Blog Archives

Canadian Monarchist News, Spring 2016

3/22/2016

The Monarchist League of Canada has published its Spring
2016 issue of Canadian Monarchist News. Link

CMN Front Page

This issue leads off with a
handful of articles on Prime
Minister Justin Trudeau. This
is understandable given the
recent change in government
and the fact that Mr. Trudeau's
view of, & relationship with,
the monarchy is not all that
well publicized. These articles
do a lot to illuminate Her
Majesty's newest Prime
Minister. There is also a nice
tribute to former Prime
Minister Stephen Harper for
everything he has done for
Canada's monarchy.

The article by constitutionalist Philippe Lagassé interpreting
the Ontario Court of Appeal's ruling on the Citizenship Oath
helped clear up the details of a slightly muddled legal ruling.

It was also nice to see the Young Monarchists are well
represented. In fact, all ages are well-represented. The old
republican lie that monarchists are nostalgic octogenarians
has never been more dead.

While many features from previous issues have returned I
do note the absence of the Crowns & Maces. This feature
which noted positive actions towards the Canadian Crown
and called out negative ones was one of my favorites.
Perhaps there were too few negative actions to make a good
article? One can only hope!

Back issues of Canadian Monarchist News can be found on
the League website. Link

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Royal Tours Explained

3/21/2016

William & Kate during the 2011 Royal Tour

Royal tours are one of the
times when the monarchy is
most visible to Canadians. The
purposes of the royal tour, or
homecomings, are not always
that well understood by
Canadians.

Members of the Royal Family
have been living, working, &
visiting Canada since 1786. Early royal tours were made by
princes (and princesses) since the long sea voyage made it
unfeasible for the sovereign to both rule and visit their
overseas territories. The tours were meant to be a chance for
the people to see their royal family and for said royals to gain
experience in military and civil administration.

Sketch of King William IV

In many ways the American
Revolution had as much of a
hand in creating Canada as it
did the United States. How
fitting that the first royal tour
occurred at roughly the same
time.

Prince William (later King
William IV) was given
command of the HMS
Pegasus in 1786. He traveled
to Newfoundland, Nova
Scotia, and the Province of
Canada. The tour lasted
about a year.

In Placentia, Newfoundland Prince William had to break up a
riot on one occasion and hear a court case on another. As the
colonies largely lacked a permanent administration it was not
entirely uncommon for senior naval officers to take on such
duties. On two occasions Prince William led church services
attended by both Protestants and a few Catholics. He would
go on to finance the building of a church for the community.

He eventually proceeded to Halifax and to the Province of
Canada. The Prince traveled inland to modern-day Cornwall,
Ontario. There he encouraged the Loyalists building new lives
for themselves in the wilderness. He also met with First
Nations living around Montreal and was greeted with great
excitement.

Prince Edward, Duke of Kent

Prince William stayed in Canada
for only a short time but his
brother, Prince Edward, would
end up spending nine years in the
growing colonies. I have already
detailed Prince Edward's time in
another post so I will move on.

Both brothers saw to the positive
development of Canada and
began a tradition that continues
to this day.

The royal tours undertaken in the 1800s were for the most
part shorter in length with the exception of Princess Louise,
who served for five years as the vice-regal couple with her
husband from 1878 to 1883.

The 1900s brought an increase in the number of royal tours as
transportation across the Atlantic became faster. Tours also
tended to include more parts of Canada. Princess Patricia
would spend six years in Canada and become immensely
popular with Canadians. It was still only princes and
princesses undertaking royal tours until 1957 when Queen
Elizabeth II became the first reigning sovereign to visit Canada and open a session of the Canadian Parliament.

Tours have increasingly become centered around specific
themes. For instance the 2005 royal tour was organized as a
chance for Her Majesty and all other Canadians to honour
"The Spirit of Nation Builders."

Besides royal tours you also have 'working visits' that have
less of the pomp and circumstance and generally involve a
member of the Canadian Royal Family carrying out some of
their less public duties. The charity work of the Princess Royal
and Prince Harry's military training in Alberta being
examples. In a sense the working visits undertaken by
members of the Royal Family more resemble the royal tours
of the past while visits by the reigning monarch have become
a form of 'patriotic festival'.

Souvenir coffee can from 2002 Royal Tour

Back of can showing downtown Sussex, NB

Royal tours are a chance for the people and their monarch to
come together in celebration of Canada. As the personal face
of what would otherwise be the distant entity, the state, the
monarch serves to humanize it. By bringing attention to
communities that might not always be on the government
radar royal tours stress the importance of all peoples and
regions of our fair dominion.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Canadian Women on our Currency...

3/16/2016

...and why the Queen never seems to count.

On Tuesday the Moncton Times & Transcript ran an editorial
about how we should include more female Canadians on our
currency. I agree. Canadians are a talented bunch and
Canadian women equally so. What bothers me is the editorial
seemed to dance around the Queen's presence on the $20 bill.

The editorial, while acknowledging that the Queen is a
woman, seemed unwilling in any way to say she is a Canadian.
This is not an isolated view. Merna Forster, author of
heroines.ca, takes a similar stance stating "There are
currently no real women from Canadian history honoured
on any Canadian bank notes."

This got me thinking about what it actually means to be a
Canadian. Is it the legalistic possession of citizenship? Is it the
happenstance of being born here? Is it the mere act of living
within Canada's borders? Or is it something else? Let us look
at each of these questions as they relate to Canadian women.

"But the Queen doesn't have Canadian Citizenship!"

Neither did three of the Famous Five since Emily Murphy,
Louise McKinney, and Henrietta Muir Edwards died before
the Canadian Citizenship Act of 1946. Or, for that matter any
of the Canadian women before that. It is not that the Queen's
lack of Canadian citizenship is a result of her having another
citizenship. Her Majesty in fact has NO citizenship (and
travels with a diplomatic passport). This is both to avoid
favouring any of her realms and due to certain legalities of
being the embodiment a country. And it seems rather odd
for Canadians to focus on Her Majesty's lack of citizenship
when we do not think any less of Canadians having dual-
citizenship.

"She wasn't born here!"

Returning to the Famous Five we have Mary Irene Parlby who
was born in England. Nor was Laura Secord and many other
famous Canadian women. A little more than 20% of Canadians were not born on Canadian soil. We have many
new Canadian women who were born elsewheres. Is it right to
consider the Queen to not be Canadian on this basis?

"She doesn't live here!"

Canada has a long tradition of its people living, working, and
retiring outside the country. Sometimes they are away for
extended periods and only returning to Canada for short
homecomings. Emmanuelle Sophie Anne Chriqui, Anna
Paquin, and Carrie Anne Moss are all Canadians that live and
work in the USA.

And then you have Kim Victoria Cattrall who was a) not
born in Canada and b) does not live in Canada and c) has both
Canadian and British citizenship. I think she would be highly
offended if anyone implied she is less of a Canadian than her
peers.

It is also clear that the Queen does considers herself to be a
Canadian. In 1983 Her Majesty remarked that "I am going
home to Canada tomorrow" as she left California. Earlier in
1978 she noted that "I am getting to know our country rather
well."

Or even earlier in 1951 when the young princess remarked
"From the moment when I first set foot on Canadian soil, the
feeling of strangeness went, for I knew myself to be not only
amongst friends, but amongst fellow countrymen."

And in 2010 the Queen reaffirmed this:

"As proud and grateful Canadians, we pause today to mark not only the ninety-
third anniversary of this nation’s victory at Vimy Ridge but also to pay tribute to
the passing of a truly remarkable generation who helped to end the most terrible
conflict the world had ever known[….] This tremendous sacrifice can rightly be
regarded as a defining moment in the history of Canada and is one which we will
never forget. And now, they are gone –and all Canadians mourn our collective loss.
Yet they will remain forever etched in the hearts of a grateful people and on the
pages of our history as symbols of service, honour and dedication. In our minds and
in our hearts always, we will remember them."

I think it is clear that the Queen considers herself Canadian.
Further, I think it is clear we should too. After all, the measure of a Canadian is in their heartfelt commitment to the
betterment of our country. It is in serving your neighbours
and community. It is doing your duty in good times and bad.

The Queen does all these things and more. Her Majesty has
spent her reign trying to bring Canadians together, traveling
the country, learning more about this great country of ours,
and encouraging people to do their best. I'd argue she is no
less a Canadian than you or me. She may in fact be more
Canadian than some who can cling to the fact of having been
born here.

We have one Canadian women on our currency. We can, and
should look to include more. What we shouldn't do is start
denigrating one Canadian women in the process of trying to
get more attention for notable Canadian women and their
contributions to Canada.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

A Collection of Loyal Quotes: Part Four

3/12/2016

While I've been doling out quotes a few at a time the
Monarchist League of Canada has an excellent quote page.
It has both some of the Queen's more memorable quotes
about Canada as well as quotes by Canadians about their
monarchy.

"I have a considerable regard for
The Queen and the monarchy
although I’m a New Democrat and a
socialist. I think that the monarchy
has validity at a time when
everything else is flying off in all
directions. I’d like to tell her that
she’s had a tough road and I sure in
hell wouldn’t change places with her.
I admire her stubborn refusal to
break down and take the easy way,
to conform with the constantly
changing public image of how our leaders should act."

~Farley Mowat, author and environmentalist

Photo Credit: Manning Centre

"If you'll forgive me going all
Bagehotian for a moment, in a
country such as Canada, the post-
election Speech from the Throne is
the defining act of constitutional
monarchy: the Queen or her viceroy
comes to parliament to read words
placed in her mouth by the Prime
Minister of her newly elected
government. It's the logical endpoint
of Magna Carta: the state as
servant of the people."

~Mark Steyn, author, journalist, and commentator

"We recall, with great honour, the
political and military bond of
mutual affection and alliance that
has marked the relationship
between the Mohawk people and
the British and Canadian Crown
for the last three centuries."

~R. Donald Maracle, Chief of the Mohawks of Bay of Quinte

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Canadian Monarchist News, Spring 2016

Royal Tours Explained

Canadian Women on our Currency...

A Collection of Loyal Quotes: Part Four

About

Archives

Categories