Blog Archives

Mailbox Cleanout

11/29/2014

I perhaps contact elected representatives with policy questions more than the average Canadian. Sometimes I include a question about Canada's monarchy. Mostly this is out of personal curiosity (I have only been in a position to vote for a couple of the people below).

It is funny (to me at least) how few policy inquiries actually get responded to. Mostly this is due how busy the candidate is although I did talk to one politician who didn't answer any inquires on the principle that they would not be able to answer every person in the riding if they were to send questions in (try and get your head around that one).

Below are the responses I've received to questions relating to the monarchy. Still aren't as facepalm-worthy as their answers about intellectual property though...

2012 NDP Leadership Race

"My own view is that it should be up to Canadians to have their say in the monarchy's role in a 21st Century Canada, and I would be supportive of a plebiscite to see whether people would like reform. Other countries in the Commonwealth are discussing similar questions, in preparation a change in the head of state at the end of the Queen's long reign. This is a question, however, that citizens, not politicians, should decide."
~Nathan Cullen

"Please know that Peggy has not made any statements on the monarchy. Given that the NDP does not have specific party policy on the monarchy, any decision made by Peggy on this matter would involve consultation with caucus and the membership."
~Etana, Peggy Nash Leadership Campaign 2012

2013 Liberal Leadership Race

"In response to the second part of your question, the monarchy is not the unifying symbol it once was, and it does nothing to help us overcome the fundamental unity problems this country faces. Clearly, it is also unable to serve its stated function of defending the institutions of parliamentary democracy. I support eventually establishing a Canadian head of state with democratic legitimacy. However, constitutional change of this magnitude can only be accomplished after a referendum. It also requires a renewed treaty process with First Nations, to ensure that the move is not unilateral and treaty and Aboriginal rights are not affected."
~Deborah Coyne

"With regards to your second question: Mr. Garneau's position is that Canadians support the monarchy and the Liberal Party of Canada voted down a resolution to study the role of the monarchy in 2012. Mr. Garneau does not plan to make an issue of it."
~Jean Proulx, Parliamentary Assistant to Mr. Garneau

"I support the concept of merit, versus blood-lines, and in that regard, I'd be happy to have Canada become completely independent from Britain. But to be honest, it's not one of the most important questions facing Canada right now so I'm not going to push too hard on this one."
~Martha Hall Findlay

"At the 2012 Liberal Party Convention, delegates were invited to introduce, debate, and vote on Liberal policy. Delegates explicitly rejected a motion to include severing Canada's ties with the monarchy as part of Liberal policy. My view is that severing our centuries-old connection to the monarchy is not a decision to be made lightly. The monarchy remains a cornerstone of Canada's foundation, and any debate surrounding changes to this institution must include as many Canadians as possible in the discussion."
~Justin Trudeau, Leader of the Liberal Party

2014 New Brunswick Election

"The monarchy has been a subject of debate in Canada for some time. Personally, I view the monarchy as a heritage & tradition of Canada with little to no real substantive value other than that."
~Kris Austin, Leader of the PANB

"My personal views on the Monarchy are that they are an extremely wealthy and powerful group of elites who own an extreme amount of land and holdings via the crown corporation. People need to be educated about them and our countries foundation, parliamentary system, military, navy, and rcmp so that Canada and it's citizen's could move towards actual sovereignty (and a great many other subjects)."
~Ira Wilbur, Green Party candidate for the riding of Albert

"I am not a fan of paying for royals trips to canada, but that said I believe in tradition and my family has supported the monarchy for a long time. I have a hard time accepting anyone receiveing an all expenses paid lifestyle, however, I like Canada being a part of the Comomonwealth. It's part of who we are and one of a number of things that helps distinguish us from the Americans."
~Bill Brewer, PANB candidate forthe riding of Albert

2014 Yellowhead By-election

"I believe in the Monarchy and its representation to Canada."
~Jim Eglinski, Conservative Party candidate

"I don't see any reason for the monarchy aside from nostalgia."
~Cory Lystang, Libertarian Party candidate

"I used to be nostalgic and liked the Monarchy... I enjoy that we retain a loose commonwealth... However, I see a need for reduction in the pomp.. and a greater respect for the people.. I like that here is an ultimate representative for the commonwealth that if necessary could depose a leader, such as the Gov General is able to do... it allows a whole other international level of consultation.. that looks to all voices.. or at least in theory should. Ultimately I like Democracy, and checks and balances for it... how does this all relate to your question.. I always like o have a higher and more experienced authority.. As I see it, the royals are ther to remind us of higher ideals, they too in our times.. have become conduits, representatives of the people.. instead of dictating, they merely look to pass around the Conch.. or in other words the speaking staff... i hope this all makes sense..."
~Dean Williams, Independent candidate

Others

"I still believe that the Monarchy is un-democratic institution of power because it is not elected. Even the Pope goes through some sort of election process. The sovereigns don't. While I believe that, I thing there are too many divisive issues out there as it is, and I'd rather focus on resolving differences on more pressing matters. This issue can be 'parked' for now and revisited when our democracy is in better shape. Let's enact Proportional Representation first, for example, to prove to ourselves and the rest of the world that Canada is a democracy."
~Michael Nicula, Leader of the Party for Accountability, Competency and Transparency (PACT)

Conclusions

Overall, there isn't much positive in the responses I have received to date. The task of educating Canadians about their monarchy still remains great. The belief that the monarchy serves no practical purpose is perhaps the most prevalent misconception in need of confrontation. Several politicians also expressed a belief that dumping the monarchy is somehow a populous measure that will lead to a improved Canadian Government. This is demonstratively false and again shows just how limited education about our monarchy is.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Queen Victoria's Letter to Mrs. Lincoln

11/28/2014

I was perusing Walter Bagehot's The English Constitution when I happened upon a passing reference to a letter sent from Queen Victoria to the recently widowed Mrs. Lincoln in 1865. The Queen, still mourning the passing of her husband Albert felt compelled to write to a women who truly shared her pain.

The Letter

A fully zoomable digital copy is on the Library of Congress' website

Transcript

April 29, 1865

Dear Madam,

Though a Stranger to you I cannot remain silent when so terrible a calamity has fallen upon you & your Country & must personally express my deep & heartfelt sympathy with you under the shocking circumstances of your present dreadful misfortune —

No one can better appreciate than I can, who am myself utterly broken-hearted by the loss of my own beloved Husband, who was the Light of my Life, — my Stay — my all, — what your sufferings must be; and I earnestly pray that you may be supported by Him to whom Alone the sorely stricken can look for comfort, in this hour of heavy affliction.

With the renewed Expression of true sympathy, I remain,

dear Madam,

Your Sincere friend

Victoria Rg

The Reply

Source

Partial Transcript

Washington, May 21st, 1865

Madam

I have received the letter which Your Majesty has had the kindness to write. I am deeply grateful for this expression of tender sympathy, coming as they do, from a heart which from its own sorrow, can appreciate the intense grief I now endure.
...
Your Majesty's sincere & grateful friend,

Mary Lincoln

Sometimes it is the simple kindnesses that matter most.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

The Monarchs of Canada: A Timeline

11/25/2014

Monarchs have ruled Canada since before Canada was a recognizable entity. This article is an overview of Canada's monarchs which is, as I will explain in a second, by necessity incomplete. Note that below if both the king and the queen are listed it means they ruled as co-sovereigns. Also note that I am defining 'Canada' as the geographic area of the current country. Finally, note that I have used the dates for the reign of each monarch rather than birth-death.

Pre-Contact North America

It is often overlooked that many of the aboriginal tribes that inhabit Canada at one time had hereditary chiefs. In fact some still do on a formal or informal basis. However, with 600+ recognized nations and fragmentary records from pre-contact civilizations it is nearly impossible to include a complete overview of native kingship in the context of this article. In the future I will attempt an article outlining a history of Canada's hereditary chiefs. Sufficed to say at present that hereditary and elected kingship has a long history in Canada.

Our French Monarchs (1534-1763)

The French Crown ruled over the parts of Canada now comprising of the Provinces of Quebec, Ontario, New Brunswick, & Nova Scotia. Two French dynasties ruled Canada before the colony was ceded to the British in 1763.

Francis I (1534–1547)
House of Valois

Henry II (1547–1559)
House of Valois

Francis II (1559–1560)
House of Valois

Charles IX (1560–1574)
House of Valois

Henry III (1574–1589)
House of Valois

Henry IV (1589–1610)
House of Bourbon

Louis XIII (1610–1643)
House of Bourbon

Louis XIV (1643–1715)
House of Bourbon

Louis XV (1715–1763)
House of Bourbon

Our English/British Monarchs (1497-1931)

The English Crown ruled parts of what would become the provinces of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and northern Ontario. It would gain areas ruled by the French Crown in 1763.

Until 1707 it is correct to refer to the English Crown. After March 6th of that year England and Scotland united into a single kingdom called Great Britain.

Henry VII (1497–1509)
House of Tudor

Henry VIII (1409–1547)
House of Tudor

Edward VI (1547–1553)
House of Tudor

Mary I
(1553–1558)
House of Tudor

Philip II of Spain
(Co-sovereign)
House of Habsburg

Elizabeth I (1558–1603)
House of Tudor

James I (1603–1625)
House of Stuart

Charles I (1625–1649)
House of Stuart

Charles II (1670–1685)
House of Stuart

James II (1685–1688)
House of Stuart

William III
(1650–1702)
House of Orange-Nassau

Mary II of England (Co-sovereign)
House of Stuart

Anne (1702–1714)
House of Stuart

-Kingdom of Great Britain established, 1707

George I (1714–1727)
House of Hanover

George II (1727–1760)
House of Hanover

George III (1760–1820)
House of Hanover

George IV (1820–1830)
House of Hanover

William IV (1830–1837)
House of Hanover

Victoria (1837–1901)
House of Hanover

-Dominion of Canada established, 1867

Edward VII (1901–1910)
House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

George V (1910–1931 as British sovereign)
House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

Our Canadian Monarchs (1931-Present)

The Canadian Crown became separate from the British Crown in 1931 due to the Statute of Westminster. More than 3/4th of the intervening period has been reigned over by a single sovereign.

George V (1931–1936 as Canadian sovereign)
House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (until 1917)
House of Windsor (after 1917)

Edward VIII (1936)
House of Windsor

George VI (1936–1952)
House of Windsor

Elizabeth II (1952-Present)
House of Windsor

Well I hope you enjoyed this timeline as much as I enjoyed putting it together.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

On a Lighter Note: A Monarchist Meme

11/19/2014

I've been browsing Deviantart a bit lately. Always impressed, and sometimes amazed, by the creativity of some people.

The meme below is a creation of Neral. Unforunately it has a bit of truth to it but I found it amusing regardless.

Remember to promote monarchy away from the computer too.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Crowned Democracy: An Update on the State of Academic Research on Monarchy

11/15/2014

In a previous article I lamented the lack of research on what effects having a monarchy has on a country. Since then I have come across a few more studies outlining advantages monarchies possess. These studies suggest that monarchies tend towards healthier democratic practices. It is of some passing interest that none of these studies set out to prove anything about monarchies. In one case the researcher even seemed surprised at the results.

The first study is Presidents with Prime Ministers: Do Direct Elections Matter? From the title you can probably tell that the author did not set out to study constitutional monarchies. In fact they are dealt with after the fact in a footnote. The end conclusion is that presidential republics suffer more voter fatigue and a drop in votes for legislative elections of about 5-7% than either constitutional monarchies or legislative republics. (UPDATE: While the original post uses 'presidential' and 'legislative' descriptors it should in fact be 'directly-elected' and 'indirectly-elected' respectively. While most legislative republics use indirect election via a legislature, some do not.)

This is a serious issue for republicans. The current prevailing model put forward by (Canadian) republicans is that we could become a republic simply by making the Governor General an elected position. However, as the above study demonstrates, this would be harmful to our democracy (which may already suffer from some voter fatigue due to federalism). To support this option puts republicans in the uncomfortable position of advocating making our democracy worse, not better. So how about election by Parliament? This has its own problems. Politicians are likely to never support such a model until the Senate issue is settled and we have proportional representation. Going ahead without reforming these two things would put the governing party in a dictatorial position of having unlimited control of all three parts of Parliament. A second issue concerns whether Canadians would support such a 'politician's republic'. Indeed, it was the Australians preference for a presidential republic (in contrast to their leaders) that helped save their monarchy.

The second study is Constitutional Power and Competing Risks: Monarchs, Presidents, Prime Ministers, and the Termination of East and West European Cabinets. The study points out that while monarchs often possess powers comparable to those of strong presidential systems they behave more like presidents of legislative republics. However, there still turned out to be a difference:

Via the Washington Post

As the chart shows, constitutional monarchy was the only government form where early elections were the preferred method discretionary government replacement. Both legislative and presidential republics have a strong preference for choosing a new government from Parliament without resorting to an election. Therefore, if you consider consulting the people more often to be more democratic you must also conclude that constitutional monarchies have a leg up in this area.

The third study is Determinants of generalized trust: A cross-country comparison. This study doesn't deal with democracy directly but with how much people in a country trust each other and why (trust being an important factor in many economic and social considerations). According to this study there are only a limited number of factors that appear to increase trust among the populous. Both greater equality of wealth and having a monarchy were found to increase trust levels. And since it is possible (despite what republicans like to claim) to be both a monarchy and highly equal it makes sense that the three Scandinavian monarchies are at the top of the trust index (and most other indexes).

Notably, being a democracy didn't increase how much people trusted each other. That is not to say its not important. Trust is thought to build political institutions, of which democracy is one. So anything that increases trust strengthens a countries democracy since the people have the firm belief their fellow citizens aren't out to screw them.

This study dovetails nicely with the previous study I looked at. One of the theories it suggested was that monarchies actually liberalized earlier than republics. Taken together it is reasonable to suggest that if a country is going to become a democracy doing so as a monarchy will be less painful overall.

It is becoming increasingly clear as I research that keeping Canada's monarchy safe from republicans isn't just about protecting our traditions, it is about preserving the quality of our democracy.

As always, the new studies have been added to Useful Links.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Albert County's Victory Cannons

11/11/2014

In honour of Remembrance Day I thought I'd write a little about New Brunswick military and royal history. Specifically I'd like to shine a light on the 1919 Victory Loans Campaign.

The Great War cost a lot of money. Various methods were used to raise the funds to pay for it (income taxes are one such temporary measure). Government-issued war bonds were another method eventually adopted. However, after the war was over there was still a substantial amount of debt to pay off. This led to the Victory Loan Campaign of 1919.

As part of the campaign a special flag featuring the coat of arms of the Prince of Wales (later King Edward VIII) could be won by communities that raised a certain amount of money. In addition a number of German howitzers were offered as rewards for significant contributions to the campaign.

Spiffy

The Prince of Wales, who was actually in Canada for his 1919 Royal Tour, presided over a ceremony where the first of 'The Prince's Flags' was unfurled. The campaign had begun.

The theme of this campaign unlike previous ones was rebuilding, cleanup, demobilizing, and a return to relative normalcy.

In New Brunswick each county had a target amount set based on ability to pay. Albert County's target was set at $110,000. By the end of the campaign the community had raised nearly triple that amount with a total of $317,600. Others raised higher total sums but only Albert County managed the feat of raising triple the target amount. In fact every New Brunswick county but one raised more than their target and was awarded a flag.

For raising such a staggering sum the people of Albert County were given one of the cannons captured at Vimy Ridge; a German 10-CM K14. They were given a second cannon for an even more impressive feat: Albert County had the highest number of volunteers per capita from anywheres in Canada. This second cannon was also from Vimy Ridge but was an older 7.7-CMFK96 N.A.model. A smaller weapon more akin to a field gun than the guns that would follow it. It bears the German imperial cypher (or coat of arms, it is somewhat worn away).

The two cannons were set up in the county's shiretown of Hopewell Cape. There they have stood against wind, rain, and picnic tables to the present day. Monuments to Canadian military achievement, the bravery of the men who went off to fight for king & country in the 'war to end all wars', and the hope that a lasting peace could be built.

There is currently a campaign underway to fix the inevitable decay of nearly 100 years. Donations can be made here. You can also learn more about the circumstances of the guns' capture at the same site.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

The 7.7-CMFK96 N.A. gun with wheels removed for repairs

A Collection of Loyal Quotes: Part One

11/10/2014

I'm currently working on a follow-up to my previous article about the state of academic research on monarchy. But since that could take a while to finish I figured I'd see what quotes I could dig up from supporters of monarchy in the meantime:

"By adhering to the monarchical principle we avoid one defect inherent in the Constitution of the United States. By the election of the president by a majority and for a short period, he never is the sovereign and chief of the nation. He is never looked up to by the whole people as the head and front of the nation. He is at best but the successful leader of a party. This defect is all the greater on account of the practice of reelection. During his first term of office he is employed in taking steps to secure his own reelection, and for his party a continuance of power. We avoid this by adhering to the monarchical principle – the sovereign whom you respect and love. I believe that it is of the utmost importance to have that principle recognized so that we shall have a sovereign who is placed above the region of party – to whom all parties look up; who is not elevated by the action of one party nor depressed by the action of another; who is the common head and sovereign of all."

~John A. Macdonald, 1st Prime Minister of Canada (Tory)

"Canadians should realise when they are well off under the Monarchy. For the vast majority of Canadians, being a Monarchy is probably the only form of government acceptable to them. I have always been for parliamentary democracy and I think the institution of Monarchy with the Queen heading it all has served Canada well."

~Pierre Elliott Trudeau, 15th Prime Minister of Canada (Grit)

"But for all those who don't want the Queen there are easily as many who don't want a President and even more who certainly would not want one if they knew who it would be. As you can readily see, I have given more thought to this subject than most and I have reached my own conclusion. God save the Queen."

~Dalton Camp, journalist, politician, and commentator

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Profiles of the Canadian Royal Family: Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

11/7/2014

Today Canada enjoys the advantages of being a constitutional monarchy with a monarch who is above the partisan politics of the day. It was not always like this and for centuries monarchs had been heavily involved in political concerns. The transition from a partisan, executive monarchy to a non-partisan, ceremonial one is a long complicated series of events. However, one man certainly helped cement this change: Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

Born in 1819 in the Saxon duchy of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld he would marry his first cousin, Queen Victoria, at the age of twenty. Prince Albert was not initially popular with the British public but after an assassination attempt on him and the Queen he was praised in the newspapers for his courage & calmness under fire. His reputation began to improve.

Prince Albert was not made a peer (due to his initial unpopularity) but insisted he did not want to be made one. Indeed he would eventually refine a model of 'soft power' and moral suasion for the Royal Family. While Prince Albert found the position of consort to be constraining early on he eventually realized it was an opportunity to define the position in wider terms. He took on several public roles within the first few months of his marriage including the presidency of the Society for the Extinction of Slavery. Early on he would also express his support for eliminating child labour, improved schooling, and freer trade. He also found various ways to help his queen carry out her duties including assisting with government paperwork and modernizing the royal finances. The revenues from the Duchy of Cornwall would steadily increase under his watch.

Chrystal Palace interior

A champion of science he was the committee chairman of the Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations of 1851. The famed 'Chrystal Palace' was built to hold the exhibition. The entire event was a great success selling over 6 million tickets in five and a half months. It realized a profit of £186,000 which was used to help purchase land in South Kensington where the Science Museum, the Natural History Museum, and the Victoria and Albert Museum stand today.

Before Queen Victoria's marriage in 1840 she had supported the Whigs and even blocked a Tory Prime Minister (although given the circumstances I would have too). After her marriage it is suggested Prince Albert advised her to be less partisan in her dealing with Parliament. This may be why only one member of the Royal Family was identified with a political party during this time. Indeed, by the end of Queen Victoria's reign the principle that the monarch 'reigns but does not rule' was firmly established. That is not to say Prince Albert, or the Queen, thought the Royal Family shouldn't have a strong voice, as demonstrated above.

Queen Victoria, Prince Albert, & 5 of their 9 children

Before and after Prince Albert's untimely death at the age of 42 many places were named after him. Albert County (NB), Prince Albert (SK), and the Victoria & Albert Mountains (NU) are just some of the more prominent places named for him in Canada. The province of Alberta is not, however, instead being named for his daughter Princess Louise Caroline Alberta.

Prince Albert was an example of a royal that could have a prominent role in the nation without governing it and created the template future members of the Royal Family would follow. His early death prevented him from fully realizing this new model for the Royal Family and one wonders what he would have accomplished had he been able to. It is an interesting question to consider.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour