the cause of England, but he is now willing to sit at the Council board in discussing the cause of England." As to the abstract right and privilege of tendering advice and making representations to the British Government he was quite in accord with Mr. Bourassa. He also agreed with the conclusion that there was no necessity of sending further troops to South Africa-but for a different reason-because the war was over. What remained was merely a guerilla contest. As to the enlistment of recruits for the Constabulary, he was of a different opinion. "If there are men in Canada who I care not for what motive, whether high or low, whether dignified or undignified, whether because they desire to get a living, or from a spirit of adventure, or from the nobler impulse of fighting for their Sovereign --wish to take service in the South African Constabulary, on what principle should a Canadian Government interfere to prevent their liberty being so exercised?" They were British subjects with the right and liberty of serving the King. Upon the wider and more important proposal to urge the British Government to grant independence to the late Republics, he took direct issue with the motion and the speaker. He deprecated the unfairness and injustice of the speech toward the British Government, and denounced the policy of Messrs. Kruger and Steyn which had been responsible for the ruined farms, the closed mines, the impoverished people and the untold miseries of the war. "These men appealed to the God of battles, and the God of battles has pronounced against them. They invaded British territory, their territory was invaded in turn, and it was annexed to the British domain in consequence of the terrible logic of war." He traced the political history and origin of the war, and laid special stress upon the later Boer efforts to annex British soil and their issue of proclamations to that effect. He denied that the British Government was, in any way, responsible for the struggle, and quoted letters written by Chief Justice de Villiers indicative of Boer aggressions and local tyranny. In the name of humanity and civilization, there was but one future for South Africa, and that was in a great Confederation of its countries under the British flag. The Dutch had been conquered, but "I pledge my reputation and my name as a British subject that if they have lost their independence, they have not lost their liberty."

Mr. John Charlton expressed extreme regret at the assertions of Mr. Bourassa regarding the conduct of British troops at the front. "I believe the conduct of the British troops in South Africa has been marked in the highest degree by kindliness, by abstaining from outrage and violence and, so far as the laws and the necessities of war would permit, by respecting the rights of combatants and the inhabitants of the country. As to the popular feeling concerning the contest, both here and in England, he believed that effusive enthusiasm had been replaced to some extent by grim determination. The result would be the same. So far as the future was concerned, Great Britain intended to give the conquered Republics the same liberties and rights as were accorded British subjects here in Canada.

But the only way to bring this about now was by the subjugation of the Afrikander element, once for all, and the teaching of the fact that British equality and liberty can only be obtained by the total cessation of disloyalty and hostile combinations of racial aggression. Mr. Charlton then traced at length the history of South Africa and the origin of the war, and concluded by declaring that "it is a matter of the most vital importance to Canada that England and all her interests shall be maintained inviolate. The integrity or the glory of this Empire is our individual interest. We have a sentimental interest, but speaking from the low standpoint of material interest alone, we cannot afford to see Britain's career in Africa, or in any other part of the globe, hampered or made to fall."

Lieut.-Col. S. Hughes followed in a stirring defence of British troops in South Africa. From personal experience he denounced the falsehoods written and spoken about the conduct of the soldiers, and quoted several cases of the most obvious fabrication. He spoke of the difficulties faced by the British armies, and of the 95,000 Boers in the field entrenched behind natural fortresses and kopjes which would not have made 600,000 men more than a fair number for the attacking forces. Little disasters did occur, as will occur in any war, but in the history of the world the qualities shown by the British army in South Africa have never been exceeded. The fighting

qualities of the British soldier and the general success of the British arms have never been surpassed, when we consider the difficulties under which the troops laboured." The speaker declared that very many of the Boers were loyal, and some had fought manfully for the British flag in South Africa. He concluded by stating that Mr. Bourassa would command the respect of the House by retracting the “foul slanders" which he had cast upon the British soldiers at the front. After brief speeches by Mr. Jabel Robinson and Mr. R. L. Borden, the Resolution was voted down by 144 to 3-the latter being Messrs. Henri Bourassa, Charles Angers and Dominique Monet. On April 15th, a discussion took place upon the condition of the Militia, and the Hon. William Ross took occasion to deprecate any feeling of overweening pride in Canada's contribution to the war. "We all rejoice at what has been achieved by the small number of officers and men whom we have sent out there. They have shown what our military men can do in comparison with those of any other country." But it was well to remember how many more troops Australia and New Zealand had contributed than Canada. On March 13th preceding, Canada had 117 men in South Africa and the Australasian Colonies 4,217. Lieut-Col. Hughes took the same line of thought. Out of every ten thousand of population New Zealand sent 27 men to the front, Tasmania 17 and Canada 5. "I also wish to be placed on record as stating that throughout the whole of the South African trouble there were no troops, Imperial or Colonial, who could in any sense surpass those from New Zealand and Australia." Their success was due, he thought, to the individuality of the officers.

In the Senate, on February 11th, the Hon. J. V. Ellis made an

interesting reference to Canadian soldiers who had been at the front. He thought there was more in the matter than defence of the Crown and the Empire, important as that was. "The people saw in the attack which was made upon the authority of Great Britain in South Africa an impeachment of the principles of British liberty itself and they rose, not because they thought there was danger, so much as because it became an undoubted duty to stand by those privileges and to show that we who were born and bred under British authority, we who came here from the British nation, we who enjoyed the benefits of the Canadian constitution and the liberty of Canada, were fully aware of what those blessings were to us and that in whatever part of the world they were assailed by men who owed allegiance to Britain it was our duty to come to the front and to take up arms and stand by the Imperial authority." The Hon. Lyman Melvin Jones followed and expressed his pride in what Canadians had done in South Africa. "There, on the veldt, Canadian-Englishman, FrenchCanadian and Irish-Canadian fought for Queen and country, and this fact ought to indicate to us and tell us in the plainest terms that Canada as a nation, made up as it is of various peoples, is still entirely Canadian and that no question should arise as to the loyalty of any of our people."

Incidents of
Canada's
Participa-
tion in the
War

Various minor incidents of interest occurred during the year in this general connection. In January a letter was published in the papers from Lieut.-Col. G. F. R. Henderson, of the British War Office, stating that he had been appointed the official historian of the war in South Africa and inviting the loan of letters, diaries, sketches and regimental records for the purposes of his work. A letter, dated February 8th, from Sir Charles Tupper, was made public stating that, in connection with the insurance of $1,000,000 effected by himself upon the lives of members of the first Contingent, thirty-one policies of one thousand dollars each had been paid. He gave the names and expressed the desire that any heirs or relatives experiencing difficulty in making good their claims against the Ocean, Accident and Guarantee Company would communicate with him. Late in January Colonel Otter published his official statement of the receipts and expenditures in connection with Red Cross Society contributions to the first Contingent. The total sum received was £1,441, or $7,205, and this had been mainly expended on drugs and additional food, and tobacco and supplies for the men together with additional boots and clothing and grants of money to men left in various hospitals. February 28th, the Hon. Mr. Costigan introduced a measure in Parliament which ultimately became law and which incorporated the Canadian Patriotic Fund with H.E. the Governor-General and Lady Minto, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Sir Charles Tupper, Lord Strathcona and others as the Corporation. The receipts up to the beginning of the year had been $336,000 and the disbursements in the neighbourhood of $30,000. In this connection a Patriotic concert was held at Dawson City, in the Yukon, on February

On

15th, and $1,320 collected for this Fund. A meeting of the Transvaal Fund Committee, of St. John, N.B., was held on March 1st, and the total subscriptions for the first Contingent were announced as $17,557 and for the second as $8,796. Of the total sum the Provincial Government had given $5,000 and the St. John City Council, $2,000. There was a balance of $1,941.

One of the curious occurrences of the year was the discussion which arose out of a letter written to the Ottawa Citizen, on January 2nd, by its Editor, Lieut. E. W. B. Morrison, who had served in the war with the Canadian Artillery. In this letter the writer referred to various incidents which had come under his notice, in the form of a dairy, and the events described gave a rather gloomy colouring to the inevitable evils of war. The Ottawa correspondent of the New York Sun, a well-known anti-British paper, took a number of paragraphs from this letter, garbled them by adding and omitting words so as to make the article a condemnation of British soldiers and the conduct of the war and sent them to his journal. They were duly published on January 7th, copied into the Manchester Guardian and other pro-Boer papers in England and finally incorporated in a leaflet for distribution by the South African Conciliation Committee. The garbled version was first questioned in England and then repudiated by Lient. Morrison. Finally, the Sun investigated the subject, re-published the original letter, apologized to the writer and dismissed its Ottawa correspondent. Various English papers commented upon the subject and the London Chronicle, amongst others, published Lieut. Morrison's denial of the garbled version of his views. For a time the topic was somewhat widely discussed as showing the means and methods by which pro-Boer papers obtained their facts."

Early in January the proposal was made in certain quarters and approved by the London Daily Mail and the Montreal Daily Star that Sir Wilfrid Laurier should be invited to act as a Commissioner to arrange terms of peace with the Boers. As the latter paper put it on January 7th: He is a living exemplification of the absolute freedom and equality of all races and all creeds under the British flag." Nothing came of the matter, however, except an interesting discussion. The Winnipeg Telegram, upon the same date, urged that Parliament should provide pensions for those Canadians who had been incapacitated by wounds or disease in South Africa from earning their living. On August 31st the Vancouver Province paid a notable tribute to Hon. Dr. Borden as Minister of Militia. It declared him to be, in this connection, the most efficient Minister Canada had yet had. He was He was "the only Minister of Militia since Confederation who has been able to carry out Militia reforms and to aid native enthusiasm." The duties of the war had been carried out with "celerity and thoroughness." In March the visit of Mr. Frederick Villiers, the celebrated war correspondent, created considerable attention in Canada and his lectures at Toronto, St. Thomas, Kingston, Guelph, Winnipeg and various other places were heard

with interest. A notable feature was his appreciation of the British hospital system and his earnest defence of Lord Methuen-with whom he had been during his eventful series of battles.

There were a very large number of lectures delivered during the year upon the war. Mr. T. F. Best, who represented the Young Men's Christian Association with the first Contingent; Messrs. Frederick Hamilton and John A. Ewan, who were representatives of the Toronto Globe at the front; Mr. L. W. R. Mulloy, the brave private who lost his sight; Mr. Stanley M. Brown, the Mail and Empire correspondent, and others, spoke throughout the country. On March 11th, Capt. R. K. Barker, who had been so popular and successful an officer of the first Contingent, spoke at Peterborough upon the war as he had seen it. On December 17th, Col. F. L. Lessard, C.B., addressed the Canadian Military Institute in Toronto on the lessons of the war as he understood them. He deprecated the tendency to decry discipline and training which was now prevalent. "The training of the future should combine the individuality shown by the Boers and the Colonials, with the power of acting in units and in the coherent fashion that only good training could produce." Obedience was still necessary, but to it should be added the power of thinking. He believed that the system of Mounted Infantry should be established in Canada. "I think our cavalry in Canada should be Mounted Rifles." He praised the British soldier highly, and declared that in spite of mistakes and lack of initiative he had performed many brilliant achievements. What he lacked the great armies of Europe also lacked. "While attached to General French, as well as in command of my own Regiment, I have been fighting with regular troops, and I cannot recollect one instance where regular troops did not come up to all that was expected of them."

Deaths at the Front

The list of Canadian casualties during 1901 were not numerous in comparison with the British list, but they were sufficient to make many a Canadian home sorrowful. Strathcona's Horse lost Privates E. Mackintosh, W. H. Nelles, C. B. Harris, M. Fernie and E. T. Hunter-all from disease. The Canadian Mounted Rifles lost, from the same cause, Troopers L. J. S. Inglis and N. Hughes, and the lamented Lieut. Sutton, who died on his way home on January 6th. Of the 23 men in the South African Constabulary who died or were killed up to October 21st, the names are given elsewhere. The most conspicuous loss was that of Major Howard, who was killed on February 17th. With him in the Canadian Scouts which he had commanded, and who were killed or who died from wounds during the year, were D. J. McGregor, D. B. Hammond, J. A. Paterson, R. J. Northway, F. C. Douglas, F. Davidson and J. Black. The death of Major Howard created wide comment and interest, because of his well-known bravery and his record in the North-West Rebellion of 1885. Originally an American, he had taken the oath of allegiance shortly after his services in the North-West, and had been one of the earliest and most anxious volunteers for South Africa. There his reputation for