.0. 
 
 O^. \'*^^^%, 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 £ lU 
 
 1^ 
 
 2.0 
 
 111= 
 
 U III 1.6 
 
 ^ 
 
 <^ 
 
 /}. 
 
 A 
 
 m 
 
 e". 
 
 ei 
 
 VI 
 
 > 
 
 '> ^) 
 
 *5^ J^ 
 
 V 
 
 /; 
 
 
 / 
 
 (? 
 
 ^ 
 
 / 
 
 M 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICIVIH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Instltut canadien de microreproductions historiqueo 
 
 1980 
 
Ei 
 
 Technical Notes / Notes techniques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 origin.il copy available for filming. Physical 
 features of this copy which may alter any of the 
 images in the reproduction are checked below. 
 
 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couvertures de couleur 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g6ographiques en couleur 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Certains 
 ddfauts susceptibles de nuire 6 la qualitd de la 
 reproduction sont notds ci-dessous. 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Coloured plates/ 
 Planches en couleur 
 
 The 
 poss 
 of th 
 filmi 
 
 The 
 cont 
 or th 
 appi 
 
 The 
 
 film( 
 
 insti 
 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqu6es 
 
 Tight binding (may cause shadows or 
 distortion along interior margin)/ 
 Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou 
 de la distortion le long de la marge 
 int^rieure) 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 Show through/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag6es 
 
 Map 
 in oi 
 upp( 
 bott 
 folic 
 
 □ 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires 
 
 Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques 
 
 n 
 n 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Re\\6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Plates missing/ 
 
 Des planches manquent 
 
 n 
 
 Pagination incorrect/ 
 Erreurs de pagination 
 
 Pages missing/ 
 
 Des pages manquent 
 
 Maps missing/ 
 
 Des cartes g^ographiques manquent 
 
 V 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever 
 possible, these have been omitted from filming. 
 
The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6x6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de I'exemplaire filmd, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall 
 contain the symbol -♦►(meaning CONTINUED"), 
 or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever 
 applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la der- 
 nidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: 
 le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole 
 V signifie "FIN". 
 
 The original copy was borrowed from, and 
 filmed with, the kind consent of the following 
 institution: 
 
 Library of the Public 
 
 Archives of Canada 
 
 Maps or plates too large to be entirely included 
 in one exposure are filmed beginning in the 
 upper left hand corner, left to right and top to 
 bottom, as many frames as required. The 
 following diagrams illustrate the method: 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grSce d la 
 gdndrositd de I'dtablissement prdteur 
 suivant : 
 
 La bibliothdque des Archives 
 
 publiques du Canada 
 
 Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre 
 reproduites en un seul clichd sont filmdes d 
 partir de Tangle sup^rieure gauche, de gauche 6 
 droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Le diagramme suivant 
 illustre la mdthode : 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
f- 
 
 \ 
 
 DUAL LANGUAGE 
 
 IN CANADA: 
 
 Its Advantages and Disadvantages. 
 
 A LECTURE 
 
 BeUVERKD BEFOnE THE PliOPEBSORS ARD STDDESTS OK TlIE U.iJ VKKSITV 
 
 OF New BKL-NawicK, Fredericpon, MARUir 18, 1896, 
 
 By Reverend S. J. DOUCET, 
 OH Shippegan. 
 
 SAINT JOHN, N. B.. 
 
 EU,I8, ROBKKTSON & Co. — "Gl.OF.fi)" PrE8H. 
 
 1890. 
 
 \. 
 
DUAL LANGUAGE 
 
 IN CANADA: 
 
 Its Advantages and Disadvantages. 
 
 A LECTURE 
 
 Delivered before the Professors and Students of The University 
 OF New Brunswick, Fredericton, March 18, 1896, 
 
 By Reverend S. J. DOUCET, 
 OF Shippegan. 
 
 SAINT JOHN, N. B. 
 
 Ellis, Robertson & Co. — "Globe" Press. 
 
 1896. 
 

 'ysa. 9S 
 
DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA: 
 
 Its Advantages and Disadvantages. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gkntlemen : 
 
 The subject on which I have been invited to lecture on 
 this occasion is: "Dual Language in Canada: its Advantages and 
 Disadvantages." Whether from love of the subject or from any other 
 motive, it is one iii which we cannot help taking a certain amount of 
 interest, for dual language we have in our midst and will likely have for 
 many years to come. Theoretically, it might be desirable to have now 
 only one language in Canada, and it may be a matter of regret that 
 things were allowed to take their present course; practically, it is better 
 to leave things as they are, and cut our garment according to our cloth. 
 
 At first sight, the existence of two languages in the same country 
 seems to be a source of embarrassment and confusion, an obstacle in the 
 path of progress, something incompatible with national greatness and 
 unity. On adjusting our mental spectacles, we learn to take a more 
 correct view of things, so that what without sufficient consideration 
 appears to be an unmixed evil may be accompanied by such redeeming 
 features as to turn it into a positive good. 
 
 Of course, if unity of language were essential to national unity and 
 prosperity, the question would be at once settled, for no amount of 
 advantages could compensate a disadvantage which would be a radical 
 and fatal defect in the organization of a federal state. On this supposi- 
 tion, it would be our duty to strive to obtain this essential requisite, for 
 we are all desirous, as ti'ue and patriotic Canadians ought to be, to see 
 this Canada of ours grow and develop into a great nation, second to none 
 on the face of the earth. Or, if it could be shown that, though not 
 preventive of ultimate success, the disadvantages resulting from the use 
 of both the English and French language in Canada are without corre- 
 sponding advantages, or that they greatly outweigh the latter, then the 
 abolition of one of the two languages should be effected, provided it 
 could be done without prejudice to the rights of any class of people, or 
 without creating difficulties which might prove more serious tlian the evil 
 to be remedied and make the cure worse than the disease. If it had to 
 be done, which would be the best way of doing it? By enacting 
 
1 
 
 DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 prohibitory laws, or adopting otherwise violent measures or odious 
 expedients to coerce two millions of Canadians in that direction? I 
 should think not. This would rather be a good way of showing how not 
 to do it. Tlie language, not much less than the religion of a people, is 
 held by them as sacred and inviolable. Those are to the people at large 
 as family rights are to the family— things that caimot be touched 
 without exciting a righteous zeal in their defense. Persecution under 
 any form or for any purpose generally accomplishes the opposite to what 
 is intended. If one of the two existing languages in Canada has to go, 
 let time bring about the change, and let us all have the patience to wait 
 for the "survival of the fittest." 
 
 The disadvantages which a plurality of languages in the same country 
 is alleged to entail as regards the consolidation and prosperity thereof 
 may be summed up under the following heads : 
 
 1. It is a source of enmity and strife between the integrant parts of a 
 
 nation and is therefore incompatible with national unity and 
 progress; 
 
 2. It necessitates an increased outlay for conveying parliamentary and 
 
 legal proceedings and enactments to the knowledge of the people; 
 It divides the forces and resources necessary to the diffusion of 
 
 education and to the creation of a national literature; 
 It is a drawback on the commercial relations and general business 
 
 intelligence of the country. 
 Before pointing out the corresponding advantages, let us see whether 
 the alleged disadvantages are all necessary concomitants of a plurality 
 of languages in the same country, and whether they are as great as they 
 appear to be. I think the conclusion which will force itself upon 
 our minds, is that, at the worst, Canada's unity and prosperity will not 
 be hampered by the use of a dual language, especially if we take into 
 consideration that the two languages are the tongue of Shakespeare and 
 Burke, and that of Bossuet and Corneille. 
 
 If it could be maintained, the first of the objections against dual 
 language settles the question, but can it be maintained? Is unity of 
 language really essential to the unity and well-being of a ration? It is 
 not essential, for if it were, there would scarcely be a single country in 
 Europe united and prosperous, as all, or nearly all, allow a plurality of 
 languages within their limits. 
 
 If unity of language were essential to national unity and prosperity, 
 the first step to be taken on organizing a federal state under any 
 form of government should be the adoption of a measure stamping out 
 all languages but one within its limits. Not only should they not be 
 made official or encouraged in any way, but they should not be even 
 
 3. 
 
 4. 
 
DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 i" 
 
 tolerated as being detrimental to the intoresta of the state. As this is 
 n]L?ainst the almost universal practice of nations, it follows that the 
 alleged danger is not feared, presumably because it does not exist. 
 
 It must be admitted that unity in the highest and strictest sense in a 
 nation implies unity of language, but it also implies unity of loligion, 
 unity of manners and customs, and unity of growth and development, if 
 not of origin. Such tniity may be flesirablo, but it is not attainable by 
 force of arms or by legal enactments; it is induced by favorable circum- 
 stances and is the growth of ages. 
 
 Neither is such absolute unity recessary to make great and prosper- 
 ous a nation comj)o.sed o^ two or more dillerent nationalities. To do 
 this, a political unity capable of engendering a common national policy, 
 the industrious development and judicious use of an unfailing supi)ly of 
 natural resources, together with a due regard to the spread and retiuire- 
 ments of education, both in its moral and intellectual aspects, are surely 
 sufficient. 
 
 Social castes, the inecjuality between the rich and the poor, the 
 wranglings of Capital and Labor, clashings between the people and the 
 government of the country, differences in religion, and other differences 
 and sources of discord in the state must be much more prejudicial to its 
 unity and prosperity than a difference of language could be, and yet, 
 what government would level all social inecpudities and conditions to the 
 same plane in order to make the jjeople united, prosperous and happy? 
 If such an attempt were to prove successful, the dream of the socialist 
 would be realized. 
 
 History teaches how dangerous are religious dissensions, how blighting 
 is the blast of wars carried on in the name of religion. Who on 
 that account, and for the puri)ose of obtaining and securing religious 
 uniformity would clamor for the suppression of all religions but one — 
 his own, of course — unless it were some Catholic or Protestant bigot of 
 a very low ty^je ? 
 
 In the practical concerns of a nation, unity should not be sought for 
 its own sake. The word is attractive and the thought inspiring, and on 
 that account the reality is sometimes pursued further than is expedient 
 and useful. Unity does not exclude diversity, but it may rather be 
 enhanced by it. There is diversity even in the unity of the Godhead, as 
 religion teaches. The universe is energized, and the harmony of the 
 heavens maintained by natural agencies which are probably all resolvable 
 into one single primary form of energy, and yet what similarity and 
 diversity are at once implied in the doctrine of the unity of the physical 
 forces ! Even on aesthetic grounds, unity in its most attractive aspect 
 comes from the blending of various forms and colors into a harmonious 
 
DUAL LANOUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 whole. No one would fancy a garden adorned with only one set of 
 flowers. Amid the various flowery forms, let the blushing rose bloom by 
 the side of the snow-white lily ! 
 
 I stated that the piactice of European countries disproves the 
 assertion that uniformity of language is necessary to national unity and 
 prosperity ; I will now substantiate that i)roposition. In Italy, while 
 Italian is the otlicial language of the country, it is far from being the 
 general household speech of the {)eoplo. Indeed, beside Tuscany, there 
 are few other parts in which it is the oral language even of the educated 
 classes. Jxalects proper to each locality are the media of oral intercourse 
 in the I.eapolitan provinces, in Sicily and Sardinia, in Piedmont, 
 Lombardy and the Venetian and Ligurian territories, as also in the 
 former states of the church. The Castilian has become the established 
 language af Spain, but the Basque or Euscara, the primitive language 
 of Spain, is the dominant language in the Basque provinces. The 
 Catalan is spoken and written throughout Catalonia. It has its literature 
 and is considered by the Catalans to be a richer language than the 
 Spanish. 
 
 While French is the official and literary language of France, and has 
 been, through the channels of popular education, widely diffused through 
 the country, yet there is still in the different provinces various languages 
 spoken, most of which are remnants of old dialects, mere local patois. 
 South of the Loire, where the langue (V Oc, the literary tongue of the 
 Troubadours, used to be spoken, there are several such patois still in use, 
 the principal of which are the Provencal, the Lnnguedoclen, the Gascon, 
 the Auverc/nat, and the Lunotisin. On the north of the Loire, the home 
 of the Trouveres and of the Langue d' Oil, there are not less than a 
 dozen different languages spoken, such as the Wallon, the Picard, the 
 Normand, the Breton. Basque is spoken in Basses-Pyrenee, Flemish in 
 some parts of Le Nord and Pas-de-Calais. Celtic is spoken by at 
 least a million of people in Finistere, Cote-dn-Nord and Morbihan. 
 Yet with this great diversity of languages, several of which are prac- 
 tically official in the localities where they are used, is there a more united 
 and prosperous country in Euro[)ethan France? Whilst travelling some 
 few years ago through different parts of that country, the home of my 
 forefathers, I had occasion to hear some of those patois. I knew those 
 who spoke were French, and as ready as Frenchmen could be to take up 
 arms and die in defense of their country (mourir pour la patrie!); but 
 their speech sounded like Celtic to my ears. 
 
 About two-thirds of the Swiss people speak German, a little less than 
 one-third speak French, the I'est of the population speak Italian and 
 Romanch, and notwithstanding the use of these four languages, the first 
 two, if not three, of which are official, Switzerland is united and 
 prosperous. 
 
DUAL LAiVOUAOE IX CANADA. 
 
 (I 
 
 <i 
 
 In one of his lectures, delivered before an English nudiencc, Professor 
 Freeman comments in the following manner on tlie Swiss Coi\fedoration: 
 "To you the sight must seem strange to see two states of the same 
 union side by side, s[)eaking wholly distinct languages; it must seem 
 yet more strange to you to find one state all but wholly Catholic, another 
 all but wholly Protestant, and to learn that the laws which in either case 
 secure civil ecjuality to the minority are in most cantons of recent date. 
 Yet, with all this diversity, the Swiss {Hjople, Teu*^onic and Ronumce, 
 Catholic and Protestant, undoubtedly form a nation, though a nation 
 artificially put together out of fragments of three elder nations." 
 
 After giving several other instances of a similar union, this historian 
 says in another place: "These instances and countless others bear out 
 the position, that while community of language is the most obvious sign 
 of common nationality, while it is the main element, or something more 
 than an element, in the formation of a nationality, the rule is open to 
 exceptions of all kinds, and the influence of language is at all times liable 
 to be overruled by other influences." 
 
 In Belgium, about one half of the inhabitants spoak Flemish, the 
 other half, French, and a more prosijerous and united country cannot be 
 found in Europe. 
 
 In Sweden, where Swedish is the official language, there are at 
 least three ditt'erent dialects spoken in different parts of the country 
 — Old Norse or Icelandic, Scania, Blekinge and Dalecarlia. 
 
 In Austro-Hungary, there are not less than twenty different languages, 
 German being the official language in the Cisleithnn, and Magyar in 
 the Transleithan provinces. The 19th article of the Constitution of the 
 Austrian Empire provides that : 
 
 "All tribes in the state have etjual rights, and each has an inviolable 
 right to maintain its nationality and language." 
 
 In his history of Austro-Hungary, Louis Leger says : 
 
 "The Universities of Vienna, Gratz, Innspruck and Czernowitz teach 
 in German. The Czekh Universities teach in Czekh. The Cracow 
 University teaches in Polish. The Universities of Livow teach in Polish 
 and Ruthenian. The Universities of Buda-Pesth and Rolosovar teach in 
 Magyar. The University of Zagreb teaches in Croatian. The University 
 of Prague, which was first Latin and then German, has recently been 
 divided into two Universities, one teaching in German, the other in 
 Czekh, the Hungarian tongue." 
 
 While German is the dominant language of the German Empire, 
 Polish, Lithuanian, Danish and other languages are spoken in parts of 
 that country. 
 
 As to Russia, beside the common Russian language, there are well 
 nigh a hundred languages spoken in that vast empire, the principal of 
 which are the Finnish, the Polish, the Sclavonic and the Caucasian. 
 
w 
 
 mp 
 
 DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 While English is the official language of Great Britain and Ireland, 
 Gaelic is the household language of the Highlands of Scotland, and Irish 
 is still spoken in different parts of Ireland, chiefly in the western and 
 southern parts of the Emerald Isle. 
 
 In Wales, the Welsh language is nearly on the same footing as the 
 English ; even Flemish is spoken in parts of that peninsula. 
 
 As regards the British possessions at large, there are almost as many 
 languages as the races which inhabit them. Manx is official as well as 
 English in the Isle of Man, and French (the old Norman French) is the 
 only official language in Jersey Island. In Heligoland, the Frisian and 
 German languages are taught in the schools as well as English. In 
 Malta, ItaHan is the official language in the courts. In the Cape of 
 Good Hope, the Dutch language is on equal footing with the English. 
 In British India, the Urdo or Hindustani is taught in the schools as well 
 as English, and is used with the other vernacular languages in the 
 courts. 
 
 In the 133rd clause of the British North America Act, both the 
 Englifh and French languages are declared to be official in the Houses 
 of Parliament at Ottawa, in the parliament and courts of the Province 
 of Quebec and in any court which may be established under that act. 
 
 Neither in the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713, in the Articles of the 
 Capitulation of Quebec in 1759, and of Montreal in 1760, in the Treaty 
 of Paris in 1763, in the Royal Proclamation of the same year, in the 
 Quebec Act of 1774, nor in any other act or document by which New 
 France and Acadia were ceded or confirmed to England is there a 
 positive declaration as to whether English, or French, or both languages 
 should or could be used in any part of Canada. There was no necessity 
 for such declaration, it being looked upon as a matter of course that 
 public documents should be published and the people should be 
 addressed in a language they could understand. Hence, so far as these 
 acts or treaties go, the new subjects could consult their convenience in 
 this respect; all that was, and is now required, is that the right to use 
 their own language, wherever and whenever they wish, should not be 
 expressly dcuied them. By the absence of a positive declaration to the 
 contrary in the acts or treaties referred to, such right was tacitly 
 recognized. Indeed, in some of those documents the right is implicitly 
 recognized, for it is stipulated that the new subjects will continue in 
 possession of their privileges and customs, and surely, these included the 
 right to the unrestricted use of their own language, for unrestricted it 
 had been from the foundation of the colony. 
 
 Governor Murray, the first English governo'' of Quebec, and his 
 successors generally acted on the tacit acknowledgment of this right, 
 for, under their direction, official documents were as a rule published in 
 
H'l 
 
DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 French as well as in English. Indeed, some of them, as the Quebec Act, 
 were published in French only. In this they consulted the convenience 
 of the people, and truly, the choice of a language in the official acts of 
 any wise and practical government should be regarded only as a matter 
 of convenience, — as a question which should be settled according to 
 local circumstances and the wants of the people, for in this as well as in 
 other things, the government is for the people, and not the people for 
 the govern.Tient. 
 
 Nor is it any objection that in the diversity of languages displayed in 
 the practice of several of the European countries, one only is declared 
 to be official, for such declaration has little influence on the everyday 
 life of the people, as is proved from the condition of things in this 
 particular in different parts of Canada, and especially in the Maritime 
 Provinces. They will communicate among themselves in the language 
 most familiar to them, their own native tongue, and it is mainly through 
 newspapers or other public prints published in their own language, 
 whether declared to be official, or not, that they receive intelligence of 
 the enactments of parliaments, proceedings of courts, and of passing 
 events. 
 
 The report of Lord Durham on the cause of the rebellion of 18.37 led 
 to the insertion of a clause in the Act of Union of Upper and Lower 
 Canada by which all public instruments connected with the Houses of 
 Parliament should be published in English only. Here we have some- 
 thing exclusive, prohibitory. Not until that positive and authoritative 
 declaration was made did the French Canadians consider themselves 
 deprived of their right to the unrestricted use of their language, and 
 only then were they so considered by their rulers. They were not very 
 long deprived of their right. In 1844, not quite four years after the 
 enforcement of the Union Act, the Legislature of Canada unanimously 
 passed an address to the Queen praying for the restoration of the French 
 language to its former basis, and the request was readily granted. The 
 obnoxious clause was formally repealed by a special act passed by the 
 English Parliament in 1848. 
 
 Concerning the suppression of the French language by the Bill of 
 Union, Lord Elgin, who a few years afterwards became Governor of 
 Canada, expresses himself as follows: 
 
 "I must avow that I am profoundly convinced of the impolitical 
 character of all intentions of this kind to denationalize the French. In 
 general it produces the opposite effect to th' have in view, and 
 
 inflames national prejudices and animosities." 
 
 "A wise prince," says Edmund Burke, "should study the genius of the 
 nation he is called to rule; he must not contradict them in their customs, 
 nor take away their privileges, but he must act according to the 
 circumstances in which he finds the existing government." 
 
~r 
 
 10 
 
 DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 "It is less by terror than by love," snys Montesquieu, "that men are 
 governed, and if absolute perfection in matter of government is a myth, 
 it is a fact that the best is the government which adapts itself most 
 closely to the climate, the habits, and even the prejudices of the 
 country." 
 
 " Since all authority is snatched from the conquered," says Grotius, 
 "leave to them their own laws, their own customs and magistrates, which 
 are of advantage in private and public matters." 
 
 "It is ever to be remembered," says Herbert Spencer, "that great as 
 may be the efforts made for the prosperity of the body politic, yet 
 the claims of the body politic are nothing in themselves, and become 
 something only in so far as they embody the claims of its component 
 individuals." 
 
 The European nations have not always shown due regard to the 
 claims of their component parts. For instance, while Russia allows, or 
 allowed until late years, her Finnish subjects the peaceful enjoyment of 
 their rights, including the use of their language, she has done and is still 
 doing her best to stamp out the language of her Polish subjects. In 
 1863, when enslaved Poland broke out into a new insurrection to regain 
 her freedom, England, France, and Austria remonstrated with Russia, 
 urging her to fulfil the obligations she had assumed at the Congress of 
 Vienna in regard to that oppressed people. One of the points of their 
 remonstrance was that the Poles should be allowed the use of their native 
 language in the public offices and in the law courts, but unfortunately 
 for Poland, this did not go further than a diplomatic remonstrance. 
 Russia's course towards the Finlanders makes that people loyal and 
 contented, and conduces to her unity and prosperity, while her 
 continued oppression of Poland is a source of strife and misery in that 
 land, and an obstacle to the consolidation of her vast empire. 
 
 At the congress above mentioned, there was provision made to unite 
 Belgium and Holland under die same crown. All went well enough as 
 long as due regard was shown to the rights and privileges of all the subjects, 
 but after a time and for the purpose of strengthening his realm, the 
 Dutch King took it into his head to forbid the use of French in Belgium. 
 Half of the population were soon arrayed against the other half, and the 
 final result was the disruption of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. 
 While it can well be admitted that community of language is not 
 essential to national unity and prosperity, it is obvious that it cannot of 
 itself secure such unity and prosperity in any state. One of the bloodiest 
 wars that ever raged in any country was the American civil war, and 
 the United States of America have one common language. Other civil 
 wars have burned fiercely in many other countries, and dynasties have 
 been annihilated, but history does not show that these dire evils were in 
 
 
DUAL LANGUAGE IN CANADA. 
 
 11 
 
 ^ 
 
 any instance caused by clissentions arising from a diversity of language, 
 except where the rights of nationalities were in this respect trampled 
 under foot. "A common language, even without common blood," says 
 Max MuUer, "makes the whole world feel akin." England and the 
 United States have the some language, yet it does not appear that there 
 is much love lost between them. When they come dangerously near to 
 an o{)en rupture, war is averted not so much by reason of a community of 
 language as on account of the commercial interests of both countries. 
 The Irish people have practically given up their language for that of 
 their rulers, yet they cling as tenaciously as ever to their nationality. 
 In parting with old Erse, their representatives at Westminster have 
 simply learned to assert the claims and vindicate the rights of fatherland 
 in plain Anglo-Saxon. 
 
 As to the disadvantage arising from an increased expenditure, it is 
 not one that tells very strongly against dual language in Canada. The 
 portion of the population for whom the French language is a necessity 
 or a convenience, contributes its full share to the defrayment of the 
 general expenditure, and co-operates successfully in the development 
 of the resources and in the promotion of the general welfare of the 
 country. It would then be manifestly unjust and mean, when benefiting 
 by their co-operation, to deprive them of the pleasure and benefit derived 
 from having public documents oorae to their knowledge and appeal to 
 their intelligence in their own native language. Besides, the extra 
 expense incurred by the publication of all legal and parliamentary 
 enactments in the French as well as in English would be only a small 
 fraction of the general ye.uly expenditure. Equally divided, it would 
 not probably amount to much more than one cent to each head of the 
 population. 
 
 As to the bearing of dual languages on the requirements of education 
 and national literature, Canada has nothing to apprehend on that score. 
 The resources and forces brought into play may be divided, but they are 
 not weakened by such division. All that is required is that they should 
 be distributed equitably and judiciously, and a laudable emulation will 
 promote the work. It is hardly necessary to add that Canada has as 
 much reason to pride herself on Canadian literary productions wortliy to 
 be crowned by the French Academy, as on works that delight the English 
 reading public. 
 
 As regards the difficulties that a duality of language may occasion in 
 commercial relations and ordinary business transactions, the answer is 
 that the knowledge of French does not necessarily exclude that of 
 English, and vice versa. People will soon acquire a knowledge of any 
 language that furthers their intei'ests, and learn to use it too, sometimes 
 better than their own. The settlement of such difficulties may well be 
 left to the action of time and influence of local circumstances. 
 
12 
 
 DUAL LANGUAGE IK CANADA. 
 
 The same diificulties may be alleged to exist in the ever increasing 
 commercial relations between difieren*" countries, yet who would success- 
 fully advocate the abolition of all leading languages but one (Volapuk, 
 for example, or its more modern successor !), on the plea that international 
 commerce and interests would be favored thereby ? The advocacy of such 
 a theory would land us in Utopia. In our business relations within the 
 limits of Canada, we may well rest satisfied with the means of intellectual 
 intercourse that serves the same purpose on an international scale. 
 Indeed, considering the question from this jwint of view, far from being 
 a disadvantage, dual language is in no small measure beneficial to the 
 Dominion, for, not to speak of the convenience it affords in travelling 
 through Europe and elsewhere, it invites and facilitates international 
 intercourse and favors commercial relations to a greater extent. But 
 this is not the only advantage, nor the greatest one, that can be claimed 
 for dual languages in Canada. 
 
 While the experience of European countries shows that unity of 
 language is not essential to national unity and progress, it must be 
 admitted that it is what best characterizes each of the nationalties of 
 which a state may be composed, and is at the same time the best 
 preservative of their other characteristic features and their identity. 
 
 But what advantage is there in keeping intact the unity and 
 characteristic features of the races which may be united under the same 
 government? I will answer in the words of an excellent authority : "I 
 think," says the Marquis of Dufferin, in one of his .admirable addresses 
 delivered during his stay in Canada, — "I think that Canada should 
 esteem itself happy in owing its prosperity (mark the words — owing 
 its prosperity) to the mixture of sevei'al races. The action and reaction 
 of 'Several national idiosyncrasies, the one upon the other, give to our 
 society a freshness, a coloring, an elasticity, a vigor, which without 
 them would be wanting to it. The statesman who would seek to 
 obliterate these distinctive characteristics would be truly badly advised." 
 
 "At this moment," says this eminent statesman (in an answer to an 
 address presented to him by Laval UniA'ersity), "the French-Canadian 
 race, to which you belong, is engaged in a generous rivalry with your 
 fellow subjects of English origin, the end of which is to see which of the 
 two will contribute more to the moral, material and political advance- 
 ment as well as to the prosperity of the country. There is not one 
 student, man of business or of science, politician or writer of either 
 origin, who does not feel himself inspired by this noble emulation." 
 
 The greatest advantage which duality of language in Canada may be 
 claimed to offer is that it subserves the cause of education. Lord 
 Macaulay said on one occasion that whenever he had mastered a new 
 language, he always felt as if he had acquired a new sense. Where is 
 
I 
 
 DUAL LANGUAGE IX CANADA. 
 
 13 
 
 the man who, having sense and knowledge enough to appreciate the 
 benefit of education, does not feel, intellectually, double the man he was 
 before, when, besides his own mother tongue, he has acquired a 
 thorough knowledge of another language, esi)ecially when such language 
 is freighted with a rich literature and is spoken by a large portion of the 
 community in which he lives? A due appreciation of this wider knowledge 
 is shown by thousands of parents who, irrespective of expense or distance, 
 send their children to study or to live for a time in places where they can 
 become familarized with the new language which it is desirable to know, 
 and which they cannot easily learn at home. If the knowledge of both 
 English and French is a desirable acquisition, especially for a Canadian 
 — and who will deny that it is? — are not the existence and preservation of 
 those two languages in Canada an incentive and an aid towards that 
 end? The frequent intercourse of the two classes of the Canadian 
 population must tend to the acquirement of each other's language. The 
 knowledge thus acquired can be afterwards perfected by the best method 
 of study. 
 
 Many are under the impression that the language spoken by French- 
 Canadians is nothing else but a patois. This is not so. There are, it is 
 true, many patois in France, but the language spoken by the French, 
 speaking portion of the community whether in the Province of Quebec 
 or in the Maritime Provinces, is the real, genuine French language. To 
 be sure, it has not the ring of the aryot de Paris, but it has something 
 better. The original settlers of la Nouvelle France, and la Cadie, who 
 were of the best class of citizens, came to this country in the seventeenth 
 century, the Augustan age of French literature, and the language which 
 they bequeathed to their children has been wonderfully well preserved, 
 and is still marked by the characteristic features of the French language 
 of that age. Even French litterateurs of the highest rank testify to this. 
 "I have been told," says the well-known French novelist, Paul Feval, 
 "that pretty good French is spoken at Moscow and St. Petersburg, but 
 if you wish to listen to the genuine sound of the language of Bossuet 
 and Corneille, the general consensus of opinion is that one must go so 
 far as Canada, where an offshoot of France obtained a vigorous growth." 
 
 "Here," (in Canada) says Xavier Marmier, of the French Academy, 
 " there is retained in the use of our tongue the elegance of the grand 
 Steele. The people speak pretty correctly, and have no patois." 
 
 It is true that, especially among the French Acadians, a certain 
 number of words and phrases borrowed from the English language are 
 needlessly intermixed with French in conversation, but very few of these 
 English words have been definitely adopted or gallicized by them. 
 Moreover, most of those who use them know that they are not genuine 
 French words and avoid using them when they wish. As to their 
 
14 
 
 DUAL LANOUAOE IN CANADA. 
 
 gmmmar— well, they are in this respect pretty much on a level with 
 those of their neighbors who murder or clip the Queen's English, and who 
 are not on that account supposed to speak any particular dialect. 
 
 It is uimecessary in this connection to enlarge on the comparative 
 merits of the two languages, and go on discussing such questions as 
 whether it is more philosophical to place the adjective before the 
 substantive (as Herbert Spencer would have it) and say— a black horse, 
 as the English do, or place it after the substantive, and say with the 
 French — un cJieval noir. 
 
 Each of the two languages has its peculiarities and excellencies. If 
 one is cor'-ncuous for the number and power of its terms, the other 
 excels by the clearness and elegance of its phrases. Each has been and 
 is still a most efficient vehicle of thought, whether scientific or religious. 
 Each has a literature richer than that of any other language in Europe, 
 and the use of the two languages in Canada invites and encourages an 
 emulative and profitable research in the literary treasures of both. The 
 one is the diplomatic language of Europe, the mother tongue of the 
 pioneers of religion and civilization in British North America and of 
 their hardy and numerous progeny ; the other, the dominant commercial 
 . language of the age, is spoken by over one hundred millions of people, 
 is the tongue of a Sovereign upon whose empire the sun never sets, 
 and under whose rule both the English and the French speaking 
 Canadians, notwithstanding a diversity of language, are united, prosper- 
 ous and happy. 
 
I* 
 
 (From St. Johx Globe, March 19Tir, 189(5.) 
 
 Rev. Father Doucet, of Sliippegan, read before the students of the University 
 of Now Brunswick and their friends on Wednesday evening a very interesting paper 
 on "The Dual Languages in Canada: their Advantages and Disadvantages." The 
 reverend gentleman treated the subject in a thoroughly academic spirit. He pointed 
 out that in many European nations two, three, and, in some cases, several languages 
 were used and that, therefore, one language was not essential to national unity, 
 although dual languages were regarded as a disadvantage by many persons from 
 this standpoint. He argued upon the commercial, literary and social advantages to 
 a country of having at its command a great commercial language like that of 
 England, and a great diplomatic language like that of France, and he dwelt upon 
 the power t)ie use of these two languages gave those who possessed them. That the 
 French of this country should be allowed the liberty of using their own tongue was, 
 he held, a simple act of justice to a true and loyal people, and, of course, without 
 restrictions of any kind time would settle all the difficulties ot the situation through 
 the survival of the fittest. The address was In every respect a scholarly one, 
 showing a wide scope of information and reading, and was as moderate in tone as it 
 ■was reasonable in argument. A discussion followed, which was participated in by 
 Professors Davidson and Stockley, and Messrs. Jones, Kierstead. and Jordan of the 
 University students, and by Kev. William O'Leary, to which Mr. J. V. Ellis, who 
 occupied the chair, added some observations. Rev. Mr. Doucet closed the discussion 
 in a few observations, using for his purpose the French language. On motion of 
 Mr. Z. Everett, who gave an instance from his own experience of the advantages to 
 be derived from knowing something of two languages, a hearty vote of thanks 
 passed to the reverend lecturer. It was stated that Mr. Doucet not only travelled 
 from Bathurst to Fredericton via St. John by rail to deliver the lecture, but that 
 his journey also included a sleigh drive of over sixty miles, from Shippegan to 
 Bathurst. The students showed their appreciation of the lecturer's courtesy and 
 ability by hearty cheers and by giving him the college cries with three times three. 
 The President of the University, Dr. Harrison, occupied a seat upon the platform, 
 and there were several citizens of Fredericton in the audience.