to Governor Hunter for the Province of New York, and the drawing of the
flag[98] which is attached to the documents is the same in 1709 as in
the instructions of 1701.
[98] New York Colonial manuscripts, Vol. V., p. 137.
Under this Queen Anne Union Jack, Port Royal was once more taken by
the forces of the United Colonies, sent out from Boston under General
Nicholson, in 1710, and its name changed in honour of their Queen to
Annapolis, where both Royal name and British ensign have ever since
remained.
The colonists had in all these expeditions stoutly proved their share
in the prowess of the British Jacks. Acadia,[99] by the Treaty of
Utrecht (1713), had been ceded to Britain, but Cape Breton had remained
in the hands of the French, and Louisbourg having been created by
them the strongest fortress in the New World, the British colonists
determined upon its reduction.
[99] Practically our present Nova Scotia.
[Illustration: 38. THE LOUISBOURG MEDAL, 1758.]
In 1745, an expedition, entirely colonial, organized by General
Shirley, of Massachusetts, and William Vaughan, of New Hampshire,
sailed from Boston under General Pepperell. After a siege of forty days
Louisbourg surrendered. In 1748, the fortress was again restored to the
_fleur-de-lis_ by the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, but only to be retaken
by Wolfe, in 1758, and the Queen Anne Jack, which the United Colonies
had before placed above it, was restored and is shown again in the
Louisbourg medal,[100] used to commemorate Wolfe's victory (38).
[100] Bourinot: "Island of Cape Breton."
On yet another field the United Colonists carried the Union Jack. In
1762, when Havana was captured from the Spanish by Lord Albemarle,
there were in his fleet of 203 vessels, and among his land forces of
12,000 men, alongside the men from across the sea, colonial contingents
sent by the colonies of Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island, New Jersey
and Maine.[101]
[101] _Graham's Journal_, published by the Society of the Colonial
Wars, in New York.
When Cuba was thus gained for the Union Jack the colonists of America
were joined with their British brothers from the Old Land in lowering
the flag of Spain, but the island was restored to Spain by the Treaty
of Paris, February 10th, 1763.[102]
[102] When, in the Spanish-American war of 1899, the forces of the
United States placed the American ensign, containing the thirteen
stripes of the old colonies, above the flag of Spain, in Cuba, Great
Britain stood by the descendants of her men of 1762 and kept the field
clear from interference by other nations.
Thus for over two and a half centuries (1497-1762) had the English
Jacks wrestled with the forests and battled along the shores of
America, carried first by the merchant adventurers, and afterwards
by the several and the United Colonies, as sign of their origin and
allegiance. For yet another long period was the two-crossed Jack to be
carried by those who had so manfully won competence and glory beneath
it, so that at length, even when joining for contest with their parent
realm, the Thirteen Colonies held its past and record in such esteem
that they placed the Union Jack of Queen Anne in their new Union Ensign
as a sign and remembrance of their common history.
CHAPTER XVI.
_THE UNION FLAGS OF THE UNITED STATES._
The thirteen English colonies which in succession had been planted
in North America, along the shores of the Atlantic from the French
possessions in Acadia to the Spanish possessions in Florida, had each
its own "colony flag"; the "United Colonies of New England" had devised
the New England flag to distinguish their particular union; but the
national flag which declared the union of all the colonies with one
another, and with the Motherland beyond the seas, was the "Union Jack"
of Great Britain.
It was under the Union Jack that the forces of the colonies of
Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia had marshalled in
1755, and with the English regulars had advanced, under the leadership
of Braddock and Washington, to drive the French out of the Ohio Valley,
but to meet with such signal disaster on the banks of the Monongahela.
In the same year, under the cross of St. George in their United
Colonies flag, the colonists of New England joined in the victories
over the French, and changed the name of the lake, by whose shores they
fought, from "St. Sacrament" to "Lake George."
Under the successive Jacks the colonies had grown into commonwealths,
had expanded their territories, and their sons had written their names
in British history by gallant deed and notable achievement.
Thus the crosses in the Union Jack had a vivid meaning, and their local
historic record had won for them the attachment of the people in the
colonies.
The occupation of Quebec by Wolfe in 1759 and the subsequent retirement
of French rule from Canada and the valley of the North Mississippi had
freed the colonies from conflict with the power which had hitherto
opposed their expansion beyond the Alleghanies. They were now free to
exploit the West, which this victory of the parent realm had gained
for them, and which was to be the wide field for their subsequent
expansion. Combining together for these adventures had brought the
separate colonies more into contact with each other and created points
of internal union. At length the time came when rifts in the methods of
government on this continent began to show themselves.
Troubles had been brewing between the colonies and the Home Government
ever since the passing of the obnoxious Stamp Act of 1765, but,
although the friction had at times been great, there was no intention
on the part of the colonists of severing their allegiance from the
parent realm. The cause of the colonists in America was largely
espoused among the English people. Lord Effingham, upon his regiment
(the 22nd) being ordered to America, resigned his commission in
the British army, "rather than consent to bear arms against my
fellow-subjects in America."[103]
[103] Letter to Lord Barrington, Secretary of War, April 12, 1775.
No more ardent adherents or outspoken advocates for the self-government
of the colonies were to be found in America than were Chatham, Burke,
and Charles James Fox in the Parliament of England, and under the
later and better conditions which have since governed the relations
between Great Britain and her outlying colonies there would, in all
probability, have been no breaking of the old home ties.
Engaged in the throes of a great European war, Britain had poured
her men into Spain and could spare but few of her own for service in
America. Forces, consisting largely of hired Hanoverian and Hessian
soldiers, had been sent across the sea to enforce the objectionable
enactments, and hostilities had broken out in June, 1775, between the
resident citizens and these imported "regulars"; but even after this
entanglement, the flag, which was introduced for the "United Colonies,"
was raised, not for the purpose of indicating any alteration in
allegiance, but to evidence the local union of the still loyal colonies
against the dictation of the impracticable home ministry.
That these were their views towards Great Britain they most plainly
stated in the address they sent to the King immediately after their
armies had been placed in the field:
"We not only most ardently desire that the former harmony between
her and these Colonies may be restored, but that a concord may be
established between them as to perpetuate its blessings uninterrupted
to succeeding generations in both countries."[104]
[104] Address of the General Congress of the Colonies in America to the
King, September 1, 1775.
As in previous wars of defence or of adventure, the separate colonial
forces were again brought together into one army. On their assembling
at Cambridge, in July, 1775, they were mustered into one service under
General Washington. As was recorded in a local paper, "None of the men
who have been raised by this (Massachusetts) and several other colonies
are in future to be distinguished as the troops of any particular
colony, but as the forces of 'The United Colonies of North America,'
into whose joint service they have been taken by the Continental
Congress."[105]
[105] _New England Chronicle_, July 6, 1775.
As early as October, Washington found the necessity of having some
"continental flag" which should identify the whole of the forces of
"The United Colonies of North America" thus assembled together under
his command, instead of having the military detachment from each colony
continuing to use its own individual flag.
An existing ensign used by the Colony of Pennsylvania was at first
proposed by him for this purpose, having a white ground with a tree in
the middle, and the motto, "Appeal to Heaven."[106]
[106] "Washington Letters," Vol. I., p. 84.
This was succeeded by a new design, devised for the Continental
Union flag (39), which, to the accompanying salute of thirteen guns,
was raised by Washington over the camp of his army at Cambridge,
Massachusetts, on the 1st January, 1776, being the occasion of its
first appearance.
[Illustration: 39. THE FIRST UNION FLAG, 1776.]
This flag was called "The Grand Union" (Pl. VI., fig. 1). It
was composed of thirteen stripes of alternate white and red--one for
each colony--and in the upper corner was the British Union Jack of that
period, displaying the two crosses of St. George and St. Andrew, as
introduced in 1707.
There existed at the time a flag which had been carried by the English
East India Company over their British possessions in India since 1704.
This was composed of thirteen stripes, red and white alternately, and
had the single red cross of St. George upon a white ground (the old
English Jack) in the upper corner. This flag might have been seen
on the vessels trading to America and exchanging products between
the English East Indian and the American colonies, and thus being
recognized as a "colonial flag" it may, with the change of form of the
Union Jack, have suggested the new ensign.
[Illustration: PLATE VI.
1
GRAND UNION 1776
2
UNITED STATES 1777
3
UNITED STATES 1909]
There is no direct evidence as to the flag which had been raised by
General Putnam at the outbreak of hostilities at Bunker Hill, June
17th, 1775, but tradition reports[107] that it was the ensign of the
colony of New England (37), which, like the East India ensign, had the
St. George's cross on a white ground in the upper corner; but the whole
fly of the flag was red.
[107] Lossing.
In the selection of a new flag for the combined forces of the united
colonies, what design could be more reasonable or more appropriate
than the selection of that Union Jack under which their united armies
had so often fought, together with the addition of thirteen stripes to
indicate the number of colonies then assembled together?
This retention of the Union Jack in the new flag was designedly
intended to signify that the American colonies retained their
allegiance to their Motherland of Great Britain, although they were
contesting the methods of taxation promulgated by its Government.
By this flag the thirteen colonies testified that, though in arms, they
still claimed to be Britons, and were demanding for themselves all the
rights of citizenship which such relation conferred.
It was, as one of their orators has well said, "the flag of the
British colonies in arms to secure the rights and liberties of British
subjects."[108]
[108] General Schuyler Hamilton: "Addresses on the Flag," p. 18.
The first Union flag raised by Washington over the armies of the united
colonies thus displayed the British Union Jack.
Another flag (40) bearing the Union Jack is still extant.[109] It is
a crimson red flag, having a rattlesnake painted upon it, and in the
upper corner is the Union Jack of 1707. This was carried by a regiment
of the colony of Pennsylvania, and was used at the Battle of Trenton,
December 26th, 1776, and in subsequent engagements with the British
regular forces.
[109] Preble: "The Flag of the United States."
[Illustration: 40. THE PENNSYLVANIA FLAG, 1776.]
The intention to cure the troubles by constitutional means had become
unhappily merged in the appeal to arms.[110] As the hostilities proceeded
rancour grew, and then a new flag was sought for, which should typify
the changed conditions. The source from which arose the idea of this
final design we shall presently see.
[110] Benjamin Franklin's only son bitterly resented his father's
abandonment of peaceful and constitutional methods, and himself left
the country in 1782, and died a U. E. Loyalist in 1813.
On July 4th, 1776, the Declaration of Independence followed,[111] but
the "Grand Union" still continued to be used by the thirteen colonies,
which had now become thirteen States. It was not until June 14th,
1777, or almost a year after the Declaration, that a new national flag
was fully developed.
[111] Carried in Congress only by the casting vote of the chairman.
The Congress of the United States, then in session at Philadelphia,
approved of a report made by a committee[112] which had been appointed to
consider the selection of a Union flag, and enacted,
"That the flag of the thirteen United States be thirteen stripes,
alternate red and white; that the Union be thirteen stars, white in a
blue field, representing a new constellation."
[112] Franklin, Adams and Washington.
The new enactment was not at once put in force and a still further
delay ensued, but at length, on September 3rd, 1777, this flag was
officially proclaimed as the Union Ensign of the United States (Pl.
VI., fig. 2), and was the first national flag which was
officially adopted by the authority of Congress.
[Illustration: 41. ARMS OF THE WASHINGTON FAMILY.]
As Washington himself suggested the first design, and had introduced
the second, it is not improbable, and, indeed, it is recorded that he
actually had somewhat to do with the designing of the final one.[113]
However this last report may be, his friends and admirers most
certainly had, and the similarity between the design of the final flag
and the coat-of-arms of the Washington family points to the source
from which they deduced the completed design.
[113] Preble: "Ross episode."
Upon the tombstones of the family in Sulgrave Church, Northamptonshire,
England, and upon the old manor house occupied by them in the time of
Henry VIII., is to be seen the shield (41) of the Weshyntons,[114] or
Washingtons, an old English county family, who traced their lineage
back into the fifteenth century.
[114] Also spelled "Wessingtons."
[Illustration: 42. WASHINGTON'S BOOK-PLATE.]
John Washington, a descendant of this family, had been a loyal
cavalier, standing staunchly by his King, Charles I. When Cromwell and
the Roundheads came into power, the Royalist Washington emigrated, in
1657, to Virginia, bringing out his family, and with them his family
shield, on which are shown three stars, above alternate stripes of
red and white. Having settled upon considerable estates, he and his
descendants kept up the old ways, and maintained the style and country
standards of their English forefathers.
George Washington, the subsequent President, was the great-grandson
of the old loyalist colonist. He, too, served in the forces of his
sovereign, King George III., and maintained the old family traditions
and habits in the same way as did all the "first families" of Virginia.
On the panels of his carriage were painted his family coat-of-arms.
It appeared on the book-plate (42) of the books in his library, and
the first commissions which, as commander-in-chief, he issued to the
officers of the Continental army were sealed with his family seal (43).
[Illustration: 43. WASHINGTON'S SEALS.]
Thus the suggestion for the further alteration was ready to hand. The
similarity of one portion of the design already existing could not fail
to have been noticed, for the stripes on the Washington coat-of-arms
were alternately red and white, as were also those on the Grand Union.
It had been suggested that the idea of the "new" constellation was
derived from the analogy of the "old" constellation of Orion containing
thirteen stars, and that the form of the stars was taken from a seal
said to have belonged to John Adams, one of the committee for designing
the flag.[115]
[115] "Magazine of American History," Vol. XIX., p. 151.
Reference to the details of this seal shows an eagle bearing in its
claws the lyre of Orion, both being surrounded by a circle of thirteen
stars; but the stars on the seal are all shown as sidereal six-pointed
stars, and not five-pointed as are the Washington stars.
The stars which were inserted in the flag when the Union Jack
was withdrawn were not the six-pointed stars which would be used
heraldically if representing a "sidereal constellation," but are the
five-pointed stars of the Washington armorial bearings.
So it happened that the stars and stripes of the coat-of-arms of the
old loyalist English family, to which the successful Revolutionary
general belonged, and of the seal with which he had attested the
commissions which his officers had received from him, formed the
basis for the design of the new American flag, and through them the
memory of the great leader and first President of the United States
is indissolubly connected with the Stars and Stripes, the national
ensign (Pl. III., fig. 3) of the nation which he brought into
existence.
The American had good right to be proud of that Jack, in whose glories
he had so valiantly borne his part, and when as Englishmen battling
for the rights of Englishmen the united colonies formed their colonial
ensign they had rightly placed the Union Jack in its upper canton as
evidence of those glories and of that claim.
Afterwards, when their new nation had been framed, and the Washington
stars had marked the new allegiance, the thirteen stripes of the
old thirteen English colonies still remained to attest to himself
and to the world the Americans' share in the preceding centuries of
Anglo-Saxon adventure and their heritage in all the liberties and
literature of the English tongue. The rights won by the Barons from
John, the works of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, are still theirs by
hereditary right, and the thirteen Anglo-Saxon stripes in his national
emblem proclaim this to the American of to-day as they did to his
forefathers in the thirteen colonies who first placed them in his union
ensign.
The bitternesses arising out of a fratricidal contest fanned by the
misrepresentations of fervid orators have for long decades misread the
events and obscured the history of that dividing strife, but British
law and the English tongue still speak in the flag of the old English
colonies which continues to form part of the national ensign of the
United States.
CHAPTER XVII.
_THE JACK AND PARLIAMENTARY UNION IN BRITAIN._
The history of the flag, so far as we now have followed it, has been
the story of martial or naval prowess and of the extension of its
power and command around the world; but there is another story told in
its combinations which is even greater in power, and has still deeper
meaning in the welfare of the peoples who have come beneath its sway.
The kingdom of England for centuries had its own St. George's Jack,
and the kingdom of Scotland its cross of St. Andrew. These red and
white crosses had been the accepted symbols of their respective
nationalities. Each of the kingdoms had its own separate Parliament,
differing, it is true, from that of the other in methods and in many
details, but representing the constitutional machinery adopted in each
community for consultation between the King and his subjects, who,
through their representatives, were advised upon matters connected with
the government of their country, whether in its internal laws or in its
relations with foreign powers. In course of time the same sovereign,
in the person of James I., had by virtue of his birth succeeded to the
throne of England, as well as to that of Scotland. The kingly office
in both the kingdoms had thus been merged in the person of one and the
same King. A new flag had been created representing the allegiance
which had then been joined in the one sovereign. In this the crosses
of the two kingdoms had been joined together in one design, but the
separate national Jacks of each had been still retained and their use
continued in force.
These separate national Jacks were certainly intended to evidence the
continued separate national existence of each kingdom, while the new
personal Jack or banner of the King would appear to have evidenced the
union of the thrones in one person, and to represent the united fealty
offered to the one King. Yet it is fairly open to question whether
this Union Jack of James I. was at first created to mean as much as
this, or whether it was not, after all, introduced more for the purpose
of avoiding trouble between the sailors of the two nations, and only
intended at first to be a local convenience for the preventing of
dissensions.
The new Union Jack certainly did not represent a union of the nations,
else why did the two national Jacks still remain? If it had been
intended to represent the fealty of his subjects to their King, why was
it not introduced immediately upon his accession, and why was not the
red cross of the Irish included as well as the crosses of the English
and Scots, for the Irish were equally at the time subjects of James I.?
The Irish had, in fact, been subjects of his predecessors for many
centuries. In 1171, after the conquest of the island had been
effected by Henry II. of England, the native princes of Ireland had
declared fealty to the prince--not in his capacity as king, but in
acknowledgment of his position as having become by conquest the "Lord
of Ireland." The country had from very early days been governed by its
own Parliaments, whose meetings are recorded as having taken place as
early as 1295; but it was not until 1522 that Ireland was raised to the
rank and designation of a kingdom. In this year an Act was passed by
the Parliament of Ireland declaring Henry VIII., the King of England,
to be also the King of Ireland, and it was by virtue of this Act
that the King of England first assumed the additional title of King
of Ireland. The flag of England was at this same time the single St.
George Jack; yet, although the crowns were thus formally united, the
cross of St. Patrick was not added to the red cross of St. George as a
Union Jack in sign of fealty to the one sovereign.
After this, the Kingdom of Ireland owned fealty to three more
sovereigns of England in succession;[116] yet under none of them were the
crosses of the two national flags joined together. It was not until a
Scotch king, the great-grandson of Henry VIII., became King of England,
that any of the three national crosses were combined. In 1603, James
I. became King of Ireland and England, as well as of Scotland; yet
notwithstanding that the three sister kingdoms were thus united in
allegiance under his united crown, the three separate crosses of the
national Jacks of each were not united in one flag. James I. on his
accession had at once added the Irish harp to the quarterings of his
Royal Standard (15), but three more years passed before he entered the
red cross of St. George in the "additional" two-crossed Union Jack
which he then created. All these incidents point, evidently, to the
view that the union of the crosses of St. George and St. Andrew in the
new flag of 1606 did not arise as an emblem of the union of thrones,
but was mainly devised, as the King's proclamation distinctly stated,
for the special and local purpose of keeping the sailors of the two
nations most interested in shipping at peace, and thus to prevent their
crews from quarrelling with one another as they sailed their ships
around the shores of Great Britain.
[116] Edward VI., Mary, Elizabeth.
It required, in fact, something more than a mere union of allegiance to
create a real Union Jack, and to entitle the national crosses of the
kingdoms to be entered upon its folds; and what this requirement was
the history of the entry of the St. Patrick cross into the Union flag
enables us to see even yet more clearly.
It will be remembered that a change in the "additional" Jack of James
was made in the sixth year of the reign of Queen Anne, and that the
occasion of this change was coincident with the union of the separate
Parliaments of England and Scotland into one British Parliament.
It was so soon as this occurred, but not until then, that the flag in
which the two national crosses were blended was made the sole national
ensign.
It was in 1707 that this first Union Jack was created. Queen Anne was
at the time Queen of Ireland as well as Queen of England and Scotland.
She had quartered the harp of Ireland in her Royal Standard five years
previously, at the time when she had commenced her reign; yet the
Queen, when forming the new flag, did not join the cross of St. Patrick
in her Union Jack any more than had King James when forming his.
For ninety-four years longer the red cross Irish Jack continued in its
separate existence. The reign of Queen Anne had come to its close;
three more sovereigns[117] in succession had ascended the united throne
of Great Britain and Ireland, and successive changes had been made
in the emblazonings on the Royal Standard, yet in all these reigns
the Union Jack, which had been declared to be the only flag of the
realm to be worn by their subjects, and which was raised over the new
dependencies which the united valour of all three nationalities won for
the crown, contained only the crosses of St. George and St. Andrew,
representing but two of the kingdoms included under its rule (44).
[117] George I., George II., George III.
At last, in 1801, during the forty-first year of the reign of George
III., the Irish Parliament was united with the Union Parliament of
England and Scotland, and then, and not till then, was the red cross of
St. Patrick blended with the other two national crosses.
The emblem of Scotland had not been blended with that of England in one
Union Jack until their Parliaments had been united; so the emblem of
Ireland was not added to the other two until her Parliament had also
been joined with theirs. So soon, then, as the three kingdoms were
joined in union under one Parliament, for the first time the three
crosses of the three national Jacks were united in one three-crossed
Union Jack.
[Illustration: 44. FORT GEORGE AND THE PORT OF NEW YORK IN
1770.
(From an old print.)]
We thus have learned what was the necessary qualification to entitle a
national cross to be entered in the union ensign.
It needed a union of Parliaments to create a real Union Jack--a flag
in which the national crosses should each continue to retain their
national significance, and, when joined together in union, be still
accorded the same precedence which had previously attached to each when
separately displayed.
The history of these successive blendings shows most plainly that
the triune flag arose, not from union under one sovereign, but from
legislative union under one Parliament. The Union Jack, therefore, has
become the emblem of the British Constitution and the British race.
It is now the signal of loyalty to one Sovereign and the existence of
Government under British parliamentary union, and, therefore, wherever
displayed, it indicates the presence of British liberties and British
law.
CHAPTER XVIII.
_THE JACK AND PARLIAMENTARY UNION IN CANADA._
In addition to its harmony with the story of the union and the growth
of the Constitution in the Motherland, the Union Jack has also an
interesting connection with the extension of the powers and advantages
of the British Constitution in Canada, and particularly with the
establishment of responsible parliamentary government among its people.
In 1759, the seeds of the new nationality had been sown upon the Plains
of Abraham, where the blood of Wolfe and Montcalm had mingled to enrich
the soil, and the power of European France in Canada became merged in
the power of England.
The French forefathers of the new subjects of King George II. had
come largely from those very portions of old France, whose people had
crossed over to England with William the Conqueror, and given the
British their King.
As says one of our French Canadian historians:
"The immigration of the French, extending from 1634 to 1720, was
almost entirely from among the Normans of Dieppe and Rouen, so that
the settled portion of Canada was to all intents and purposes a
reproduction of a Norman province. The subsequent settlers were mainly
selected in Rochelle, Poictou, Paris and Normandy, to the exclusion of
persons from the south and east, and coming out single, they married
the daughters of the settled Normans. This accounts for the marked
absence of any but the Norman accent and form of speech throughout the
French-speaking communities of Canada at the present day."[118]
[118] Benjamin Sulte: "The Origin of the French Canadians."
[Illustration: 45. ROYAL ARMS OF GEORGE II.]
Thus the new French-speaking subjects in Canada were only returning
in allegiance to the sovereignty of a king whose ancestors had been
placed upon the English throne by their own Norman forefathers; upon
whose royal arms (45) were displayed the three _fleurs-de-lis_ as sign
of his claim, through his ancestors, to the throne of France (14);
upon whose crown was the motto in their own French language, "_Dieu et
Mon Droit_,"[119] and who by the retention of old customs still gave his
consent to the laws enacted in his British Parliament in the same old
Norman phrase, "_Le Roi le veult_" ("The King wills it"), which had
been used by his Norman forefathers.[120]
[119] First used at Gisors, in Normandy, in 1198.
[120] The custom is still continued. The consent of Queen Victoria to
Acts passed by Parliament was given in Norman French, "_La Reyne le
veult_."
The French _habitant_ felt how easy was the renewal of the old
relationship, and accepted the change in the way so well expressed in
his Canadian voyageur patois:
"An' dat was de way we feel, w'en de ole régime's no more,
An' de new wan come, but don't change moche; w'y its jus' lak' it be
before,
Spikin' _Francais_ lak' we alway do, an' de English dey mak' no fuss,
An' our law de sam', wall, I don't know me, 'twas better mebbe for
us."[121]
[121] W. H. Drummond: "The Habitant."
There now commenced in Canada an evolution of internal government
of the people similar to that which had taken place in the old land
of England, but under reversed conditions, beginning here with the
incoming of English rule, while there it had commenced with the Norman
conquest of England. An eminent French authority[122] has stated his
belief that England owed her liberties to her having been conquered
by the Normans, and to this we may add the statement of a no less
important English author,[123] that "assuredly England was gainer by the
conquest." As the advent of Norman rule to England had resulted in such
privileges to the English people, so assuredly the cession of Quebec
and the introduction of English government into Canada brought equal
blessings to the descendants of those selfsame Normans.
[122] Guizot: "Essais sur l'Histoire de France."
[123] Gibbon.
The French Canadian found that under his new Union Jack his property
was secure. Under the old régime the French Canadian had practically
no voice in the government of his country. There was no system of
elective municipal government, no freedom for public meetings, all the
legislative and executive power, even to its extremest details, being
centralized through the Governor and Intendant in the person of the
King of France, who was two thousand miles away. Finding his religious
faith untrammelled, his freedom unimpaired, his language preserved, the
_habitant_ soon settled down without objection to his new sovereignty.
In 1774, the British Parliament passed the Act known as the "Quebec
Act," which granted an increased share of local government to the
people of the great province comprising all Canada which was then set
apart, and the greater portion of which is now within the present
Dominion. This measure of self-government still further assured the
French-descended Canadians of the protection of their liberties, so
that when the English-descended colonists of the thirteen English state
colonies to the south of them revolted from their British allegiance in
1775, French Canada stood firm by the British crown. The descendants
of the Normans in Canada were true to the government which their
forefathers had helped to create in England.
The march of events now brought an additional set of new subjects to
the British Constitution as it had then been established in Canada.
The granting of separation to the thirteen United States, in 1783, was
followed by the immigration to Canada of those loyal souls whose hearts
revolted at the action of their old colonies in taking down the Union
Jack, and who refused to separate themselves from the United Empire, in
whose ultimate justice they had unwavering faith.
These "United Empire Loyalists" settled mainly in the parts now known
as Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Ontario. Of the quarter of a million
souls who then formed the total population of Canada, about a hundred
and forty thousand were of French language and descent, living in the
counties adjacent to the St. Lawrence River; and of the forty to fifty
thousand Loyalists who, it is estimated, reached the northern colonies
during or immediately after the rebellion of 1775, over twenty-five
thousand had, by 1786, settled along the western lakes.
Government in Canada had hitherto been conducted by a Governor and a
Legislative Council appointed by the Crown, there being no elected
representative. A further advance in constitutional self-government
was now considered desirable, and the "Constitutional Act of 1791" was
passed by the parent Parliament in Great Britain. The ancient Province
of Quebec was divided into two provinces, called Lower Canada and Upper
Canada, very fairly representing the localities occupied, the one by
the older or French-speaking subjects of His Majesty, and the other by
the newcoming English-speaking Loyalists, who had followed their old
flag into the forests of the northland.
This Act of 1791 gave the right of Parliamentary government to the
people of Canada. A Legislative Council and a House of Assembly were
created for each Province, the members of the latter house being
elected by the votes of people in the counties and towns of each.
The Legislature of Upper Canada held its first session at Newark (now
Niagara-on-the-Lake) in 1792, summoned, as said Lieutenant-Governor
Simcoe in his opening speech, "Under the authority of an Act of
Parliament of Great Britain, passed in the last year, which has
established the British Constitution in this distant country." To this
he added:
"The wisdom and beneficence of our Most Gracious Sovereign and the
British Parliament have been eminently proved not only in imparting to
us the same form of government, but in securing the benefit of the many
provisions which guard this memorable Act, so that the blessings of our
invulnerable constitution, we hope, will be extended to the remotest
posterity."
As a sign of this self-government under the British Crown, the King
issued his warrant from the Court of St. James on March 4th, 1792,
authorizing a "_Great Seal for the Province of Upper Canada_," to be
used in sealing all public instruments. The engraving (46), which is a
photo reproduction of the seal attached to the Crown Patent of a grant
of one hundred acres of land near Port Hope, Upper Canada, made to a U.
E. Loyalist, shows the details of the design, being, as described in
the royal warrant, "an anchor and sword crossed on a calumet of peace,
encircled by a wreath of olives, surmounted by an imperial crown and
the Union of Great Britain."
[Illustration: 46. THE GREAT SEAL OF UPPER CANADA, 1792.]
This "Union," which will be seen in the upper right-hand corner of the
seal, was the Union Jack of Queen Anne.
The United Empire Loyalists sought their loved two-crossed Union Jack
in Canada. They found it not only flying on the flagstaff, but also
impressed on the seals of the Grants of land which were made to them
in recognition of their loyalty. On these it came to them as a sign
of the surety of their legal rights under British law and their full
protection under the administration of British justice.
The introduction of this Union Jack had been the result of an Act
passed by the British Parliament, that "mother of parliaments," which
continues to this day to have vested in it the ultimate political
sovereignty of every local Parliament which it has created.
This Union Jack on the Great Seal is in this way the emblem of
parliamentary union between Great Britain and Canada, and the sign of
the spread of British constitutional government to the continent of
America.
But the French Canadian has also an interest in this same _Great Seal_,
for on its reverse side it bore the royal coat-of-arms of the reigning
sovereign, and in this were still shown the three lilies of France, in
the same way as in the arms of his predecessor, George II. (45). What
the Union Jack on the one side was to the English-speaking Canadian,
the "_fleurs-de-lis_" on the other was to the French-Canadian--a
visible sign of his own personal connection with the glories of his
forefathers, and the evidence of his glad allegiance to the Sovereign
whose connection with the ancient realm of France was represented by
these emblems, and with whose realm he was now reunited.
In drawings of the arms of the Province of Ontario (the new name given
to the Province of Upper Canada at the time of Confederation, in 1867),
the Jack has frequently been shown as containing three crosses. A
reference to the impressions made by the seal itself upon the great
pieces of white wax, four and a half inches broad by three-quarters of
an inch in thickness, which were attached by bands of parchment or of
tape to the official documents, shows, as is seen in the photograph,
that the "Union" contained two crosses only, namely, the cross of St.
George and the cross of St. Andrew.
This Union Jack of 1707 was also shown in the arms of the Department of
Education of Upper Canada, from 1844 to 1876, during the régime of Dr.
Ryerson as Superintendent. In these the design was the same as on the
Great Seal, but the Union Jack was removed from the upper corner and
placed upon a shield in the centre, upon which the two crosses of Queen
Anne are plainly shown.
In earlier stained glass windows placed in the Normal School, Toronto,
the head offices of the Department of Education of Ontario, the
three-crossed flag had been shown, but this, on the suggestion of the
writer, has been corrected in the new windows placed in the library in
1896.
A further adoption of the national emblem is shown in the design on the
early currency, which was coined for use in the Province. The "penny"
of the Bank of Upper Canada (47) shows on the one side St. George and
the dragon, and on the other the arms of the Great Seal, having on it
the Union Jack,[124] which good national emblem, no doubt, made the money
that the Canadian Loyalist earned more acceptable to him. These must
have been happy reminders to the patriot, for on the coins which passed
current among his people, and on the seal of the deed of the grant of
land which his Loyalist father or himself had received for his new
home, was the imprint of the old Union Jack, placed there by an Act of
the Union Parliament of Great Britain, as the sign of his parliamentary
union with that United Empire which ever commanded his allegiance.
[124] The design of this Bank of Upper Canada penny was made by F. W.
Cumberland, the father of the writer.
[Illustration: 47. UPPER CANADA PENNY.]
CHAPTER XIX.
_THE UNION JACK OF GEORGE III., 1801._
THE PRESENT UNION JACK.
We come now to the formation of the first, and present, three-crossed
Jack, the "Red, White and Blue," of story and of song, being the third
Union Jack.
For forty years King George III. had reigned as King of Great Britain
and Ireland. The Union Parliament, created under Queen Anne, had
administered the affairs of England and of Scotland, but the Parliament
of Ireland had continued meeting separately, and the two-crossed Union
Jack of 1707 had been the only Union Jack authorized to be raised in
the British realm. In the forty-first year of the King's reign an Act
was passed in the Parliament of Ireland, whereby it became, as had
the Parliaments of the two other kingdoms, incorporated in the one
Union Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
As previously, so now again the Parliamentary and completed union of
the kingdoms having been arrived at, the Irish Jack was directed to be
joined with the Jacks of England and Scotland.
The same deliberate procedure for making an alteration in the Union
flag was followed as under Queen Anne: First, an Act of Parliament
creating a further union, the call of the Sovereign as the supreme head
of the nations, the appointment of a Committee of the Privy Council
to consider the drafts of the changes to be made, then an Order in
Council, and, finally, the issue of a proclamation by the King.
The record[125] states: "On the 5th November, 1800, the King in Council
was pleased to approve the report of a Committee of the Privy Council,
that the Union Flag should be altered according to the draft marked
'C,' in which the cross of St. George is conjoined with the crosses of
St. Andrew and St. Patrick."
[125] Memorandum of the Admiralty.
[Illustration: 48. DRAFT "C" OF UNION JACK, 1800.]
This draft "C" (48) was duly transmitted to the College of Arms,
London, and an exact tracing of it as recorded in the books of the
college has been made.[126]
[126] "Genealogical Magazine," 1899.
The designers of this new Union Jack of 1801 had this time to join
three flags together, instead of, as in 1707, only joining two; the
problem set before them being the union of the three national Jacks of
the sister nations into one grand Union Jack (Pl. v., fig. 3).
The three flags now to be formed into one Union flag were the incoming
Irish Jack, having a red diagonal saltire cross and white ground, to be
joined with the "white crosse, commonly called St. Andrew's crosse,"[127]
of Scotland, with its blue ground, and the "Jack white with a red
cross, commonly called St. George's cross"[128] of England, with its
white ground.
[127] Proclamation, Charles I., 1634, p. 83.
[128] Proclamation, Charles II., 1663, p. 90.
The latter two had already been joined in the Union Jack of 1707. The
draft "C" (48) gives the method in which the designers proposed the
three flags should be combined, and the proportions to be given to
each in the new flag, which then received the approval of the King in
Council.
Thereafter, on January 1st, 1801, King George III. issued his Royal
proclamation from St. James' Palace, declaring His Majesty's pleasure
concerning the Royal style and titles appertaining to the Imperial
crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and its
dependencies, and also the ensigns armorial, flags and banners thereof.
The clause respecting the Royal coat-of-arms states:
"And that the arms or ensigns armorial of the said United Kingdoms
shall be quarterly; first and fourth England, second Scotland, third
Ireland; and it is our will and pleasure that there shall be borne
therewith on an escutcheon of pretence the arms of our Dominions in
Germany."
The result of this clause was that the lilies of France, which had been
quartered in the Royal arms since Edward III., 1327, were altogether
removed, and the whole four quarters were appropriated--two quarters
to the three golden lions of England, and one quarter each to the red
lion of Scotland and the golden harp of Ireland--and upon a shield on
the centre was to be placed the arms and white horse of Hanover, to
indicate the other countries over which the King also reigned (49).
[Illustration: 49. ROYAL ARMS OF GEORGE III., 1801.]
The next clause refers to the Royal Standard or flag of the sovereign:
"... And it is our will and pleasure that the standard of the said
united kingdoms shall be the same quarterings as are hereinbefore
declared to be the arms or ensigns armorial of the said united
kingdoms...."
Although the Royal arms contained a recognition of the King's
Hanoverian kingdom, the flag to be used as the "Royal Standard" is
ordered to have on it only the arms of the three united kingdoms of
England, Scotland and Ireland.
In the clause of this proclamation the Union flag (50), which had
already been designed and approved, was described as follows:
"And that the union flag shall be azure, the crosses saltires of St.
Andrew and St. Patrick, quarterly per saltire counterchanged, argent
and gules; the latter fimbriated of the second, surmounted by the
cross of St. George of the third fimbriated as the saltire."
This description defines, with respect to the crosses, that the white
cross of Scotland and the red cross of Ireland were joined together
quarterly and "_counterchanged_" and that the red cross of St. George
is to "_surmount_"--that is, to be laid upon the surface of them both.
With respect to the grounds of the flag, it is described as being blue,
and that the cross of St. George is "fimbriated as the saltire." Much,
and almost continuous, controversy early arose upon this heraldic
description of the Union flag, particularly with respect to the
proportion of the crosses, and specially to the width of the white
border to the St. George.
[Illustration: 50. UNION JACK OF GEORGE III., 1801.]
It is to be remembered that heraldry does not, except when specifically
given, deal with exact dimensions, but gives the general appearance and
particular colourings of the shield or banner. If, as in this case,
the arrangement of the flag selected may have been in the opinion of
some of the heraldically inclined, "an extraordinary amalgamation,"[129]
and by others not made in accord with the heraldic "blazon" or
description given of it in the proclamation, yet this division of its
parts is not to be attributed to the "officers of arms" of that day,
for it has been expressly put on record that "in this allotment they
were not allowed the exercise of their own judgment."[130] Suggestions
have constantly since been made that the forms in the flag should be
changed, because, as is reiterated, "the guide to all heraldic devices
is the verbal blazon of the heralds," and with this, they say, the flag
does not agree, for the saltire crosses do not bear the appearance of
having been "counterchanged"--that is, alternated, share and share
alike; and that the "fimbriation" to the red cross of St. George is
wider than an "heraldic fimbriation," which on an heraldic shield is
only a very narrow edging or border for the purpose of separating one
colour from another.
[129] _Gentleman's Magazine_, January. 1801.
[130] _Naval and Military Magazine_, 1827, p. 182.
These are objections arising only from the wording of the "blazon" and
not from the flag itself; to the description given of it and not to the
design.
We have seen that, both in 1707 and in 1801, the changes made in
the "Union Jacks" proceeded by a regular and formal progression of,
consideration by Sovereign, Committee of Enquiry, Order in Council and
registration of the drafts of design then selected and approved, and
the promulgation of the Royal proclamation for its use.
_The design of the flags preceded the blazon_, or description given
of them in the proclamations. We must, therefore, refer to the flags
themselves as the guide to their proportions and to the intentions of
their designers.
It does not appear that any "draft" of the first flag of James I.,
1606, was fyled, but a formal proclamation authorizing it was made by
the King "according to the form made by our heralds."
On reference to the "Draft C, 1707," of Queen Anne, for the conjoining
of the two flags, it will be noted that the crosses of St. George and
St. Andrew are of _equal width_, and that the white border to the St.
George is one-third of the width of either of the crosses. The red and
white crosses of the two national flags are thus represented, and the
whole of the "crosse-flags" by the blue ground of the Scottish flag in
the angles, and the white ground of the English flag in the broad white
border.
Queen Anne and her Councillors had in mind the union of the two
nations, but there was no "verbal blazon" made or issued, the order
being that "the flaggs be according to the 'Draft marked C,'" and as
"shown on the margent" of the proclamation.
This authorized Union Jack of 1707 was the basis upon which the
designers of George III. began when, in 1800, they were instructed to
conjoin the cross of St. Patrick, which was to be added to the union
flag.
Comparison of the "Draft marked C, 1800," shows that the broad white
border of St. George is retained of the same width as in the "Draft C,
1707," being approximately _one-third_ of the width of the red cross
of St. George and of the saltire cross, both of which remain of the
same size as previously. The form authorized by the Order in Council of
1707 was adopted and repeated by the Order in Council of 1800.
In the bringing in of the additional red saltire cross of Ireland, the
diagonal space previously allotted in "Draft C, 1707," to a saltire
cross is now equally divided between the white and the red saltire
crosses of the kingdoms, and to give them equal recognition and honour,
the edging of white necessary to separate the red saltire of St.
Patrick from the blue ground of the flag is taken from its own half of
the diagonal space allotted to it instead of from the Scotland's blue,
and this was duly balanced by the retention of the full broad white
border space around the St. George, which in the new flag represented
both the white grounds of the St. Patrick and the St. George, as the
blue ground did that of St. Andrew's flag.
Thus the intentions of the designers of 1707 were followed, confirmed
and extended by the designers of 1800. The drafts and orders in Council
issued in pursuance of them are the authority which must be recognized
in the making of the flag, and not the interpretation of a description
or "blazon" given of it in the proclamation issued after the Union Jack
had already been approved and adopted.
It has been said that the wording of the blazon, "the cross of St.
George fimbriated as the saltire," is to be taken as indicating
the "width" as well as the "colour" of the fimbriation, and that,
therefore, it should be reduced to a narrow heraldic edging. Others
consider that as heraldry does not deal with sizes as exact dimensions,
the wording means simply, "of the same _colour_ as the saltire," and
has no reference to the width, and some criticisms have described the
"blazon" as being "very obscure."[131]
[131] _Naval and Military Magazine_, 1827.
In consequence of these interpretations, proposals have, at times,
been made for altering the Union Jack, "so as to bring it more into
accordance with the blazon and with heraldic rules," but as has been
well said, "flag making is not pure heraldry; it is affected by
considerations of symmetry, proportion and in no small measure of usage
and prescription."[132]
[132] _Times_, September 17, 1903.
Our Union Jack, in its present form, has unquestionably been made as
it was ordered to be made in 1707 and in 1800, and proclaimed in 1801,
whether the description in the proclamation be correctly expressed or
not.
But in addition to the general form of the design, as given in the
"Draft C, 1800," there were also detailed regulations issued for the
making of the flag, which are the same as the rules prescribed by the
Admiralty of the present day[133] for the several proportions of the
Union Jack as always and now issued.
[133] Admiralty Memorandum relative to the Union Jack, 1907.
From these regulations it is clearly evident that the recognition
which the white ground of St. George's Jack had been given in the
flag of 1707 was intended to be continued. While the pattern drafts
of the Councils were of square form, the Admiralty adopted a longer
form, as "the practice has been, in regard to the dimensions of flags
generally, to make the length twice the breadth at the head." This
is the usual length adopted for flags which are not square, although
the flag of an admiral, which is the old English St. George, still
continues to be one and a half times as long as it is broad.
The dimensions are given in full detail in the regulations.
An outline drawing (51) of the flag of the same form as the Admiralty
pattern is given for convenience of reference. The proportions of the
several crosses and borders are directed in the regulations to be made
according to the measurement called the "width of the flag," being the
measurement on the "halliard" or "hoist," which is the side next to the
flagstaff, and are as follows:
REGULATIONS FOR THE SIZES OF THE PARTS OF THE UNION JACK,
Whether square or oblong, in which latter case the length
to be twice as long as the width.
Red cross of St. George 1/5 of width of flag.
White border to St. George 1/3 of red of St. George.
Red cross of St. Patrick 1/3 " " "
White border to St. Patrick 1/6 " " "
Broad white of St. Andrew 1/2 " " "
The paramount cross of St. George is to be one-fifth of the width of
the flag on the flagstaff, and its width is made the factor by which
the measurements of all the other parts are to be regulated in flags of
varying sizes.
The crosses of the two other Jacks, which were to be joined, are each
allotted a proportion of _one-third_ the width of the cross of St.
George.
The divisions of the parts for the Irish Jack are stated separately,
being _one-third_ for the red cross of St. Patrick, and _one-sixth_ for
its white border; the two measurements, when added together, amounting
to a proportion of one-half.
The proportion of one-half allotted to the "broad white of St. Andrew"
comprises the due share of _one-third_ for the Scotch cross, and
_one-sixth_ for its border, being an exact equality to the proportions
given to the Irish cross and its border.
[Illustration: 51. OUTLINE JACK--THE PROPER PROPORTIONS OF THE CROSSES.]
At first sight it would appear that the "broad white of St. Andrew"
was given a larger proportion of the flag, but the measurements of the
"cross" and its "border" of the Scotch Jack are stated in one figure,
because their colours are the same, while those of the Irish Jack are
given separately, because the colours are different, the cross being
red and its border white.
The saltire space of the Union Jack of Queen Anne has been divided
equally, and the national banners of St. Patrick and St. Andrew are
thus given each a proportion of _one-third_ for its CROSS and
_one-sixth_ for its BORDER or "fimbriation."
The description given in the "blazon" respecting the red cross of St.
George, stated that it was "fimbriated as the saltire." The regulations
defined this as "for the white border to the cross of St. George,"
and there was allotted, not simply a one-sixth proportion due a
"fimbriation," but the full proportion of _one-third_, equal to that of
a national cross, and in this way the white border to the cross of St.
George is as wide as the cross of each of the other nations.
The width of the border cannot this time, as was said of the change
of 1707, be the result of the "carelessness of a draughtsman,"[134] for
it is made with premeditated carefulness, and, more than that, the
measurements are set down in exact figures. Thus the reason for the
broadening of the border in the flag of 1707 has been justified by the
flag of 1801 and its authority confirmed.
[134] McGeorge: "Flags."
This broad white border, given to surround the red cross of St. George,
is not only the formal recognition of the white ground of the English
Jack, which had been placed in the flag of 1707, but it is also a
recognition of the white ground of the Irish Jack, which was now for
the first time entering the Union Jack, so that the broad border in the
flag of 1801 represents the grounds of two national Jacks.
The practical proportions of the pattern drafts are thus fully carried
out in the Admiralty pattern. Some twenty years ago the Garter King of
Arms had his attention drawn to the Admiralty flag as used in the navy,
and he was asked to suggest an alteration. He declined, because, he
said, "the flag was made according to the drawing, and it was exhibited
in the same way on the colours of the Queen's Infantry Regiments."
It is a serious thing to deface or alter the national flag of a nation,
and if any changes have been made in any individual instances they
are the result of error, and have not been made with such paramount
authority of Sovereign, Parliament and Council, as have been the Union
Jacks of Queen Anne and King George III.
In this Union Jack of 1801 we have, then, plainly displayed a complete
representation of the three separate crosses, and of the white and blue
grounds of the three national Jacks which were then combined together
to form our Union Jack.
Since 1801 no change had been made in this Union Jack of George III.,
which was the first three-crossed Jack of its race, and is our present
Union Jack.
From 1801 onward dates this glorious flag, in which all three nations
are represented. It was born when the power of Great Britain seemed
almost wrecked. Reverses had accumulated upon her. In America many
of her possessions among the West Indies and on the surrounding
coasts[135] had been wrested from her flag, and thirteen of her longest
established and most populous colonies, becoming the United States, and
aided by men, money and fleet from the French in Europe, had revolted
from her sway and abandoned their allegiance. In Europe the nations of
France, Spain and Holland were united in arms against her, and she was
battling almost single-handed against the power of the great Napoleon;
yet, undaunted by these trials, the sons of the united nation ran their
new Union Jack up aloft, and started out to frame that marvellous
career which it has since achieved.
[135] In 1781 England lost Tobago, St. Eustachius, Demerara, Essequibo,
St. Christopher, Nevis, and Montserrat.
"For England's courage flames
The fiercest in defeat,
And in the day she stands at bay
Most dangerous to meet."[136]
[136] Kirby: "Canadian Idylls."
This third Union Jack flew at Aboukir when Abercrombie drove Napoleon
out of Egypt; with it were won the triumphs of Wellington, from Assaye
in India, through Badajoz and Spain, to the crowning victory at
Waterloo. It was the flag which floated in the "white ensign" on all
the ships at Trafalgar,[137] and on the _Victory_ when Nelson sent aloft
his British watchword:
"England expects every man will do his duty."
[137] Nelson, in order to have the British ships easily recognized by
one another in the action, had ordered that instead of wearing (in
accordance with regulations) the flags of their respective red, white
or blue squadrons, all the ships should wear the same flag (the white
ensign) as himself.
The halo of that signal shone around it at Balaclava, when the heroes
of the valley-charge proved it was
"Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs not to make reply;
Theirs but to do and die";
and again above the _Birkenhead_, at sea, when five hundred steadfast
men went down beneath its folds, inspired by its duty-call.
[Illustration: 52. THE UNION JACK AND SHACKLETON AT FARTHEST
SOUTH.
(From a photograph taken at the spot.)]
In Africa, Melville and Coghill wrapped it around their bodies at
Isandula, and won death to save it from the foe; for it the forty
mounted riflemen of Matabeleland died in their tracks, singing "God
Save the Queen," and yet again at the call of the race the sons of the
Flag from all around the world hastened to help it to hold its own upon
the veldt.
On the continent of America the impetuous Brock, facing enormous
odds, and leading his Canadian volunteers in defence of their native
land, gave up his life for it on the cedar-clad slopes of Queenston
Heights, and beneath it the French Canadians of Beauharnois knelt on
the battlefield, and rising, won, with the brave De Salaberry as their
leader, the victory of glorious Chateauguay.[138]
[138] "Captain Langtin caused his men of the Beauharnois militia to
kneel, went through a short prayer with them, and then, rising, said:
'_Now that they had fulfilled their duty to their God, they would
fulfil that to their King._'"--LIGHTHALL: "The Battle of Chateauguay."
It was carried far to the Arctic north by Sir John Franklin, in 1846,
and in October, 1908, Shackleton planted this ancient Union Jack, with
all its crosses and broad white border,[139] upon the farthest Antarctic
south (52).
[139] A Union Jack given him by Her Majesty Queen Alexandra.
Such a flag with such a history should be held sacred and inviolable.
CHAPTER XX.
_THE LESSONS OF THE CROSSES._
The combinations of the Jacks have at length been completed, and the
three crosses placed together in the one flag of 1801.
If some of the heralds are not entirely satisfied with the way the
divisions are made, due honour has at least been done to each of the
Jacks of the three kingdoms, while at the same time the historical
value of the "Union" has been greatly enhanced, and its beauty as
a flag most certainly increased. If the object of heraldry is the
teaching of lessons by the combinations of colour and of forms, then
the flag as made is yet more heraldically successful.
In the heraldic and traditional interpretations of colours, red
indicates courage, white is the emblem of purity, and blue the emblem
of truth.
"Red, white and blue,
Brave, pure and true."
By this better and more equal division of the colours in the flag much
additional emphasis is given to the story which those colours tell.
Lessons are taught which may be deeply impressed upon the minds of
our children, so that by reading the history of their nation in its
folds they may endeavour to live lives worthy of the ideals of their
national flag, and frame their own characters and the character of
their empire by its lofty teachings.
That it is a beautiful and easily distinguished flag is admitted on
all hands, but it has the still further quality, of immeasurable value
in a national flag, that its parts and colours tell the history of the
nation whose emblem it is. To those who have acquainted themselves with
the story of the three separate national flags, the Union Jack, with
its three crosses, its broad white borders and eight blue triangles,
tells the story of the influences under which the present Empire has
been built up by the three kingdoms which were combined to make it.
Laid broadly upon the whole combination, and "surmounting" it, and also
forming the basis for all its measurements, is the plain red cross
of St. George, indicating, in such a way as the simplest mind can
understand, the leading part which the English nation has taken in the
creation of the Union, and the powerful position which it holds in its
councils.
Under this cross, and supporting it, are the white and red crosses of
the two junior nations, which are themselves, in their turn, supported
on the white and blue grounds, which form the basis foundations of the
flag, the whole being embraced and bound together by the broadspread
arms of the plain red cross.
Thus clearly does the position of the crosses and their grounds teach
the vivid lesson of how the three sister nations, supporting each
other, are all united by _Courage_ in building their realm upon the
sure foundations of _Purity_ and _Truth_.
The position of the red cross of St. George, in front and full view,
tells plainly how England was the first of the nations to enter the
lists and lead the way in acquiring the glories of the Empire.
Another lesson there is which the crosses also plainly tell respecting
the relations between the Scotch and Irish nations themselves.
The flag is divided by the cross of St. George into four quarters, in
all of which the saltire crosses of St. Andrew and St. Patrick, as the
heraldic blazon of the proclamation says, are "quarterly per saltire
counterchanged."
Discussions have arisen between heraldic experts as to whether
the descriptive word in the blazon should be "countercharged" or
"counterchanged." The latter is the word given in this proclamation,
and although at first sight it looks as though the red cross only had
been "charged"--that is, been placed upon the original white diagonal
cross--it is to be remembered that the saltire cross has been equally
divided between the two nations.
It will be noted that the broad white of the cross of Scotland occupies
the higher position in the first and third quarters, which are next the
flagstaff, and the red cross of Ireland is in the higher position in
the second and fourth, which are the quarters at the end or fly of the
flag; the relative position of the Irish and Scotch crosses, as they
are placed in the first and third quarters, are reversed in the second
and fourth quarters; that is to say, the positions of the crosses are
alternately changed about, or "counterchanged."
The quarters of the flag next the flagstaff are considered to be
of higher importance than the others, and in these more important
quarters the cross of St. Andrew and its border is thus given
precedence over the red cross of St. Patrick and its border.
The lesson intended to be taught by the position of the crosses is
plain. The kingdom of Scotland had entered into the union with England
before the kingdom of Ireland, and, therefore, as being the senior, the
white cross of St. Andrew is given the precedence over the red cross of
St. Patrick, but this, in its turn, is given the upper position in the
remaining quarters.
The utmost care must, therefore, be taken to see that the Union Jack
is correctly raised on the flagstaff, with the broad white of the St.
Andrew uppermost.
When the Red Ensign, or any similarly quartered flag, is reversed
on the flagstaff--that is to say, displayed with the Union down--it
becomes a signal of distress. Union Jacks are often seen hoisted
upside down (Pl. VII., fig. 1). No more distressing act can
be done to the Union Jack than to thus carelessly reverse its crosses
by putting the wrong end next the staff, with the broad white saltire
down, nor greater indignity be done to its supporters than by thus
reversing the correct positions of their national Jacks.
Flags are sometimes to be seen (Pl. VII., fig. 2) in which the
white border around the red cross of St. George is reduced to the same
narrow size as the border of St. Patrick, and thus the white ground of
the Jacks of England and Ireland has been wiped out.
[Illustration: PLATE VII.
1
PRESENT UNION JACK UPSIDE DOWN
2
JACK WRONGLY MADE
3
JACK WRONGLY MADE]
Still more often the red cross of St. Patrick is set full in the centre
of the diagonal cross, and thus the cross of St. Andrew is completely
expunged, for its white is reduced to only two narrow white margins
on both sides of the Irish red cross. The broad white of St. Andrew has
thus been entirely lost. (Pl. VII., fig. 2).
Such errors as have been mentioned cannot be too greatly lamented, or
be too carefully avoided, for by them dishonour is done to the memory
of the nations whose prowess has ennobled their national emblems,
and the beautiful story of the Union Jack is utterly marred; for the
positions of the crosses and borders cease to tell the consecutive
history of the empire nation whose combined union emblem they form.
In Pl. VII., fig. 3, a further error will be noted, that the
opposite ends of the combined saltires are not in continuous line with
one another, as in the correctly made Jack (Pl. V., fig. 3).
This has occurred from the centre lines of the combined saltires having
been drawn directly from the inner corners of St. George to the outer
corners of the oblong flag.
We have seen that as the space of the one saltire of 1707 was to be
divided equally between the two saltires of 1801, the two ends of the
saltire should be in line, and the division run equally through the
centre.
[Illustration: 53. SQUARE UNION JACK.]
In view of these errors it may be well to give some simple instructions
by which the flags may always be correctly made, and which are in
accordance with the Admiralty regulations.
Union Jacks must be made either square (53), or oblong (54), in which
latter shape the length must always be twice the width on the staff.
[Illustration: 54. OBLONG UNION JACK.]
It will be noticed that in the square Jack (53) the diagonal lines
drawn from the opposite corners of the flag intersect the corners of
the white border of St. George and of the cross, which latter is shown
in dotted lines, and that in the oblong Jack (54) they do not. It is
this difference which has usually created the difficulty.
Having decided the size, either square or twice as long as wide (1 ×
2), then draw two diagonal lines from corner to corner upon the shape
of flag selected, then place the St. George cross and its border upon
the flag according to the measurements in the "Outline Jack" (51),
the red of St. George being one-fifth of the height or width of the
flag. The diagonal lines will be the centre and dividing lines of the
saltires, as shown by the dotted lines which are thus in continuous
line from one corner to the other. The St. Patrick and St. Andrew
saltires and their borders are then to be added according to the
proportions shown in (51), the red saltire being placed touching the
diagonal, below it in the first and third quarters of the flag, and
above it in the second and fourth. The St. Andrew, being in one colour
and above the diagonal in the first and third, and below it in the
second and fourth, completes the combined saltire.
By following these directions the making of a Union Jack is much
simplified.
That the utmost care should be exercised in the making of our flag is
beyond all question. It is the record of our history, the flag of our
British nation; to display one in incorrect form is to do dishonour to
it, to our history and to our nationality. No patriot would do this
intentionally, and yet some may do this ignorantly. It would be well
for their help and the avoidance of error that they should be taught
how to make their flag correctly, and be educated in the lessons which
it conveys.
Once these have been learned, the amount of increased interest in our
flags is immeasurably advanced. Each flag as it comes before the eye
becomes a study and a lesson, an historic reminder and a patriotic
inspiration.
If those crosses could themselves but speak, what glories they could
tell; and yet the outlines of the flag, when they are properly
displayed, signal the stories of their colours and their crosses as
plainly and as eloquently as if they voiced it in burning words.
CHAPTER XXI.
_THE PROPORTIONS OF THE CROSSES._
The division of proportions allotted to the crosses and to the white
border of St. George in the Union Jack has hitherto been treated solely
by inference and also by comparison of the "drafts" selected and
regulations which were issued for the construction of the flag. It may
be well now to revert to some actual examples showing the details of
flags early in use, which will further substantiate the reasons which
led to the proportionate division of the spaces when the Union Jack of
1707 was altered in 1801, and our present Union Jack was designed to
record the addition of Ireland to the Union.
It has sometimes been stated that the red cross and white border of St.
George indicate the presence of two crosses, the impression, formed
by those who, as they admit, were "better acquainted with heraldic
definitions than historic expression," being that they give the
appearance of a red English cross placed over a white French cross.
As reason for this, they point out that King James I. and all his
successors until King George III. had been styled "Kings of Great
Britain, France and Ireland." The successive Union Jacks had been
created during the existence of this royal title, and, therefore, it
is suggested that two crosses had been placed upon this part of the
flag, one being the white cross of France, upon the face of which the
red cross of St. George had been laid to thus present the ancient and
long-past union of the kingdoms of France and England under the one
sovereignty.
The white cross of France, however, was not a straight-sided cross,
such as that of St. George, but one of Maltese shape, being wider at
the ends than at the centre.
An instance of this flag is given in the copy (55) of the flag shown on
the mainmast of a French caravel of the sixteenth century, as drawn in
an old manuscript illustration.[140]
[140] Caravelle Francaise tirée des "Ouvres Pilote du Havre," MSS. du
XVI. Siecle.
[Illustration 55: FLAG OF A FRENCH CARAVEL, 16TH CENTURY.]
It is quite evident that the rectangular white border to
the St. George could not be formed by a cross of this shape, and,
therefore, this suggestion for the origin of the white border must be
taken as erroneous.
Further, it was not unreasonable, seeing that the Royal Standard is
composed of the personal arms of the sovereign, that the successive
kings and queens of England should have continued the _fleur-de-lis_
in one of the quarterings of their royal arms, as a sign of family
succession, and as evidence of personal claim by descent to the old
sovereignty of France; but the British nations brought into union did
not themselves claim any such sovereignty, Calais, the last foothold of
England in France, won by Edward III. in his claim to the succession of
the throne of France, having been lost in 1558 under Queen Mary. There
would, therefore, be no corresponding reason for inserting the French
cross in the union flag, nor any historical connection which would
justify its being so used.
In the illustrations given of the two-crossed Jack of 1606 (Pl.
III., fig. 2, and cut 16), the white saltire of St. Andrew is
represented as of the full size of a wide saltire cross; so also in the
Jack of Queen Anne, 1707 (Pl. V., fig. 1), in which the broad
white of St. George was first given its full width.
This is the proportion of size which is given to it in heraldic
drawings, and the way in which it is usually drawn in later
representations, the white saltire cross of St. Andrew being thus shown
broader than the white border to St. George; but the earlier practice
in the actual making of flags appears to have been different.
In the allotment of the proportions in the new three-crossed Jack of
1801, when the cross of St. Patrick was added to the flag, it has been
pointed out that the white border to St. George was continued in its
full width, as in the previous flag of 1707, and was given the same
width as each of the two national crosses, which were then first placed
side by side, and between which the saltire space was then divided.
It will be interesting to show, by reference to early original
documents and flags, that this was the same equality as had previously
existed between the cross of St. Andrew and the border of St. George in
the old two-crossed Jacks of James I. and of Queen Anne.
In the time of William III. it appears that objections had been raised
in England to the using of the King's two-crossed Jack by merchant
ships of the American colonies, permission to do this having been
granted to the colonial ships by the Governors of the colonies.
The English Lords Justices in Council at Whitehall, on 31st July, 1701,
considered these objections to the using of what their report termed
"the King's Colours," and thereupon issued an order that the ships of
the colonies shall
"wear no other Jack than that hereafter mentioned, namely, that worne
by His Majesty's ships, with the Distinction of a _White Escutcheon_
in the middle thereof, and that the said Mark of Distinction may
extend itself to one-half of the depth of the Jack, and one-third part
of the Fly thereof, according to the _sample hereunto annexed_."
The Lords Commissioners of Trade were accordingly instructed to write
to the Governors of His Majesty's plantations,
"that they do oblige the commanders of such merchant ships to which
they grant commissions to _wear no other Jack_ than according to what
is proposed."
An exact tracing of the "_sample hereunto annexed_," taken from the
original manuscript report,[141] which was sent to the then Governor of
the colony of Massachusetts, is shown in fig. 56, and in colours in Pl.
III., fig. 3.
[141] Archives Rooms, Massachusetts. Vol. 62, Fol. 449-490. Boston.
This flag is the Jack of James I., which is still described in this
report of July, 1701, as it had been of old, as the "King's Colours."
It will be noted that the white cross of St. Andrew is a narrow cross,
and that the white border to St. George is of the same width as the St.
Andrew's cross.
[Illustration: 56. THE COLONIAL JACK, 1701.]
In the centre of the Jack is the "white escutcheon" described in the
report, to be used on the colonial flags. This is the first instance of
the creation of a special flag for the overseas colonies, and reference
to it will be made in a subsequent chapter. Similar instructions were
sent to the Governor of the colony of New York in 1709, and the flag is
repeated with an escutcheon in the same form.
[Illustration: 57. JACK OF ENGLAND, 1711.
(From an old Dutch sheet of flags.)]
A coloured sheet, "Schouw-Cart Aller Scheeps Vlaggen" (Examples of
all ships' flags), was published in 1711 by P. Schenk, at Amsterdam,
"correcting errors in previous editions." In an old atlas[142] of maps,
which were bound together in "old Amsterdam," in 1763, there is
included one of these sheets. Among the flags represented on it is the
"Jack of England" (57), showing the white of St. George of the same
width as the St. Andrew's cross.
[142] New York Colonial Society Manuscripts, New York.
References to many drawings of Union Jacks, as used on the American
side of the Atlantic, show similar proportions, of which some examples
may be given.
Fig. 58 is a copy of the Jack on the bowsprit of a three-masted ship
shown in a large three-sheet engraving, entitled "A Prospect of
Charleston, Carolina," published by R. Roberts, June 9th, 1739.[143]
[143] In Emmet Collection, Lennox Library, New York.
On page 187, a view of the port of New York (44) shows the flag as
used in 1770. Both on the ship and on the King's fort is the narrow St.
Andrew.
[Illustration: 58. JACK IN CAROLINA, 1739.]
Fig. 59 is a portion of an old engraving of the combat between the
French frigate, _La Surveillante_, and the English frigate, _Quebec_,
6th October, 1779.[144] This was one of the most gallantly contested
actions of the many engagements between single ships during the
progress of the war. The two frigates met in the English Channel, and
flying at one another at sight they battled hand to hand. All their
masts had been carried away, both ships were on fire, more than half
of the crew on either side had been killed or wounded. All the boats
except one on the French ship had been destroyed, when the _Quebec_
blew up, and Captain Farmer, her commander, went down in her with
nearly all who were left alive of his crew. The French captain, de
Coudic, who was himself severely wounded, received the forty-three
survivors, with a seaman's gallantry, on board the _Surveillante_,
saying that "as their ship had perished with her colours flying, they
would be treated, not as prisoners, but as brothers rescued from
shipwreck."
[144] In Collection of Chateau de Ramezay, Montreal.
The white flag with the _fleurs-de-lis_ is at the stern of the French
ship, and at the stern of the English ship is the red ensign on which
the St. Andrew cross and the white border of St. George are still shown
of equal width.
[Illustration: 59. THE COMBAT BETWEEN "LA SURVEILLANTE" AND THE
"QUEBEC," 1779.]
In addition to these instances from illustrations, reference to actual
flags of these early periods, and which are still in existence, proves
that the Union flags carried by regiments of the British army were made
on these same proportions.
The drawing (60) is reproduced from a photograph of the King's colour
of the 7th Royal Fusiliers, which is stated to have been obtained at
the capture of Fort Chambly, in 1775, and is now deposited in the
chapel of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York,
and shows its present appearance.[145]
[145] Avery: "History of the United States," Burrows Bros.: Cleveland,
Ohio.
A further example is given in the drawing (61) made from a regimental
flag[146] surrendered by the British forces at the capitulation of
Yorkton, by Lord Cornwallis, on 20th October, 1781. This is the "King's
colour" of one of the British regiments. These flags had most probably
been given to the regiments at much earlier dates, and had still
continued in use. In both the cross of St. Andrew and the border to St.
George are of the same width.
[146] Now in the Museum at Alexandria, Virginia, U.S.A.
[Illustration: 60. ENSIGN OF 7TH ROYAL FUSILIERS, 1775.]
These instances could not all be incorrect, and their similarity shows
that the form and proportions of the Union Jack of James I., as given
in the Massachusetts document, were those which were subsequently used
in the actual flags officially displayed at sea and on shore.
In all these Union Jacks the white of St. George is of the same width
as the cross of St. Andrew, and from these evidences of the form of the
flag, derived from such varied sources, we may fairly conclude that the
allotment to the white border to St. George in the Union Jack, of a
proportion equal to that then given to a national cross, had not only
early authority, but also wide usage.
[Illustration: 61. "KING'S COLOUR," 1781.]
These were two-crossed Jacks. When the time came, in 1800, for the
construction of the three-crossed Union Jack, the designers of the
"_draft_" and the committee of selection would have been acquainted
with the details of those previous flags. It is, indeed, stated that
the various existing flags were submitted for their inspection. When,
therefore, they gave the broad white border to St. George the same
width as that of each of the crosses of St. Andrew and St. Patrick,
namely, as the instructions stated, one-third of the red cross, they
were only continuing the width and proportion allotted to it in the
Union Jacks which had preceded, and with the actual examples to which
they were accustomed.
The broad white of St. George, as we now see it, was not dependent
upon any heraldic description, but is an heirloom of national descent,
and was evidently continued by the designers of 1801 in its full
proportion of the Union flag, not only to represent, as previously, the
white ground of the English Jack, but also for the additional reason
that it represents the white ground of the Irish Jack, which they
were then adding to the Union flag. By this method the proportionate
representation of the Jacks of the three kingdoms was intended and
justified.
Another objection raised to the proportions of the present flag, by
those on the side of the heraldic interpretation of the "blazon," is
that the individual crosses are of less width in proportion to the size
of the flag than they should be according to heraldic rules, and that,
therefore, the dividing of the flag is incorrect.
We need again to be reminded that the flag makers were not simply
placing three "crosses" upon a single flag, but were joining three
"Jacks" into one Union Jack; yet it may be satisfactory to see that in
the doing of this they have really fulfilled the rules of heraldry.
According to the received rules of strict heraldry, in emblazoning a
shield or a banner, a cross should be given one-third, and a saltire
be given one-fifth of the width. On a shield this measurement of width
is taken across the top, and on a banner or a flag it is measured
perpendicularly along the flagstaff.
Applying this rule and measurement to our present Union Jack, and
taking, as in fact they are, the red cross of St. George and its two
borders as _one cross_, and the two saltire crosses of St. Andrew and
St. Patrick and their two borders as _one saltire_, we shall find that
the heraldic rules have been actually complied with by the official
"draft" and by the regulations (Fig. 51), and that the combined cross
is _one-third_, and the combined saltire _one-fifth_, of the width of
the flag.
SIZES OF THE CROSSES ACCORDING TO THE ADMIRALTY REGULATIONS.
ONE COMBINED CROSS:
Red Cross of St. George, 1/5 of width 3/15
Upper white border, 1/3 of 3/15 1/15
Lower white border, 1/3 of 3/15 1/15
----
5/15 = 1/3 (One-third.)
ONE COMBINED SALTIRE:
Red of St. Patrick, 1/3 of 3/15 1/15
White border of St. Patrick, 1/6 of 3/15 1/30
Broad white of St. Andrew, 1/2 of 3/15 3/30
----
6/30 = 1/5 (One-fifth.)
It may be convenient to state these proportions as they would be in a
Union Jack, of which the width on the flagstaff is 5 feet:
Red of St. George, 1/5 of 5 feet 1 ft. 0 in.
Upper white border 4 in.
Lower white border 4 in.
-----------
1 ft. 8 in. or 1/3 of 5 ft.
Red of St. Patrick 4 in.
White of St. Patrick 2 in.
Broad white of St. Andrew 6 in.
-----------
1 ft. 0 in. or 1/5 of 5 ft.
It is possible that this form of compliance with the heraldic rules was
fully intended; yet, even were it not so, it is at all events a happy
coincidence which might be taken as a conformity to these rules, and
thus the flag which has been confirmed in its shape by the usage and
glory of centuries should be cheerfully accepted by the heraldically
inclined as being completely satisfactory.
It is not to the point for them to say it might look better if it were
made some other way, for that would be merely a matter of opinion; or
that if the heralds had had the making of it they would have made it
differently, but it was not of their making, that having been settled
by the Council in the selected draft of which the heralds worded a
description, or, as some state, a misdescription; but it cannot fail
to be admitted by all, that, as now made, it has been made, in all its
parts, in the way ordered by the successive Councils, in whom authority
was vested for its designing and issue.
The proportions of the crosses and of the borders of our Union Jack are
thus not only technically correct, but, of still higher importance,
they also preserve in detailed sequence the historical proportions of
the three nations and of the three national Jacks, which were, in 1801,
joined together in completed union.
Our noble flag, with its centuries of loyal history, might well,
therefore, be held sacred and free from any objections on theoretical
proportions.
CHAPTER XXII.
_UNDER THE THREE CROSSES IN CANADA._
In 1801 the "new" three-cross union had entered into the upper corner
of the red ensign of British rule. The Canadians, both French and
English, had been faithful to its two-crossed predecessor, and now
again their patriotism was to be put to the test.
The parent kingdom of Great Britain had for nineteen years been engaged
in its mighty struggle with the great Napoleon for the supremacy of
Europe, and the time seemed opportune to a section of the people of the
United States for gaining an advantage over the nation from which they
had separated their allegiance, and also for striking a blow at the
neighbouring people who had refused to become absorbed with them, and
had so successfully resisted their previous invasion.
The quarrel was none of Canada's making, nor was it one in which she
had any share, yet, although the ostensible reason which had been
alleged as the cause of offence was repealed before hostilities had
been commenced, war was declared at Washington on the 18th of June,
1812.[147]
[147] The British Orders in Council respecting the "right of search,"
to which the United States made objection, and had been given as their
reason for war, had been repealed in England the day before war was
declared.
The population of the United States at that time amounted to no less
than eight millions, while in Canada, from end to end, there were but
four hundred thousand souls, all told.
The Canadians did not hesitate, though their country was to be the
scene of war, and their homes to be the stake for which the nations
were to strive. Aid they could not expect from their British friends
across the sea, already strained to the utmost in the long conflict
with the armies of Europe; their reliance must be upon their own stout
hearts and strong right arms. But this was enough, for
"Odds lie not in numbers, but in spirit, too."
So they rallied with eagerness beneath their Country's and Britain's
Union flag.
[Illustration: 62. THE WAR MEDAL, 1793-1814.]
Only four thousand five hundred regular trained soldiers were in Canada
in 1812, and in them are included men of the Newfoundland and Glengarry
regiments, recruited locally in the colonies; and thus the brunt of
the defence was to fall upon the stalwart but untrained militia of the
countryside.
[Illustration: 63. THE SERVICE MEDAL, CANADA, 1866-70.]
The tide of invasion advanced north against Canada from the United
States. For three years, from 1812 to 1815, the contest went on. Our
French Canadians again bravely took up their arms, and this time,
under the new three-crossed Jack, again drove the United States
invaders back, making the names of Chateauguay and Chrystler's Farm
ring down through history in token of the victories which they won
beneath it in defence of their Canadian liberties and homes. So, too,
their English-speaking brothers of Upper Canada won equal victories
for this same Union Jack. At Mackinac, Captain Roberts,[148] with his
Indians and Canadian voyageurs, raised it above the captured American
fort. At the capitulation of Fort Detroit to Brock and Tecumseh, the
American soldiers laid down their arms before it, and all Michigan was
surrendered. At Queenston Heights, under the glorious Brock, at Stoney
Creek and Beaver Dams, Niagara and Lundy's Lane, the American invader
was sent in quick retreat from Canadian soil, and at the conclusion of
the three years' war, after all the varying fluctuations in reverse and
success between the contending forces, there was, at its end, not a
foot of Canada, occupied or sullied by the foot of the foreign foe.
[148] An ancestor of Lord Roberts of Kandahar and Pretoria.
Thus all along their frontier shores, from Mackinac to far St. John,
the Canadians stood shoulder to shoulder in one bold, united line, and
held the larger half of North America for the British crown.
Again, when Fenian hordes and restless soldiers, who had been disbanded
from the armies of the American Civil War, were assembled and drilled
under the protection of the United States, and launched in raids
against Canadian homes, the Canadian volunteers mustered around their
Union Jack, and along the Niagara frontier, in 1866, and at Eccles
Hill, in the Province of Quebec, in 1870, again drove the southern
invader back, and held their native soil inviolate beneath its
three-crossed folds.
"Since when has a Southerner placed his heel
On the men of the northern zone?
"Shall the mothers that bore us bow the head
And blush for degenerate sons?
Are the patriot fires gone out and dead?
Ho! brothers, stand to the guns!
Let the flag be nailed to the mast,
Defying the coming blast!
For Canada's sons are true as steel,
Their metal is muscle and bone,
The Southerner never shall place his heel
On the men of the northern zone.
"Oh, we are the men of the northern zone,
Where the maples their branches toss;
And the Great Bear rides in his state alone,
Afar from the Southern Cross.
Our people shall aye be free,
They never shall bend the knee,
For this is the land of the true and leal,
Where freedom is bred in the bone--
The Southerner never shall place his heel
On the men of the northern zone."[149]
[149] Kernighan ("The Khan"): "The Men of the Northern Zone."
Such was the British patriotism of which the flag was the Union signal,
and now another parliamentary union is to be included in the career of
the Union Jack in Canada.
Up to 1867 the Eastern British Provinces in North America had remained
under separate local governments, such as had been established in the
previous century; but in this year Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Upper
and Lower Canada were all united in the one "Dominion" of Canada, then
extending only as far as Lake Superior. This "Act of Confederation" was
passed in London, at Westminster, by the Parliament of Great Britain,
and thus again the Union Parliament of the Union Jack was parent to
a new Union Parliament established in united Canada. Each Province
continues to have its own "Provincial Assembly," in which legislation
is conducted on matters pertaining to its own local or home rule, but
all general powers are centred in the Dominion Parliament of Canada.
Hitherto the spirit of the flag had been solely that of union with
the Motherland; thereafter it had an added and local meaning, for it
became also the symbol of Canadian union, the patriot flag of the new
daughter nation which had thus been brought into existence in the outer
British American realm. Inspired by this union, the older Provinces
thus combined began to extend their borders, and soon Manitoba and the
Hudson Bay Territories of the central prairies[150] were added, in 1869,
and British Columbia joined in 1871, followed by Prince Edward Island
in 1873, to make the enlarged Dominion of Canada, now stretching across
the continent of America from sea to sea.
[150] Out of a part of these the Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan
were created in 1905.
[Illustration: 64. THE NORTH-WEST CANADA MEDAL.]
Difficulties, of course, were met in this consolidating of the
territories, but the sign of Union was flying from the flagstaff, and
the new-born patriotism surmounted them all. In March, 1885, when the
spirit of discontent arose among the Metis of the North-West, and a
rebellion broke out, the courage of the united Canadians was aroused
with electric flash, and the volunteer battalions from the Maritime
Atlantic shores, from French-speaking Quebec, from the great Ontario
lakes, and from all parts of the Dominion, vied with one another in
bearing the privations of forced marches across the frozen lakes, or
over the pathless prairies, to reach the scene of action, and join in
maintaining the supremacy of their native union. The rebellion was
quickly suppressed; but the events at Fish Creek, Batoche and on the
banks of the Saskatchewan left gaps in the loyal ranks.
"Not in the quiet churchyard, near those who loved them best,
But by the wild Saskatchewan we laid them to their rest;
A simple soldier's funeral in that lonely spot was theirs,
Made consecrate and holy by a nation's tears and prayers.
Their requiem, the music of the river's singing tide;
Their funeral wreaths, the wild flowers that grew on every side;
Their monument, undying praise from each Canadian heart
That hears how, for their country's sake, they nobly bore their part."
Three medals[151] have been granted by their sovereign to commemorate the
gallantry of the Canadians who thus fought beneath the Union Jack: In
1812-15, for union with the Motherland (62); in 1866-70, for service in
defence of their country during the Fenian raids (63); and in 1885, for
union within Canada itself (64). Such are some of the events which have
given rise to the stirring patriotism evinced by Canadians for their
national flag, and which have kept aflame the passionate fervour of
their loyalty not only at home, but when they joined hands in 1900 with
their brothers-in-arms from British Isles and Colonies to fight and die
for union in South Africa.
[151] See Appendix C--"Canadian War Medals."
Four times within the century--in 1775, 1812, 1866, and 1870--have
Canadians raised their Union Jack in defence of home and native land,
and once, in 1885, for maintenance of union within themselves.
As Canadians see it waving above their school-houses, and on the ships,
or over their homes, they read in the crosses the stories that they
tell, and remember that the deep red tones in its folds have been
freshened and coloured by the heart-blood of Canada's sons, poured out
for it in ungrudging loyalty on their own loved soil. The sons of the
parent nations have carried it in many a far-off strife, but in their
own island homes, "compassed by the inviolate sea," they sleep secure,
and never have had to fight beneath it in defence of native land. It
is in this regard that Canadians can cherish this flag even more than
they who first carried it, and their sons may now rightly wear it as
their very own, for the Union Jack is so bound up with love of country,
defence of home, and all that is glorious in Canada's history, that it
is the union flag of Canada itself.
CHAPTER XXIII.
_THE FLAG OF FREEDOM._
These stories of martial and constitutional advance are not all the
story that this Union Jack tells. There is something more than mere
valorous devotion which should be aroused in the expression of loyalty
for a flag. Such a devotion might be found even under a despot's sway,
for racial and reckless valour may, with some, take the place of
thoughtful allegiance.
The story of an ideal flag should declare a supreme idea, an idea
which has been so well expressed as being the "divine right of liberty
in man. Not lawlessness, not license, but organized institutional
liberty--liberty through law, and law for liberty."[152]
[152] Henry Ward Beecher.
When a flag records, by the unmistakable story of its life, how this
desired freedom has been not simply alleged, but granted in actual fact
to all who have reached the soil of its dominion, and, further, tells
how the amplest dream of self-government is realized by those who dwell
beneath its sway, then, indeed, is that flag to be cherished with the
most passionate devotion, and valued in the most critical estimation.
Such a flag becomes an inspiration not only to the heart, but to the
mind, and men may well be willing to risk their all, and life itself,
for the maintenance of its unsullied honour. Such a flag is the Union
Jack in Canada.
This three-crossed Jack in Canada is not only the national ensign of
the British race, but it is more, for Canadians have made it the real
"flag of freedom in America."
It is the proudest ascription of the Union Jack of the Empire that
"Though it may sink o'er a shot-torn wreck,
It never flies over a slave."
This fact is true to-day of the Jack throughout all the British
territories, but it has not always been so, and we may, with much
interest, trace the condition of the slave under the flag in Great
Britain, in the Colonies, in the United States, and in Canada.
It has been the happy lot of the Motherland, the cradle of the
liberties of the earth, that freedom has been enjoyed for many
centuries upon her own home soil; but even there legal doubts existed
until 1772 about the position of persons who, being slaves in other
lands, had reached her shores, when the notable decision of Lord
Mansfield declared that, "_When a slave has landed on the soil of the
British Isles that slave is free_." Although this legal definition
had been reached, the abolition, by statute, of slavery under the
Union Jack was not enacted by the British Parliament until 1811; and
even after that, as this Act did not apply outside the British Isles,
slavery continued in the outer realms to such an extent that in 1820
there were no fewer than 340,000 slaves under British rule in the
Island of Jamaica alone.
At last, in 1833, the glorious _Act of Emancipation_ was passed by the
British Parliament, and the same freedom which had existed on the soil
of the parent kingdom was extended to all races who lived anywhere
under the Union Jack. The people of the parent isles gave further proof
that this was done, not solely in the pursuit of an ideal, but out of
real good-will, for they were not content with proclaiming freedom to
the slave, but themselves purchased his emancipation by paying one
hundred million dollars to his owners in those colonies in which, up to
that time, slavery had existed with their consent. In the true spirit
of British fair-play they thus scouted the idea of exercising their own
compassion and good-will at any other person's expense.
Number Indemnity
of Slaves. paid.
[153]Jamaica 311,700 £6,152,000
Barbadoes 83,000 1,721,000
Trinidad 22,300 1,039,000
Antigua, etc. 172,093 3,421,000
Guiana 84,900 4,297,000
Mauritius 68,600 2,113,000
Cape of Good Hope 38,400 1,247,000
------- -----------
Total 780,993 £20,000,000
Such has been the story of freedom under the Union Jack on the other
continents. Let us see how its history compares with that of other
flags on the continent of America.
[153] Extract from Dictionary of Statistics, p. 541, "Abolition of
Slavery."
The stories of the flags of Mexico and the republics of South America
are so changing and unsettled that they may not be counted in the
consideration, and the flag of Spain in Cuba never became an exponent
of freedom. The sole competitor for the title of "the flag of the free"
is the Stars and Stripes of the United States of North America.
The thirteen colonies of North America were, at the time of Lord
Mansfield's decision in 1772, colonies of the British crown, and moved,
no doubt, by a desire to emulate their brothers in Great Britain, and
following their example, the representatives of the colonies met at
Philadelphia, on 27th September, 1774, and in Continental Congress
"declared against the slave-trade, and forbade any further importation
of slaves into British America." Being supporters of the Union Jack,
and following its ideals, they made, as Britons, a first step in the
right direction, but no freedom was given to those already in the
country.
It was, no doubt, under the influence of this spirit of British
freedom, and with British hearts, that, when they were separating
from their British allegiance, they stated in their Declaration of
Independence (4th July, 1776):
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness."
Yet at the very time when this claim was made, that all men were born
equal, well-nigh a million blacks were held in these same States in
bondage,[154] and this sounding declaration of "liberty" did not bring
freedom to a single slave.
[154] In 1780 there were 1,191,000 slaves in the United States, and as
late as 1860 more than 4,000,000.
Indeed, when, eleven years afterwards, in 1787, the representatives
of the thirteen States met[155] in federal convention, and adopted the
"Constitution of the United States," the existence of slavery under the
Stars and Stripes was recognized and its continuance guaranteed.
[155] 25th May, 1787, at Philadelphia.
The framers of the constitution were evidently conscious of the
fact that the statements of their "declaration" were not in actual
accordance with their actions, and therefore the provisions in their
"constitution" concerning slavery were stated in a veiled and secret
form, the words "slave" and "slavery" being carefully excluded. In
this way the clauses of the American constitution have a different
interpretation from that which their wording would apparently convey,
for the existence of one class of their population in slavery was duly
recognized, although not specifically mentioned.
The leaven of English freedom evinced in 1774 had continued to work
among some of the States, even after their separation from the Crown,
and emancipation had been begun in Vermont in 1777, in Pennsylvania in
1780, and was impending in some of the others, but had by no means been
accepted in all.[156]
[156] Emancipation was effected in New Jersey in 1804; New York, 1827.
In arranging the proportionate representation of the several States
in the union congress it became necessary to apportion the number of
members of congress to be elected by each State, and in arranging this
representation a concession was made to the slave-owning States whereby
their slaves were to be recognized in estimating the number of their
population.
The Article[157] enacts:
"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States which
may be included within this union according to their respective
numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of
free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years,
and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons."
[157] Article I., Section 2, Constitution of United States, 1787.
By the apparently simple but very pregnant words, "all other persons,"
of whom three-fifths were to be added, were meant the slaves, who,
although they were not themselves accorded any citizenship or
right to vote, were thus counted in determining the number of the
representatives who were to be accredited to and elected by the State
in which they were held in slavery.
As slavery was, in 1787, legal in some of the States and illegal in
others, it also became necessary, in order to gain the acceptance of
the union by the slave-owning States, that provision should be made for
the legal return to their owners of any slaves who might escape from a
slave-owning to a free State, and a clause guaranteeing the rendition
of fugitive slaves was therefore embodied in the constitution. It was
enacted:
"No person held to service or labour in one State--under the laws
thereof--escaping to another shall, in consequence of any law or
regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but
shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service of
labour may be due."[158]
[158] Article IV., Section 2, Constitution of United States, 1787.
It is stated on the authority of Madison,[159] "the father of the
constitution," that the words used in each case in the original drafts
of these clauses was "servitude," but it was afterwards changed to
"service."
[159] James Madison, subsequently twice President of the United States,
1809 and 1813.
The expulsion of the words, although it might appear better to the eye,
did not alter the fact that the whole of the States, which then framed
their Union, although they did not all practise slavery, yet every one
of them then consented to its perpetuation. Thus it came that slavery
existed legally under the Stars and Stripes from 1787 until 1865, when
happily it was terminated[160] by the proclamation of Lincoln and the
constitutional amendment.
[160] Constitutional amendment abolishing slavery, January 31st, 1865.
Such is the story of the slave's "freedom" under the national flag of
the United States.
We may now turn to the story of his freedom under the Union Jack in
Canada.
We have seen that slavery, excepting on the soil of Great Britain, was
not abolished in all other parts of the British Empire until 1833, and
not in the United States until 1865. In 1792, long before either of
these dates, self-government had been granted to Canada, and, under
the two-crossed Jack, at the first meetings which were held by the
parliament in Upper Canada, slavery was abolished on July 9th, 1793.[161]
This was before our present Union Jack came into existence, so that in
Canada alone, of all the outer lands over which this flag of 1801 has
ever been raised, beginning from the very day on which it first was
displayed, this three-crossed Jack has always, as in the Motherland,
proclaimed freedom to the slave.
[161] There were a few isolated instances of slaves who continued for
a short time in the possession of their previous owners, but after
this date any slave who came to the country, and every child born of
coloured parents, was free.
Canadians in this way feel added honour in the flag, and that it is
more particularly their own; for on the continent of America, whether
he came from the British West Indies, from the southern continent, from
Cuba, or the United States, in all of which he was still the chattel of
his owner, so soon as the slave reached the soil of Canada, and came
under the colours of our Union Jack, that moment he was free.
The deep significance which this early law of Canada had given
to the flag has often been attested by coloured men before their
fellow-citizens and the world, and particularly by Frederick Douglas,
the great coloured orator of the United States. While dilating upon the
great advantage which had come to his own people since freedom had at
last been granted to them in the United States, he would nevertheless
contrast their condition with that existing in the neighbouring
Canadian land, where the black child sits in the public schools by
the side of his little white brother, and travels with him in the
same carriage on the trains, and where the law is administered with
impartiality for both white and black alike.[162]
[162] Speaking in the Exposition Hall, at the great Columbian
Exhibition, Chicago, on August 25th, 1893, Douglas said of his people:
"To-day we number 8,000,000 (coloured) people in the United States.
To-day a desperate effort is being made to blacken the character of the
negro and to brand him as a moral monster. In fourteen States of this
Union wild mobs have taken the place of the law. They hang, shoot and
burn men of my race without law and without right."
In telling words he would revert to the time "when there was but one
flag in America under which the fugitive slave could be secure. When
the slave had escaped from the control of his owner, and was making
his way through the intervening States to the free land of the north,
whether he gained the summit of the highest mountains or hid in the
recesses of the deepest valleys, the fugitive could find no safe
resting place. If he mingled in the teeming throngs of their busiest
cities, he feared detection; if he sought solitude on their widest
prairies, beneath the silent stars, he was in dread of being tracked;
not until he had sighted the red-crossed Jack, and, crossing the
northern lakes, had touched the strand of Canada's shore, could the
slave fall upon his knees and know that at last he was free."
Thus pure, unsullied in its life-story, this three-crossed Union Jack
of Canada is the only flag on the continent of America which has always
and ever been the "flag of freedom," a flag under which all men, as
their birthright, have been born equal and free.
Canadians may well, therefore, be proud of their flag, for what truer
glory can be claimed for any other flag--than this, which spells out
FREEDOM in its every fold?
CHAPTER XXXIV.
_THE FLAG OF LIBERTY._
There is yet the other ideal phase in which the Union Jack in the outer
realms of the Empire and in Canada reigns supreme--that of "liberty
to the people." The inborn hope which buds and blossoms in the hearts
of a growing people as their energies evolve and their circumstances
advance, finds its fruitage in the possession of mastery over their own
homes, and thus a nation's desire for liberty is concentrated in the
absorbing dream of self-government.
It was this spirit which spoke in the old English colonies in America
when they averred, in their address to King George III., that they were
"being degraded from the pre-eminent rank of _English_ freemen." The
condition of a citizen in the old homeland was their highest ideal of
the liberties of a people, and the only one with which, even in those
times, they considered comparison could worthily be made.
The history of the Union Jack in the parent land has been connected, as
we have seen, not solely with national allegiance, but yet more with
parliamentary government; and its several parts have been combined in
union to evidence the advent of union under representative institutions.
Such, too, has been the history of its expansion among the great
groups of colonies of the British Empire which dot the outer world, a
development of true democratic government which can best be realized by
a comparison between the forms of government in Canada and that in the
United States.
The creation of the constitution of England was not confined to a
single date, nor was it the product of the men of a single period;
its growth has been spread, like that of its flag, over century after
century, as each successive phase of the ideal dream has become
harmonized with the existing requirements of the day. Formed largely
upon usage and upon precedent, it reflects the current views of the
people, and, therefore, has never been restricted to invariable forms
of words.
There are milestones such as Magna Charta, the Petition of Rights, the
Habeas Corpus Act, the Act of Settlement, and the other landmarks which
measure the way towards constitutional liberty; but as with the Union
Jack, so, too, with the liberties of the British form of government,
the story of the combinations is not the record of a revolution, but
the gradual process of a reasoning evolution.
When, at the end of the eighteenth century, our neighbours in the
United States framed their new constitution, they based it on the
information and usages of that day when responsible government was
almost unknown. Creating an elective King under the name of President,
they endowed him with distinct and executive powers, which, as then,
he still exercises, largely of his own private will, or only in
consultation with a Cabinet which is nominated by and is responsible
only to himself, whose members are not members of the House of
Representatives, nor are they elected by the people.
How entirely he acts of his own motion, without the instructions or
the initiation of Congress, was only too evidently shown in the recent
Venezuela-Guiana incident,[163] when President Cleveland's message was
promulgated with all the individual vehemence of an autocrat, and if it
had not been for the temperate forbearance of the British Cabinet, war
would have resulted.
[163] 1896.
The President of the United States, having been elected for a definite
term of years, represents the opinion which prevailed at the time of
his election; and no matter how much the opinion of the nation may
change in the interval, or his policy be objected to, he continues to
rule until his allotted term of four years shall have expired, even
though he and his Cabinet be in absolute conflict with the expressed
will of the people, as indicated in the elections which are constantly
in progress.[164]
[164] In the United States the members of the Senate are elected by the
Legislatures of the States, one for each State, and sit for six years.
The members of the House of Representatives are elected by popular vote
of the electors, the number for each State being determined by its
proportional population, and each sits for a fixed term of two years.
It is true there are provisions in the constitution for checking his
course, or for his impeachment, but in cases in which this has been
attempted to be enforced the trial has lasted longer than his term.
His appointment as chief of the nation having been the result of an
election contest, the President represents not the whole people, but
only the political party which happened to be in the majority at the
time of his election.
Being, then, the elected representative of a definite political party,
his acts are expected by those who have elected him to be used towards
continuing their party in power, and thus the person from time to
time holding the position of President becomes a distinct vehicle for
the exercise of party political warfare instead of being an impartial
administrator.
His veto being thus supreme, all legislation has to be conducted with
a view to what will meet, or will not meet, the personal views of the
President, as has been most plainly shown in the framing of Tariffs for
Customs and Taxation.
This written constitution of the United States, admirable though it
may have been thought at the time, and an improvement upon the then
existing state of things, was born over a century ago, in the times of
autocratic government, and though thus out of date, it has remained
ever since practically unchanged; in fact, with the exception of the
amendment respecting slavery, it is identically the same.
During this same hundred years, as civilization has advanced, education
enlightened the masses, intelligence expanded among the people, and
experience been gained, there has grown up that marvellous form of
self-government under which we Canadians and our brother colonists
live--the British Constitutional Monarchy. In this British Empire,
in the colonial parliaments, as in the Imperial Parliament, the King
or Sovereign represents all the people, not a party, and is the
permanent chairman of the nation. The will of Parliament, tempered by
his continued counsel, is his will. The ministers of the Crown, who,
with the Premier as their head, form the Executive, are elected by the
people, and sit in the same House of Commons with the other elected
representatives. Debating with them on the issues of the day, they
are responsible to their fellow-members for the measures which they
introduce;[165] and when they fail to carry these measures, and cease to
secure the support of the majority of the people's representatives, as
then sitting in Parliament, the ministry must resign, and is succeeded
at the call of the sovereign, or in a self-governed Dominion, of the
Governor-General, by another Cabinet, which shall represent that
majority; or, should the matter be considered of sufficient importance,
the whole Parliament is forthwith dissolved by the Sovereign, or his
representative, as the neutral and unbiased centre of impartial power.
All the members return for re-election by their constituencies, and
the question at issue is quickly submitted for decision by the ballots
of the electors. Thus the acts of the Premier or chief minister, and
of his Cabinet, and also of the party of which he is leader, and the
whole Parliament, are at once subject to the opinion of the people
without waiting for the completion of their term.[166]
[165] No Bill for the expenditure of any money or for a change in
taxation can be introduced except by a member of the Cabinet.
[166] The life of a Parliament in Canada is limited to five years,
and, unless it has been dissolved in the interval, must return for
re-election at the end of that term. An entire new parliament can be
re-elected any time in about six weeks.
Further, indeed, than this, if a member of the Cabinet should die or
resign during the term of any parliament his successor must, upon his
appointment, return to his individual constituency and be re-elected,
so that the opinion of the people may be taken upon the general policy
of the Cabinet and upon his own special fitness for his appointment.
The Governor-General of Canada, as also the governors in the other
self-governed colonies, does not, as so many of the people of the
United States imagine, govern the country, acting with absolute power
under the direction of the Government of Great Britain; for in every
way, except for the purposes of imperial advice and the declaration of
war, Canada is practically an Independent Dominion, as sings the empire
poet,[167]
"Daughter am I in my mother's home,
But mistress in my own."
[167] Rudyard Kipling.
By virtue of his office, a Governor-General represents the person of
the sovereign of the empire in the local government in his portion
of the British realm, and is the connecting link between the mother
parliament in Great Britain and the parliament in the colony. He can
influence but does not direct, he can advise but does not determine,
for as has been well said of the British Monarchy: "Le Roi regne mais
ne gouverne pas"--The King reigns, but does not govern. As in the
parent kingdom the Sovereign is secured in impartiality by the grace
of birth, so in the daughter realm the Governor-General is dissociated
from all local entanglements or party feelings by virtue of being
selected for his particular abilities and appointed from another
portion of the Empire by the central source of honour and power. The
distinctive flag (65) of the Governor-General of Canada is the "Union
Jack," having on its centre the arms of Canada, surrounded by a wreath
of maple leaves, the whole being surmounted by a royal crown.
[Illustration: 65. FLAG OF THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF CANADA.]
The flag of the governor or administrator in all other British colonies
and dependencies is also the Union Jack, having upon it the arms or
badge of the colony on a white shield, surrounded by a green garland of
laurel leaves, surmounted by a crown.
In 1870, as a special honour, the imperial sanction was given to Canada
to place a garland of maple leaves--its national emblem[168]--instead of
the laurel upon the flag of its Governor-General.
[168] Appendix A.--"The Maple Leaf Emblem."
The Lieutenant-Governors of the Provinces of Canada also wear the Union
Jack as their distinctive flag, bearing upon it the arms of their
respective Provinces, surrounded by a similar garland of maple leaves;
but as they are appointed by the Government of the Dominion, and not by
the King, the garland is not surmounted by a crown (66).
[Illustration: 66. FLAG OF THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF QUEBEC.]
In this governor-general's flag, with its royal crown, its maple
leaves, and Canadian coat-of-arms, as also in the lieutenant-governors'
flags, backed up by the Union Jack, is symbolized the existence of
British constitutional government in Canada. In this the reigning King
or Queen is the whole Canadian people, and the Premier and his Cabinet
are the representatives of the political party for the time being in
power.[169] The Cabinet is responsible to Parliament for the policy which
they introduce, and for which they, as well as all the other members of
the Parliament, are immediately answerable to the electors, who are the
original source of their power.
[169] Legal documents issued under legislation in Canada are issued
in the name of the "King," as representing the whole people, as in
the United States the expression is in the name of "The people of the
United States."
This modern flexible system of responsible government in Canada, so
closely in touch with the people, in contrast with the irresponsible
and rigid system in the United States, was neatly brought out by Lord
Dufferin during his term as Governor-General of Canada, in a speech he
delivered at Toronto, in 1874, after his visit to Chicago:
"More than once," said he, "I was addressed with the playful
suggestion that Canada should unite her fortunes with those of the
great Republic. (Laughter.) To these invitations I invariably replied
by acquainting them that in Canada we were essentially a democratic
people--great laughter--that nothing would content us unless the
popular will could exercise an immediate and complete control over the
executive of the country--renewed laughter--that the ministers who
conducted the government were but a committee of Parliament, which was
in itself an emanation from the constituencies--loud applause--and
that no Canadian would be able to breathe freely if he thought the
persons administering the affairs of the country were removed beyond
the supervision and contact of our legislative assemblies. (Cheers.)"
It is, then, easily seen why Canadians and our brother Britons love
their Union Jack. It is the signal of parliamentary government by
British constitutional principles. It represents progress and modern
ideas--the rule of the people, for the people, by the people, through
their unbiased King; and, therefore, it is the evidence of their
affectionate and loyal allegiance to that monarchy and system of
government under whose benign sway the colonies have advanced, and
Canada, above all other countries on the continent of America, is the
land of the self-governed and the free.
These are the liberties which the Union Jack signals in all parts of
the British Empire to all the varied nations, with varied tongues,
which have come beneath its sway. It is the consciousness of such
liberty and the enjoyment of such equal rights that impelled Canada,
Australia, New Zealand and all the colonies of the empire to send their
sons to the field of contest in South Africa as a free-will offering
to defend their fellow-men and to spread the blessings of Liberty and
Freedom to the peoples of that continent.
From this has come that most recent acknowledgment of its incomparable
liberties that the peoples of South Africa, the Boers of Dutch and
French descent, so recently warring with their British neighbours of
Cape Colony and Natal, have now[170] united together and, meeting as
brothers, have raised it as the union sign of their united liberty in
the fourth[171] daughter Parliament of the Britains beyond the seas in
our united empire.
[170] Confederation Act, South Africa, 1909.
[171] Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa.
The world over it is the free-will Flag of Liberty.
CHAPTER XXV.
_THE UNION JACK AS A SINGLE FLAG._
This Union Jack, so spread abroad, is in its single form a declaration
and an evidence of British nationality, and is raised every day from
sunrise to sunset over every one of the garrisons of the British
peoples which surround the world. It is the flag which is raised and
saluted whenever formal possession of any new territory is taken
in the name of the Sovereign of Great Britain, and was thus raised
at Khartoum, Bloemfontein, and Pretoria, to signify the success of
the British arms and the accession of British rule, just as its
predecessors had been in Newfoundland, on the shores of America, and
all other colonies and conquests around the seas when each was first
occupied.
Some considerable discussions have taken place as to whether it should
be called the "Union Jack" or the "Union Flag."
This latter is the name usually given in the Official Regulations
respecting the official use of a three-crossed flag of this
description. There is in the navy the rank of "Admiral of the Fleet,"
corresponding to the rank of Field Marshal in the army. The Admiralty
Regulations state that the proper flag of an Admiral of the Fleet is
the "Union Flag," to be worn at the top masthead, and an Admiralty
memorandum further states: "A Jack is a flag to be flown only on the
'Jack' staff, _i.e._, a staff on the bowsprit or forepart of the ship."
The difference in name of the same flag when carried on a ship would
appear to indicate a difference in size appropriate to the different
positions.
In the order in Council[172] directing what flags are to be used by
diplomatic and consular officers, it is stated: "The flag to be used by
Her Majesty's consular officers ashore to distinguish their residences
is the Union flag."
[172] Order in Council, 7th August, 1869.
There is, however, another official name of this flag given in official
instructions which must be noticed.
The Military Regulations (1899) order to be displayed afloat,
by generals and other military officers commanding stations, as
their distinguishing flags, "the Union, bearing in the centre as
a distinguishing mark the Royal Initials, surrounded by a garland
on a blue shield and surmounted by a crown." For Commissioners and
Consuls-general, "the Union, with the Royal Arms in the centre, on a
white shield, surrounded by a green garland."
This same name "Union" is also given in directions respecting this flag
when included as a part of a larger flag.
The Admiralty Instructions directing what Ensign is to be worn by all
ships of the Royal Navy in commission state that they shall "bear a
White Ensign with the Red St. George's cross, and the Union in the
upper canton."
The Foreign Office Regulations direct that "consular officers when
embarked in boats or other vessels shall use the Blue Ensign with the
Royal Arms in the centre of the fly of the flag, that is, in the centre
of that between the Union and the end of the flag."
Many other instances could be quoted, but these are typical and
sufficient.
Three names are used--the "Union," "Union Flag," and "Union Jack," all
describing the same flag.
It is interesting to note the transition of the names. Under Charles
I., in 1634, it was described as "the Union Flagge"; under Charles
II., in 1663, "His Majesty's Jack, commonly called the Union Jack."
The usage of the name Jack had thus early and largely spread, and it
is further shown by a letter written by Burchett, the Secretary of the
Admiralty, in 1695, regarding the flag carried by the Earl of Pembroke
in the expedition against Cadiz, in which he says: "There was some
doubt as to whether his Lordship should have borne at the maintop
masthead the Royal Standard of England or the Union, or, more properly
speaking in maritime phrase, the Jack flag commonly worn by those
who have under the Lord High Admiral been appointed Admirals of the
Fleet."[173]
[173] Admiral Eardley Wilmot: "Our Flags."
It is not surprising, therefore, that under Queen Anne, in 1707, it is
again described as "Our Jack, commonly called the Union Jack."
This name of the flag had, in fact, become so general that it had
affectionately passed onward to give its name to the gallant sailors
who bore it, as is instanced in nautical ballads:
"There's a sweet little cherub that sits up aloft,
To keep watch for the life of poor Jack."[174]
[174] Dibdin, 1755.
Used thus for centuries by sailors in song and on shore, although the
name given in the proclamation of George III., 1801, was the "Union
Flagge," the ancient and loving name of Union Jack has always prevailed
among its upholders.
In the issue of official instructions there is propriety and, perhaps,
necessity for using the different names, but they all contain the
dominant name of "_Union_," and describe the same flag in its single
form--the two-crossed or, in its succession, three-crossed Jack of
united nationality.
There is another and distinctive use of the Union Jack. Surrounded by a
white border of one-fifth of its width, it becomes a "Pilot Jack," and
in this form becomes the official signal for a pilot, and is so used on
all British ships, merchantmen as well as men-of-war, in all parts of
the world. This white-bordered Jack is only appropriately to be used
for this special signal service.