avoidable and in a political campaign exaggeration was inevitable; yet the advantage taken of the deplorable situation in Quebec was politically natural. Advertisements teemed in the Unionist press dealing with Quebec and one from the Citizens' Union Committee, of which J. W. Lyon, Guelph, G. A. Warburton, and Dr. A. H. Abbott, Toronto, were the chief officers, said: “We believe that a united Quebec will dominate a divided Canada unless all loyal men and women forget party differences and local prejudices and unite to support British ideals and traditions; that the future of our soldiers, their wives and dependants, cannot be safely trusted to the Province of Quebec, which has conspicuously failed in all patriotic workenlistments, Patriotic and Red Cross Funds and Victory Loan." Other separate advertisements of this Committee stated that “a solid Quebec will vote to rule all Canada and only a solid Ontario can defeat them"; that "Quebec must not rule all Canada"; that "a Laurier victory will be the first Canadian defeat"; that Canada having subscribed $410,000,000 to the Victory Loan-"of which Quebec outside of Montreal only subscribed $17,000,000-shall we hand the whole sum over to Quebec to spend?" An elaborate page advertisement in the Monetary Times of Dec. 14 and many other journals expressed these views:

To-day, in our national crisis, Quebec alone, among all the Provinces, stands more united than ever before. She knows what she wants:

(1) Withdrawal from the War. (3) Weakening of the ties of British connection. (2) Bi-lingual schools everywhere. (4) Political control of Canada.

From the Ottawa River to Labrador and the Gulf a common purpose actuates Quebec in her determination to profit by the factional divisions of Canada and to impose her will upon all the people of Canada. Within the last few weeks Quebec has mobilized all her forces to dominate Canada under the unified leadership of Bourassa and Laurier... With 60 solid seats Quebec is about to accomplish her designs. Bourassa, the real master and idol of Quebec, is in sight of his goal. To attain her purpose, Quebec has not scrupled to ignore British traditions and to suppress freedom of speech. So thoroughly organized is her campaign to prevent even the discussion of the War that Unionist candidates are prevented from holding public meetings throughout that Province. The Unionist minority in Quebec are the victims of organized obstruction. To be successful in her determination to rule all Canada, Quebec has but to secure a few seats in each of the other Provinces. United in her determination to quit the War, Quebec would compel a divided Canada to do likewise. By union only can the English-speaking people prevent this calamity. The Unionist Party Publicity Committee, of which Sir John Willison was Chairman, did strong service for its cause in advertisements spread throughout the press of Canada. Much was said about Bourassa and the French-Canadians. A reference to the Victory Loan was followed by this statement: "Is it to be handed over to Laurier and Bourassa and their adherents, who propose deferring Canada's further participation in the War?" Another advertisement declared that: "Laurier, Bourassa and Quebec think we have done enough, and are in favour of deserting our men, breaking our pledge, ruining the country's credit with our Allies, and trailing Canada's honour in the mud of world opinion. Quebec having failed to do her duty, is now trying to bend the rest of Canada to her will." A campaign leaflet issued by this Committee declared that "the French-Canadians who have shirked their duty in this war

will be the dominating force in the Government of the country. Are the English-speaking people prepared to stand for that?" An advertisement on the eve of Election declared that "your vote on Monday will return Union Government-or leave Canada to the will of Laurier, Bourassa and Quebec." From Vancouver to Halifax these advertisements ran and they certainly influenced public opinion, as did the broadcast publication of an anti-Conscription pledge signed by some of the Liberal candidates in Quebec. Speeches everywhere rang with denunciation of Quebec Nationalism, of war inaction, of Bourassa and of an alleged alliance between him and Sir W. Laurier. Edmund Bristol, K.C., (Cons.) in Toronto (Dec. 10) described Quebec as "the spoiled child of Confederation" and T. C. Robinette (Lib.) declared at the same meeting that Quebec could not rule eight other Provinces; H. C. Hocken, an Orange leader and Conservative candidate, was vehement in his denunciation of the French-Canadians, and G. W. Allan, K.c. (Lib.) in Winnipeg (Dec. 5) described Quebec as, politically, "the plague-spot of the whole Dominion"; Hon. T. C. Norris at Morden declared on Dec. 4 that if Sir Wilfrid won the election Bourassa would rule Canada; Sir Hibbert Tupper (Cons.) at Vancouver, on Oct. 20, stated that: "It seems inconceivable, under present needs, that Canada, as a whole, will submit to Quebec rule, and if Laurier wins now it means Quebec rule with a vengeance. I never doubted that our patriots in Quebec are at heart sound but the vast majority are nevertheless being led to a desperate position." Some other references follow: Isaac Campbell, K.C., (Lib.) Winnipeg, Dec. 5:

Suppose Sir Wilfrid wins and comes into office-I don't think he will come into power. He may hold office, but not power. The backbone of the Quebec Nationalist party won't allow him a free hand on the question of winning the War. He won't hold office a day if he counters their wishes.

Hon. N. W. Rowell, K.C., (Lib.) North Bay, Dec. 6:

We might as well frankly face the issue. There is a Nationalist, clerical and reactionary movement at work in the Province of Quebec which to-day dominates the political situation in that Province, and is using this hour of grave national peril to dominate the political situation throughout the Dominion of Canada. . . . If Sir Wilfrid Laurier had been 20 years younger I believe he would have fought this sinister influence in the Province of Quebec just as he did in 1896, and would have triumphed over it. I was opposed to the Nationalist propaganda in 1911, when Canada was at peace. I am doubly opposed to it to-day, when Canada is at War. Those of us who had knowledge of the situation found ourselves compelled to choose between supporting Sir Wilfrid Laurier and a policy shaped to secure Nationalist support and which we believed would take Canada out of the War, or to decline to follow him farther.

Archdeacon H. J. Cody (Cons.), Kitchener, Dec. 10:

We have to set aside the picturesque figure of Sir Wilfrid Laurier to see the powers that are behind him. Henri Bourassa is the real leader of Quebec, and I ask if that Province, led by him, shall have the domination of the rest of this free Dominion which has sacrificed and suffered; is it for him to say to the rest of Canada that 'We have done enough?'

Sir Wm. Hearst (Cons.), Georgetown, Dec. 12:

The issue to-day is: Shall Canada have a Union Government of all Provinces and parties outside of Quebec, or shall a solid Quebec control the destiny of a divided Canada? Ontario must stand by the Union of the Eight Provinces, and must do so in a manner so emphatic and conclusive that Quebec domination will never again be attempted.

The Daily News (Cons.), Toronto, Dec. 1:

Is Quebec to rule Canada? Is the one French-Canadian Province to lord it over the eight English-speaking Provinces? Are the people of Quebec, in alliance with the anti-British and pro-German elements of the population in the other Provinces, to take the Dominion out of the War? Are the French-Canadians, who have refused to fight for Canada's liberties, to prevent the re-inforcement of the gallant troops which for over three years have upheld the national honour in countless bloody encounters?

The Globe (Lib.), Toronto, Dec. 4:

How can he (Sir W. Laurier) aid in winning the War if he should attain power and be compelled to retain it by the support of a solid delegation of Quebec members, many of whom are out-spokenly hostile to any further contribution of Canada's man-power to the Allied cause? English-speaking Liberals cannot afford to vote and work for a party in which they can be no more than a tail to the Quebec Nationalist kite.

Manitoba, from the first, was inclined toward The Unionist Unionism; its Government led the people in this CampaignThe Western respect and aided in preventing the Western ConProvinces. vention from becoming more than a compromise of diverging views. None of the Provincial Ministers opposed Union and Hon. Valentine Winkler was neutral; Messrs. R. S. Thornton, Edward Brown, T. H. Johnson, J. W. Armstrong and the Premier, did pronounced service in the Elections. The inclusion of Mr. Crerar in the Cabinet, as representing the great grain-growing interests of the West, prevented the appointment of Hon. A. B. Hudson as a second Minister from Manitoba. Mr. Hudson was in the hospital during much of the contest but on Dec. 13 issued a statement declaring there was but one dominant issue: "If an elector wants Canada to do her full share toward winning the War he must support Union Government." All the Liberal members of the Legislature aided the Unionist cause except two; Isaac Pitblado, K.C., H. J. Symington, K.C., J. B. Coyne, K.C., active Liberals of Winnipeg, A. C. Fraser of Brandon and the Rev. Dr. S. G. Bland were other Liberals who took an active part in the Province, as did W. J. Tupper, K.C., a well-known Conservative. Isaac Campbell, K.C., was a veteran Liberal of high character and place in his party who also lent great influence to the Unionists and in a Winnipeg speech on Dec. 5 dealt at length with the attitude of Quebec and the Nationalists. As to the rest: "We are supporting the Union Government on its policy of helping to win the War, and on Conscription because Conscription is necessary. We must keep on and we must stay in the War because, from the most selfish viewpoint, if the Allies are defeated it will cost us more to quit than it will to keep on. We must stay because we have pledged our last available man and our last available dollar. We must stay because our honour is concerned that we do not desert our Allies."

The first great Western meeting was held at Winnipeg on Oct. 22 with Messrs. J. A. Calder, Arthur Meighen and T. A. Crerar as the speakers. Mr. Crerar, in his speech, stated that: "The Grain Growers of Western Canada have always believed in Union Government. Personally I have always believed in it. I believe we should have had it two years ago and that it would have been much better for us in Canada. . I think I can say that the farmers

stand whole-heartedly behind it." He took pride in the fact, as Minister of Agriculture, that his whole life had been and would be bound up in Agriculture and he believed that he understood the difficulties of the farmers. As to one leading issue he said: "My conception of the Conscription of wealth is the conscription of the earnings of wealth, of profit, of income, and I think you can rest safely assured that the new Administration will pay very careful attention to that part of the business." Mr. Meighen gave statistics to prove the need for re-inforcements and showed that the net loss to the C.E.F., after enlistments, discharges and casualties had been reviewed, was 50,927 between Jan. 1 and Sept. 30, 1917, while during that period, in the vital matter of Infantry, there were 16,329 enlistments and 48,410 casualties to say nothing of discharges. Hence the need for Conscription and his hope that "the cry from the agony of the battlefield will be heard in sympathy and answered in honour." He addressed a number of succeeding meetings in Manitoba and others East and West.

During the ensuing campaign Mr. Premier Norris in all his speeches, dwelt upon the necessity of Union to carry on the War, declared his conviction that the new Administration was a real Union Government and that, though an admirer and supporter of Sir W. Laurier for many years, he could not endorse him now. As Mr. Norris was highly respected in the Province his opinion had weight with many old-time Liberals who might not otherwise have changed their minds. During the campaign Messrs. Norris and Meighen spoke together at Morris, Morden, Boissevain, Brandon, Minnedosa and Neepawa. Mr. Crerar and R. W. Craig, K.C., (Cons.) spoke at Roblin, Basswood and Rapid City, Crandall and Hamiota, Miniota and Birtle and Gladstone; Mr. Crerar also was at Carman, Carberry, Souris, Napinka, Manitou and Emerson with W. J. Tupper, K.C. On Sept. 6 the Manitoba Free Press, though standing for Union Government during many months, preceded an able campaign of advocacy in succeeding weeks with this declaration: "In order to prevent any possible misunderstanding the Free Press asserts that it will not take the responsibility of assisting in the election of any Liberal candidate, however high his position in the party, however emphatic his protestations as to war policy, if he seeks the suffrage of the people solely as a party candidate without the endorsement of a Union Convention. For the duration of the War the Free Press is out of party politics. As to candidates there were complications but most of them were overcome. G. W. Allan, K.C., (Cons.) was a strong candidate in South Winnipeg from the beginning; Rev. Dr. S. G. Bland intended to run in the Centre as a Liberal supporter of the Government but eventually retired in favour of Major G. W. Andrews, D.S.O., a soldier-Liberal; after various complications in Brandon Rev. Dr. H. P. Whidden (Cons.), Principal of the Baptist College, was nominated. Mr. Crerar ran in Marquette and an incident of his contest was a letter (Dec. 5) from H. W. Wood, President of the Union of Alberta Farmers, urging support to the new Minister because of his "devotion to the ideals of the West and the Western farmers, and

"

the highest ideals of Canadian Nationality as a whole." Mr. Crerar addressed several meetings in Winnipeg and on Dec. 13 told a final one that his two weeks' tour of the Province had convinced him that "rural Manitoba is solid for Union."

In Alberta Liberalism was and had been dominant for years in both Provincial and Federal affairs-while in Manitoba it had only recently won power in the Province after many years of Opposition. There had been some internal divergence of feeling at Edmonton between the sections led by Hon. C. W. Cross, Attorney-General, and Mr. Premier Sifton, but it never took active form; in these Elections Mr. Sifton carried with him a large portion of his party but Mr. Cross joined forces with Hon. Frank Oliver and some members of the Provincial Government who stood with himnotably Hon. Duncan Marshall and Hon. Wilfrid Gariepy. Mr. Sifton was, however, a reserved, astute leader and he knew his Province well. Labour interests were strong in the cities and he had one Labour man running as a Unionist supporter in Calgary side by side with T. M. M. Tweedie, an old-time Conservative opponent of his late Government; while a Soldier candidate opposed him personally in Medicine Hat he had popular Conservative officers as Unionist candidates in Major Lee Redmond at Calgary and Maj.-Gen. W. A. Griesbach, D.S.O., at Edmonton. Michael Clark put up a strong fight in Red Deer while W. A. Buchanan, another Liberal of the new light, ran again in Lethbridge; George Lane, the well-known rancher, retired as Liberal candidate in Bow River and proclaimed himself a Unionist; Victoria had a threecornered fight with J. W. Leedy, ex-Governor of Kansas, standing as an anti-Conscriptionist, Non-partisan League candidate. Mr. Sifton and his one-time opponent, Mr. Tweedie, spoke at Lethbridge on Nov. 20, at Macleod, Calgary, Edmonton, Red Deer and other points.

Dr. Clark, who had a hard fight in his own riding against an anti-war American element, found time to deliver forcible speeches at Calgary and Edmonton; R. B. Bennett, K.C., ex-M.P., who had declined re-nomination in Calgary as a Conservative-Unionist, spoke at various points-Crossfield, Calgary, Carstairs, Acme, Didsbury. Two mass-meetings at Calgary on Nov. 22 were addressed by Hon. T. A. Crerar, Hon. A. L. Sifton, Mr. Bennett and others. Mr. Crerar was emphatic as to the tariff question not being an issue in this contest and declared that the pre-War expenditure of $135,000,000 in Canada would increase to $275,000,000 after the War. It was pointed out that Messrs. Ballantyne, Crerar, Robertson, White and General Mewburn were not politicians in the ordinary sense of the word. At Medicine Hat on Dec. 14 Mr. Sifton dealt with the charge that he had abandoned Liberalism: "A Liberal is a man who stands for progressive legislation and legislation is the test." As to Quebec he was sarcastic: "It seems a man can be a Liberal in the West only if he receives the sanction of Quebec. If we want unity in Canada it can only come by satisfying Quebec. If Quebec is not satisfied then there is disunion!" An incident of the Alberta as well as Manitoba campaign,