appeared to me that there is among our English-speaking people of Canada a section of the community that holds extreme views on all matters pertaining to nationality and religion. This section holds and advocates the idea, that there must be no compromise in dealing with matters pertaining to race and religion. In a word, they would set about at once to "Prussianize" our complex population. They forget, or entirely ignore, the fact that this is not the British plan. If the British Empire is the glorious Empire it is to-day is it not because of the fact that long ago the British statesman and the British citizen have learned the lesson of tolerance? To-day, Great Britain with its forty-five millions of people rules over hundreds of millions of people of diverse nationalities and religious faiths, and throughout the whole scheme of government and constitution runs the idea of reasonable and just tolerance and compromise. Were this not so the British Empire would quickly fall to pieces. Why then should we not have more of this spirit in Canada, and particularly in Western Canada? Some people are mightily concerned about our foreign-born population. They imagine that the process of assimilation can and should be accomplished in a day. Nothing is further from the truth. The process is necessarily a slow one. It is bound to take two or three, and in some cases, more generations. In the meantime we should strive to make these people feel that they are welcome to our broad open plains and to our citizenship. As to the final outcome no one need have any doubt."

The principle that has created the British Empire is the only principle that will keep it on the map of the world. This is history, philosophy, and common sense.

And when we see England recognizing the Catholic elementary schools and subsidizing to a certain extent our secondary schools, when Scotland has just brought the Catholic schools of several cities into its system, is it not painful, to say the least, to hear our ultra-loyalists ever up in arms against our separate schools? To them we feel like saying, "Go back to England and Scotland, from whence you or your forefathers came and learn from the Home Country the lesson of tolerance, of sane political government."

VI.—A Historical Reason