This Flag Question

A forthright statement of the case for a Canadian national flag

HUGH SAVAGE September 15 1929

This Flag Question

A forthright statement of the case for a Canadian national flag

HUGH SAVAGE September 15 1929

This Flag Question

A forthright statement of the case for a Canadian national flag

HUGH SAVAGE

ON Dominion Day last, at the temporary quarters of the Canadian legation in the city of Tokio, Japan, “the Canadian national emblem” was raised officially for the first time on Asiatic soil.

What was this emblem?

It was not the Union Jack.

In August, 50,000 Boy Scouts from almost every nation gathered in England for the scout movement’s coming-of-age jamboree. Each contingent carried the flag of their country. Had Canada’s boys carried the proper flag, they would have marched behind the Union Jack—and no one would have known from their flag that they were Canadians. As it was, they flew “the Canadian emblem,” and in so doing, they flew the wrong flag. For “the Canadian emblem” they used was a shipping flag which may be flown with official sanction only at sea.

Ashore in Canada there is, officially, no such “Canadian emblem.” There is the flag of Canada—and that is the Union Jack.

Let a Canadian set forth on the high seas in a Canadian vessel, and he must, by law, sail under a Canadian flag. That flag is not the Union Jack, but the Canadian Red Ensign.

Last year at the Olympic games, Canadian victories were honored by the hoisting of “the Canadian flag.” That flag was not the Union Jack, but the Canadian Red Ensign, a flag which, within Canada, has no official status. And yet that is the flag which flies over CanadiGovernment buildings outside the Dominion.

“But surely,” I hear a reader protesting, “surely, that can’t be right. Why all the muddle? Australia has a flag. South Africa has a flag. New Zealand has a flag. Ireland has a flag. Haven’t we got a flag that we can call our own?”

No Flag We Can Call Our Own

WE HAVE and we haven’t. We’ve been too busy with material affairs to attend to this flag matter, and every time it has seemed about to receive attention some influence has been sufficient to scare the politicians into inaction. And yet the Prime Minister is understood to favor a distinctive flag for Canada, while the Leader of the Opposition last year told a Calgary audience that a Canadian flag was coming.

Orangemen, we are told, are opposed to anything but the Union Jack. Then why is the verandah doorway of Sudbury County Orange Hall decorated with two Canadian merchant marine ensigns? In Moose Jaw, on July 12 last, an Orange parade was headed by an official who carried, not the Union Jack, but a banner intended to be the Canadian merchant marine ensign, or shipping flag. As a matter of fact, it was not any recognized flag, a fact which is not surprising in view of the existing comparison.

It may be hazarded that one-third of our people are using this merchant marine flag, and that most of them believe it is the flag of Canada. The Press aids them in this belief. Any Dominion Day issue will furnish proof. Uninformed publishers of stickers sold to visiting American motorists augment this false impression. Perhaps we should go across the line to learn what is the flag of Canada. Detroit’s Automobile Club tells its members touring Canada never to “display the American flag on their cars without carrying the British flag alongside.”

To some untaught cousins the fact that the Union Jack is the flag of Canada may perpetuate the idea that Canada “belongs to England;” has not yet, in fact, grown up. But even they may have seen the Australian cadets, and so realized that Australia has a flag of her very own. Some states gave these lads their own flags to take back “down under,” and a great Canadian newspaper saw to it that the boys also took back “Canadian flags.” Were they Union Jacks? They were not.

Now, the same societies and sects exist in Australia as in Canada, but they do not object to their own flag. They use and honor the Union Jack as ther flag, common to them and to all the Empire. They are proud of themselves as Britishers. They are also proud of being Australians, and they are proud of their own distinctive Australian flag, the Blue Ensign with the stars of the Southern Cross in the fly.

Possibly one-third of our people display the Union Jack, or neglect to display any flag, while many among our French-speaking population, roughly another third, fly the flag of the French republic—this apart from religious flags, and as denoting nationality.

Small sections of our people feel very strongly about the Union Jack and its retention as the sole emblem of Canada. Why has not their voice been raised against the ever-growing substitution and use of other flags in Canada, against the action of the Canadian government in allowing a flag other than the Union Jack to be flown on certain Canadian buildings abroad?

Whatever be our personal thoughts on this subject let us each remember that flags are something more than mere advertising media.

The greatest possession of a nation is its soul. The soul of a nation is symbolized in its flag.

Take the Union Jack. It is primarily the flag of the British Isles, for its epitomizes the long history of their peoples. But it is more. It is the symbol of empire unity. It is inseparably entwined with the history of every British Dominion.

It enshrines the memory of scores of millions of men and women in all the Britains, who have not only died for it, but have lived for it and all that it signifies.

It is the individual right and privilege of every British subject to fly this flag. It is the right and privilege of every Dominion to fly it. In proposing the creation of a Dominion flag for Canada, there is not the slightest suggestion of abolishing the use of the Union Jack.

But it is proposed that there should be a distinctive Canadian flag, to supplement the Union Jack, and to distinguish Canada from the other British nations, just as the distinctive flag of the Commonwealth of Australia supplements the Union Jack, and distinguishes Australia from the other British nations.

The Status of the Red Ensign

TN VIEW of the current mis-

conceptions it will be well to set out here the true situation concerning flags and their legitimate and proper use in Canada as at present.

In 1912, after some controversy at Ottawa, the Secretary of the Colonies sent to H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught, then GovernorGeneral, a communication which included the following:

“I should be glad if you would be good enough to cause the public to be informed that the Union flag is the national flag of Canada, as of all other parts of His Majesty’s Dominions, and may be flown on land by all British subjects, and that the Red Ensign with the arms of the Dominion of Canada in the fly is intended to be used only by Canadian merchant vessels.”

I propose to show later how the use of this latter flag has been officially extended slightly by the Government of Canada, and how its use has been, unofficially, greatly extended by large sections of the people of Canada.

This flag is the Red Ensign or “red duster” of the British mercantile marine, with the Dominion coat-ofarms in a shield in the fly, or field, of the flag. It was “authorized to be used on board vessels registered in the Dominion” by a British Admiralty warrant, dated February 2, 1892.

To quote W. J. Healy, Provincial Librarian of Manitoba, in an article which appeared in the Grain Growers’Guide, July 1, 1926:

“This limits its use to ships owned by the Canadian Government and to Canadian merchant ships. The Admiralty warrant gives no authorization for flying it ashore. When it is flown on land it is out of its proper sphere. It is then a flag without the sanction of any authority, and can claim no recognition.”

In 1892, the arms of Canada shown in the shield on this flag depicted the conjoined arms of four provinces only—Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New

Brunswick—although there were then seven Canadian provinces. In 1905, the provinces numbered nine, but the arms of Canada remained unchanged on the flag, on government stationery and elsewhere. From 1867 to 1921 they remained unchanged.

Flags as heraldic emblems, that is historical and distinctive emblems, are closely interlinked with coatsof-arms. At Confederation in 1867, the arms of the four participating provinces were joined together or “quartered” to form the arms of a united Canada.

The Change of 1921

T-TISTORY moved faster than the Canadian Government’s sense of fitness in matters heraldic. Not until 1921 did this Dominion adopt entirely different but distinctive and complete armorial bearings.

The beauty and appropriateness of their design is everywhere conceded. The shield bears the Royal Arms, differenced by what were once the arms of France in the fourth quarter; and on the lower third, on a silver field, there appears a green three-leaved sprig of maple, the emblem of the Dominion of Canada.

This new device was the work of the College of Arms in London, who are experts in these matters. It is noteworthy that this far-reaching change passed without comment. There was no hint of substitution or supplanting.

Now private enterprise, with more zeal than heraldic knowledge, but actuated by a desire to give the provinces of Prince Edward Island, British Columbia and Manitoba—and later those of Saskatchewan and Alberta—their “place in the sun,” manufactured Canadian merchant-shipping flags bearing a shield in which the arms of the seven or nine provinces are conjoined or quartered.

This, of course, was absolutely unauthorized and unofficial, but the device appears in countless illustrations by artists and engravers and, as will be shown, in no less a place than a great Canadian war picture, and in a “Punch” cartoon.

One does not expect a provincial coat-of-arms to be a quartering or “grand mêlée” of those of the cities or municipalities within it. Individual distinctiveness for city, province or country is the need, and this, at last, has been secured.

But herein is another instance of the failure of the Government of Canada in these matters. Although the proclamation by the King, granting Canada her present distinctive Dominion coat-of-arms, is dated February 21, 1921, it was not until April 21, 1925—over four years later—that an Order-inCouncil was passed at Ottawa substituting the new Dominion shield for the old one on the fly of the Red Ensign.

But this flag continued to be one authorized for use only on Canadian ships and not on land. Subsequently, exceptions to this rule have been authorized. In 1924, permission was granted to the High Commissioner in London to fly it. Similar permission was granted in 1927 to the Canadian Embassy at Washington. The Union Jack, previously flown, was not distinctive of a Canadian building in London; .neither did it distinguish a Canadian from a British diplomatic headquarters.

The Prime Minister’s Statement

IN THE House of Commons on June 17, 1925, the Rt. Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King stated that a committee of six had been appointed to consider the question of a design for a Canadian flag ashore, “a distinctive flag which shall be recognized as the flag of Canada.” Mr. King said ( Hansard, 1925, page 4,365): “Let me make it quite clear that this committee is simply a committee to study and report,” and added: “The government would not for a moment consider adopting a national flag other than by resolution of this House, and the full sanction of the Parliament of Canada. But surely that question can be referred to in a calm manner as one worthy of consideration, without it being assumed, as some of the questions which the hon. member has put to the government in his list of questions would suggest, that there are ulterior motives with respect to any consideration of the question.

“Speaking for myself, may I say that while I am able to sympathize with the point of view which would have for Canada a distinctive national flag, just as Australia, South Africa and others of the self-governing British Dominions have their national flags, I would be proud and happy to have Canada continue in the future, as in the past, to have the Union Jack recognized as the national flag. Moreover, I would not lend my support to any proposal which did not include the Union Jack as the most distinctive feature of any national flag that at any time it might be proposed to adopt.”

He added further that the appointment of this committee had been cancelled. Officially nothing has been done since, other than that the flag designating Canadian government buildings abroad has been changed from the Union Jack to the Canadian shipping flag. A resolution asking for the appointment of a committee to consider the advisability of adopting a distinctive Canadian flag, in which the Union Jack shall occupy the position of honor, was placed on the order paper for last session by C. R. McIntosh, M.P., North Battleford, but did not come before the House.

French-speaking Canadians have for many years advocated a distinctive flag for Canada, and in May, 1926, four similar designs divided the prize in a contest conducted by La Presse, Montreal. The design resembles the White Ensign minus the cross of St.

George and with a green maple leaf in the fly of the white field. The Union Jack is in the place of honor.

The Manitoba Free Press, Winnipeg, some years previously, advocated a design bearing the Union Jack in a similar position with the constellation of the Big Dipper and the North Star in the field of the flag. Other newspapers and individuals have, since 1914, made various suggestions. Directly a Canadian flag is mentioned, the question of design comes uppermost. With design this article is not concerned. Meantime resolutions, mostly for and some against, are recorded concerning the principle of a Dominion flag for Canada.

Flags of the Other Dominions

VJi/HAT is the attitude of the people in ’ V Canada toward this matter of a distinctive Canadian flag?

Among English-speaking Canadians there is a widespread idea that the Canadian merchant-shipping flag is the flag of Canada.

It is in common use on land for a variety of purposes. This mistake has been reiterated in a recent Toronto publication.

Some sections imagine that loyalty to the King, to Great Britain and to Canada is inconsistent with any move toward differencing a Dominion flag from the Union Jack.

Australia is ninety-eight per cent pure British in blood. In 1902, the Commonwealth Parliament authorized, from 30,000 competing designs submitted as the flag of Australia, the Blue Ensign bearing in the fly five seven-pointed white stars in the form of the Southern Cross and one large sevenpointed star.

In 1901, the Dominion of New Zealand, through its Parliament, adopted the Blue Ensign also, but in the fly are four large five-pointed red stars with white borders.

New Zealand is ninety-two per cent pure British in blood. Is there any question of the loyalty of these Dominions, or of Newfoundland, whose flag is the Red Ensign bearing the seal or badge of the Dominion of Canada?

In South Africa, racial feeling—particularly that which wished to keep the Union Jack as the sole flag of the Union—resulted in years of strife, which ended in the adoption of two flags, the Union Jack and “national” flag of orange, white and blue horizontal stripes. In the centre of the white stripe appear the Union Jack, the Orange Free State flag and the Transvaal vierkleur.

In the flag of the Irish Free State the Union Jack does not appear. Its design is a tricolor of green, white and orange.

In Canada, there is a nativist movement which inclines to hold that the only Canadians are those born in the country of the white race and speaking English. In its virulent form this movement is ultranationalistic, and has forgotten that Downing Street and “autonomy” are straw bogeys.

Every time these bogeys are set up again, an impression of anti-Empire connection is conveyed. This, in turn, antagonizes other English-speaking sections, which see in nativist demands for a national flag a menace to Empire connection. But, for the most part, the native-born are as silent as their British brothers born overseas.

Among French-speaking Canadians there is a wide use—in Quebec City at any rate— not of the Union Jack or yet of the Canadian shipping flag, but of the tricolor of the French Republic. The origin of this custom has been ascribed to the visit of a French warship to Quebec many years ago, and to the fraternization which then ensued.

The foreign-born and foreign-speaking population of Canada is at a loss to know what is the banner of their adopted land.

They are accustomed to flags and know from experience in Europe that the Union Jack stands for “England” or the United Kingdom. They know of Canada’s connection with the United Kingdom, but naturally look for a distinctive emblem designating Canada and themselves as Canadians.

There is, therefore, misunderstanding and use of unauthorized flags in Canada itself. A Dominion flag would remove this. Canadian misunderstanding of the rules with respect to flags and lack of governmental direction and leadership sees a portion of our people crying to retain the Union Jack as the peculiar and distinctive flag of our Dominion.

The Union Jack is primarily the flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It has become the flag of the Empire, to be used—as it is used, voluntarily in New Zealand and Australia, and by law in South Africa—in conjunction with the distinctive flag of the Dominion in question.

This section is more British than the British, and has little regard for the customs of peoples or nations. Its desire is akin to that which would keep the personal crest of H.M. the King as the crest of the province of British Columbia —an anachronism discovered some years ago, but not yet removed in spite of representations by the College of Arms.

Sons of a father take his shield, but difference it by some small mark in the same way that the Canadian Dominion armorial bearings resemble the Royal Arms but are in every detail properly differenced.

In the same way Canada needs the Union Jack in her distinctive Dominion flag but properly differenced.

A Question of Self-Expression

IT IS in the nature of man, woman, boy and girl to adopt a distinctive symbol for themselves. Totems, knightly crests, and the badges and insignia of our colleges, schools, fraternal lodges, and baseball teams, spring alike from the same source.

One need not pause here to hint at the atrocities of art, let alone heraldry, which are current among us. They call for the administration of some government department or officer, akin to or cooperating with the College of Arms in London.

Rarely does one see a flag correctly depicted in our publications; almost as rarely does one see a flag correctly flown on other than official flagstaffs.

Everyone has, latent or otherwise, this clan or badge or flag sense, which is allied to the science of heraldry. And heraldry is closely allied to history. It is the handmaid of history, and expresses and transmits the lessons of history from generation to generation. It embodies tradition.

It is the British way to grope its own path to self-expression. Is it because Canada is not purely British that we have not, long ago, adopted our own distinctive Dominion flag?

In the British Isles and in the other British Dominions, it is the general belief that we in Canada have, as they have, our own Dominion flag. That belief is due to the inconsistent attitude of our government and public in flag matters.

Frequently one notes in the press exchanges of flags between schools, fraternal, service and commercial organizations in this country and in other Dominions, the Motherland and the United States.

In almost every case it is safe to assert that the flag sent from Canada as her flag is not the Union Jack but the only piece of bunting of a distinctive Canadian nature, a sea flag, the authorized and differenced flag of our merchant marine!

Here, then, is some evidence that many of our own Canadian people believe that there already exists a distinctive flag for Canada. If further proof be needed, the use of this shipping flag on our streets on public occasions and by our schoolchildren supplies sufficient answer.

But this belief is not confined to Canada. What are the English people to think, when they may see at any time this merchant-shipping flag on Wolfe’s memorial in Westminster Abbey; in St. Cuthbert’s Church, York (the parish church of Wolfe’s mother), or hanging from the carved roof of Exeter’s Guildhall?

When the soldiers of Canada withstood the first gas attack at Ypres and earned the thanks of all the Britains, “Punch” devised a cartoon to commemorate their supreme gallantry. To distinguish the khaki figure holding the flag, the artist placed in his hands not only the authorized flag of Canada, the Union Jack, but the flag of our merchant shipping—and therein the arms in the fly are incorrectly depicted.

A similar mistake has been made by Byam Shaw in his striking picture “The Flag,” one of Canada’s great war paintings in our own National Gallery.

These mistakes are not the fault of the artists, but of Canada, which too long has neglected this important matter.

Artistic license may be permissible but how deep-seated and old is the impression that Canada has or should have her own distinctive flag may be gauged from the fact that the design of one British war medal, for a campaign conducted in Canada, that of the Fenian Raid, includes a flag with the coat-of-arms of Canada in the fly, which was never authorized for such use.

Misunderstanding or perpetuated inconsistency, call it what you will, has received another fillip of late years since, in order to distinguish Canada House in London and the Canadian Embassy in Washington, official permission has been granted them to fly the Canadian merchant-shipping flag. Otherwise they would fly the Union Jack and be lost amid the Union Jacks of London, or undistinguished from that at the British Ministry in Washington.

Thus Canadians at home are denied the right to a distinctive flag of their own on land, while that right—or rather permission to use a flag other than the official flag of the country they officially represent—has been specially granted to Canadian representatives in London and Washington, Paris and Tokio.

At sea we are in better case. Our ships of merchant registry fly the Red Ensign, differenced for Canada. Our fisheriespatrol vessels fly the Blue Ensign similarly differenced. The ships of the Royal Canadian Navy fly the White Ensign at the stern, the Union Jack at the fore and the Blue Ensign, differenced for Canada, at the bow. It is this last flag, the Blue Ensign, which distinguishes our warships from those of the Royal Navy or of other British Dominions.

If it be not disloyal for Canada to fly at sea and over buildings outside Canada a flag other than the Union Jack, how can it be disloyal to fly a flag of the same nature everywhere on Canadian soil?

What Kipling calls “the Flag of England,” has itself undergone changes. The English “Jack,” which Cabot and Hudson carried to North American shores, became the first Union Jack of England and Scotland, under which Wolfe’s men fought at Quebec against Montcalm’s army under the old flag of France— golden fleur-de-lis on a white field. Since 1801, the Union Jack has included the cross of St. Patrick for Ireland.

Union Jack Result of Changes

BUT the people of the British Isles themselves have not found the Union Jack sufficient for all the purposes for which a flag is required by a nation in its various activities. Regiments usually have two colors, the first, or King’s color, being the Union Jack. The second is the distinctive regimental color. Warships and merchantmen alike use two flags. In each case the Union Jack is one; the other is a flag in which the Union Jack has the place of honor, the top corner next the flagstaff. In neither case is the Union Jack ousted or supplanted.

The British people, with true native adaptability and in conformity with the rules of heraldry, have therefore changed, adapted and supplemented the Union Jack to suit their needs.

The further development and differentiation of the Union Jack, as proposed, will serve the need of Canada, just as the further development and differentiation of this glorious old flag is serving the need of Australia, New Zealand and Newfoundland.

Once again, this is positively not a question of abolishing the Union Jack or of substituting another flag for it. The Union Jack will always be honored and flown in Canada, just as it is in the Motherland and in our sister Dominions.

Neglect to provide for and mark the growth, dignity and unity of Canada in this matter of a distinctive flag has exposed Canada and Canadians to ridicule and scorn, and has caused illfeeling of a nature which is serious.

An admiral of a foreign power, on landing at Vancouver, is reported to have commented on the large number of customs houses the city must possess. He referred sarcastically to the wide use of the Canadian merchant-shipping flag on buildings.

Sections of the Canadian press which pooh-pooh the need for a distinctive flag presented a diametrically opposite attitude in their treatment of the news dispatches from Amsterdam during the Olympic Games.

A typical heading ran: “Canadians Are Being Unjustly Treated; Claim No Canadian Flag Could Not Properly Recognize Canuck Athletes’ Victories.”

Here is part of a news story from Amsterdam, August 2, 1928:

“Canadian officials deeply resent the manner in which the Olympic Games have been conducted.” The dispatch gives some instances and proceeds:

“One of the many instances had to do with the raising of the Canadian flag, Monday, when Percy Williams won the 100-metre race. The custom is to raise a huge flag on the centre field. Canadians grieved when the Dutch authorities were unable to produce a regulation flag. A protest was made, with the result that a regulation flag was secured and used Wednesday. It may have been possible that the Dutch did not consider Canadians would win, and therefore a Canadian flag would not be needed, but that can be hardly a satisfactory excuse.” Presumably by this “Canadian” or “regulation” flag is meant the Canadian merchant-shipping flag.

Does not this incident show that the Dutch were entirely blameless? How could they be expected to know that Canadian athletes wished to be designated by a flag other than that of Canada— the Union Jack?

Doesn’t it show that the statement from Canadian sources that “the Union Jack is good enough for us,” is incorrect in that at Amsterdam the Union Jack was not considered good enough because it was not sufficiently distinctive?

Herein is a matter involving national and international relations. Is not a perpetuation of the status quo highly undesirable?

Herein also is further proof that the majority of the people of Canada desire— as many of them think they now possess— a distinctive flag for Canada?

This incident emphasizes the truth that Canada cannot longer afford to be the only self-governing country in the world which does not possess a distinctive flag of its own.

No Basis for Cry of Disloyalty

TN VIEW of the facts, will any Canadian contend that the Union Jack alone is sufficient for all the uses for which Canada needs a flag? Certainly no nonCanadian will.

Will any Canadian say that there is not urgent demand for settlement of this question in which Canada’s s^'J-respect is closely involved?

A section of irreconcilables to progress —tq “broadening down from precedent to precedent”—express their inferiority complex in assertions that what they choose to call “substitution” of a distinctive Canadian flag for the Union Jack would be regarded as a sign of Canadian disloyalty, and that the British Empire was about to break up.

Talk of substitution is ridiculous. The outside world varies between scorn and toleration of our gaucheries and inconsistency. If there be substitution proposed, has it not already taken place both unofficially and officially, as at Washington and London?

Have you not read or heard that in this project there is a base desire to weaken the Empire; to weaken the ties between it and Canada? Have you not been urged to show your loyalty to Great Britain by resisting any scheme to change the Union Jack?

Does not this show that there is need for a new conception of loyalty, a loyalty of Canadians to Canada? That loyalty, in its best expression, cannot be other than a loyalty to the British connection and Canada’s proud place as the premier Dominion of the British Empire.

Have we forgotten already Lord Darling’s words when last in Canada? “The strength of the British Empire lies in the strict independence of its component parts; in its apparent weakness.”

There is no question of loyalty involved in any way. The Union Jack is as much our flag as it is that of the British Islanders of the present day. It was our fathers’ flag just as it was their fathers’ flag. The elder stay-at-home son succeeds to the family firm’s title and trademark. The younger sons abroad use that trademark, differenced by a distinctive address.

The daughters of a family do not for ever carry their mother’s name alone on their visiting cards. When they grow up, their own names appear thereon. As the eldest Miss Britain, it is not contemplated that Canada will change her name or leave the family, but it is surely time that her own visiting cards were properly engraved.

Other critics of the proposal to put this flag question in order are of the “hush, hush” type. What has Canada to fear within or without?

You may say, “We do not want an agitation in Canada such as that in South Africa.” We all agree. Perhaps we do not all recognize that the longer this matter is left in abeyance, the greater is the probability of acrimonious dispute. Conditions here are not the same as in South Africa. Our fellow Canadians of French descent may be relied on to discuss this matter as Canadians, conscious of the history of our country and loyal subjects of the British Crown.

Already they have given some proof of their agreement with the principle of adopting a distinctive flag for Canada, one which includes the Union Jack.

FAR from being a cause of disunity and disagreement, the adoption of a distinctive Dominion flag for Canada will be one of the greatest contributory causes to the development of a national consciousness and pride in Canada and her connection with the British Empire.

It will give to all classes, races and peoples in Canada a symbol of unity as Canadians. At present we have no officially adopted distinctive flag to which the son of a long line of French or British Canadian ancestors, the son of the immigrant from England or Iceland or Galicia, can look as the flag and symbol of his own country, and of his country alone.

Abroad, a distinctive Canadian flag would designate Canada, Canadian institutions, and Canadian people.

Its adoption would end the ridicule which Canada’s present attitude invites, and prevent embarrassment to Canada’s friends. _ _ ,

Embassies and government buildings abroad would then fly this flag without need of special orders-in-council.

Exhibitors of Canadian commerce and trade would be properly distinguished by a Dominion flag. Much valuable publicity has in the past been lost to Canada through lack of such a flag.

In such a flag, Canadians of every class, athletes included, will have their own distinctive Dominion emblem, just as have their cousins in every other Dominion in the British Empire.

Editor’s Note—On page seventeen of this issue is a colored plate showing various flags of the British Empire,