Sir Wilfrid Laurier would profoundly change Canada as the Prime Minister (PM) from 1896-1911. Laurier was born on November 20th, 1841 into a family of farmers where politics was often the dinner time discussion topic. The liberal ideas Laurier had when he was a Prime Minister can be traced back to the roots of these diverse conversations as a youngster. Laurier's father, Carolus Laurier, was an educated man that had diverse and liberal ideas and held many important leadership positions. Positions like Mayor and Militia Lieutenant were just a few important political jobs Carolus held. With his father a role model and mentor for open discussion, Wilfrid would learn the power and ability to understand varying points of views. He would take these ideas and put them into practice once he became PM of Canada. Wilfrid Laurier’s time as the Prime Minister of Canada should be judged as a time of great compromise by looking at the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis of the Naval Service Bill and the Manitoba Schools Question.
The first event that showed Laurier’s ability to compromise was his dealing with the main argument on the British perspective of the Naval Services Bill. English speaking Canadians, who were loyal to Great Britain (GB) wanted to do all they could to help Britain in their arms race. At the start of the twentieth century, Britain was in a naval arms race with Germany, over the fear that the German Navy with their Dreadnoughts would catch up to the British Royal Navy. Britain was in an arms race with Germany and feared a loss of military and economic power to protect its empire. To pay for the expensive new battleships Britain asked her Dominions, including Canada, for money. The Dominions of Australia and New Zealand agreed to this request and many British Canadians expected that Laurier would follow suit. They protested about this to Laurier as well as the government, stating that they should do everything they can to help Britain. This support the British Canadians displayed for Britain was not just because the other dominions provided support, but also because they saw themselves as being loyal British subjects that have a duty to help the crown when it is in need. This shows that at this point in time Englishmen in Canada still saw themselves as being very close to their British counterparts. It also meant that for Laurier that if he does not listen to the voices of the British Canadians he could be losing a lot of support.
The opposing viewpoint in the Naval dispute came from the military and social concerns of French speaking Canadians. While British Canadians wanted to do their best to help, with the French Canadians it was quite the opposite. The French Canadians did not want Canada to spend money to help the British and opposed the idea of Canada having any involvement in Britain's arms race. French Canadians believed that Canada should not be involved in foreign affairs that do not directly involve Canada and should instead save the resources that they had. Due to this dilemma, Laurier was put in a difficult position. He would have to think of a solution that would please two sides that are very divided. This shows that the French Canadians did not feel like there was a strong bond between them and the British. They much rathered prefered keeping the money for Canada to use than help Britain with their arms race.
Wilfrid Laurier showed great compromising skills towards the Naval Question as he achieved balance between the English and French speaking viewpoints. It was a good solution, despite it not being received well by the general public. The two sides were asking for opposite things and this made it hard for Laurier to find an answer. However, he was able to think of a solution which was to form a Navy that Canada’s Parliament controlled but could be put under the direction of the British during times of war. This meant that the solution would benefit Canada in the long term, while simultaneously providing aid to the British in the short term. This is because while the Navy does fulfil Britain’s request for help it also gives Canada a way to defend its waters if it is ever attacked in the future. However, it did not completely fulfill the demands of the French and English, instead, the compromise met in the middle. But this caused the French to complain that Laurier was being too loyal to the British crown while the English complained that Laurier was not helping the British crown enough as neither groups thought they were benefiting enough. This shows that Laurier's compromise was an excellent solution to a difficult problem. The compromise benefits both Canada as well as Britain which is exactly what the French and English Canadians wanted. Despite it not being received well by the Canadian public, it does show that Laurier's time as Prime Minister was a time of great compromise.
The social and political event known as the Manitoba Schools Question with the main argument from the French perspective showed Laurier’s ability to compromise. When the Manitoba Act was created in 1870, it promised the French people that their language would be protected as an official language of Manitoba. Since it was now part of the Canadian Constitution, it would mean that any change to this promise would be unlawful and unconstitutional, giving the French people a feeling of security knowing the language would survive in Western Canada. However, this changed when the provincial government of Manitoba began passing laws that eliminated funding for Catholic schools. This angered the French people and in turn led to the strengthening of French Canadian nationalism in Quebec. The issue would eventually be brought to the supreme court of Canada, where a census was reached in favour of the French. However, it was overruled by the judicial courts of London. This shows that the French people cared deeply about their language and its future, but due to new laws created by the Manitoba government they were put in a difficult situation and had to fight for the survival of the language.
The social and political concerns of the English-speaking Canadians formed the opposing viewpoint of the Manitoba Schools Question. The English speaking people of Canada saw French as being a nuisance that should not be an official language They pressured the Manitoba government with their resentment and eventually received a reply in the form of the Manitoba Schools Act which removed French from being an official language. However, this solution was unconstitutional as it actually defied the original Manitoba Act that protected French from this issue, which caused the French Canadians to protest. In order to placate either groups Laurier did not take a definitive stance against the issue but instead promised to satisfy both groups. This shows that the English Canadians did not want French to be a official language of Canada. However, Laurier knew that he would have to uphold the constitution to not anger the French while at the sametime still keeping the English happy, which made it hard to come up with a viable solution.
Laurier formulated a compromise in response to the concerns of the French and English speaking Canadians involving the Manitoba Schools Question. It would be known as the Manitoba Schools Act of 1896. The Act stated that French would remain as an official language of Manitoba, however, it would only be taught in classes that had more than 10 French-speaking pupils. It also removed funding to French school boards from the government, meaning that the school boards would have to rely on private funding. In addition, the Act mandated that there are to be only half an hour set aside every school day for religious instruction. If looked at literally, as it is the act was a victory for the English Canadian population since it meant the end of the French language in many parts of Manitoba. However, considering the fact that the French Canadian population much smaller than the English Canadian population, for the French to get anything out of the issue was already really good. This shows that when Laurier was thinking of a solution to the Manitoba Schools Question, he tried his best to make it fair for both sides. Even though the French made up a smaller portion of the total population compared to the English, Laurier still wanted to ensure that both sides would be happy about something in the solution. From this, Laurier's solution should definitely be seen as a very good compromise.
In conclusion, the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis of the two events known as the Naval Service Bill and the Manitoba Schools Question has clearly shown that Laurier's time as the Prime Minister of Canada should be seen as an era of great compromise. When his time as the leader of Canada came to an end, marked by the defeat of the 1911 elections, his actions will change Canada forever. His compromises in the events satisfied the two sides, French and English, who were very divided on the issues. Though he was never able to meet all the needs of the parties, to do what he did and bring the people together is something that was much harder said than done. Today, Laurier is still seen as a man that helped bring Canada together and led it on path that would make it unique from Great Britain and the USA.
