The Danger of the Present System.

These oversea States have been developed and have reached maturity during an era in which the British Empire has been at peace with the great European nations. The wars with France in the 18th century were fought out in India and our American Colonies. It was not Canada, but France, that was defeated at Quebec. Would the present system stand the strain of war? Many of our fellow subjects oversea think that, in the event of war between England and a European power, it would be an open question whether their State would join in such a war or not. There could be no more dangerous delusion than this idea. War is a condition of things affecting every subject of our King and every subject of the Ruler who would be opposed to us, or, if at war with a Republic, every citizen of such foreign State. To take a modern instance. In 1870, if either France or Prussia violated the neutrality of Belgium, we were bound by treaty to join the other power to repel the invader. If the Emperor Napoleon marched his troops over the border, a state of war would have immediately resulted, and every Frenchman, that is every subject of Napoleon III., would have become an "alien enemy" to every subject of the Queen. Partnerships of French and English subjects would have been dissolved. Frenchmen could not enforce their contracts in any court in the British Empire! Would the existing ties have stood the strain? Canada could not be neutral. Neutrality would involve secession.

Again, we have now the States oversea voluntarily undertaking a large share in the burden of Imperial defence, both naval and military. A misguided policy at home might precipitate a European war. Is it right that these States should bear the loss and burden of war, sacrifice their sons, and be denied any share in directing the page 13 policy which led up to it? Is it right that their soldiers and Statesmen should be debarred from sharing in the government of the Empire?