FORCED MILITARY SERVICE:

Why Did Canada Use Conscription In The First World War?

 

Cindy Dives

 

History 2610

Dr. J. Petryshyn

3 March 1998

 

     When Canada entered the First World War, the government promised citizens any effort would be voluntary. This voluntary duty was successful for nearly three years. However, after allied forces took Vimy Ridge it became apparent that another method of recruitment needed to be implemented. Wounded Canadian soldiers were being sent back to battle, the casualty rate was high, and there just weren’t enough new recruits to replace the dwindling Canadian forces. Although many Canadians were opposed to the idea of forced military service, Prime Minister Robert Borden had no other choice but to implement it.

     In 1914, Great Britain declared war on Germany. At this time, there was no doubt among Canadians that they should be part of the British war effort. Even French nationalist Henri Bourassa thought it was necessary. The general consensus among Canadians was that any military effort would be voluntary. At first this policy was successful. Four Canadian Regiments were sent overseas, and Canadian soldiers earned a well-deserved reputation. This reputation did have a downside; Canadian troops were sent into many dangerous front line battles because of it. By mid 1917, high casualties and declining recruitment had begun to take their toll. New recruitment methods were obviously necessary. [1] Other methods such as propaganda campaigns were tried but proved unsuccessful. Borden set in motion a voluntary national registration program designed to identify possible recruits. Only one fifth of these were returned. Not one of the noted possible recruits volunteered.[2] When this ploy did not work it became obvious to Borden that he must go back on his word not to implement conscription.

     Canada was not the only country looking at conscription as a method of filling out troops. When the United States entered the war, they had an automatic draft imposed. In Australia popular vote twice defeated any possibility of conscription. Borden new that he had a hard sell for the idea in Canada. The issue of conscription quickly turned into a French/English issue. Borden offered to stay the conscription vote until after the upcoming election if Sir Wilfred Laurier[3] would join forces. Laurier, misreading English Canada, and fearing the loss of Quebec to Henri Bourassa declined the offer. Laurier fought the conscription issue, but nowhere near as adamantly as Bourassa.[4] The House of Commons voted 102 to 44 in favour of conscription, and the bill was approved by senate.[5] After passing the Military Service Act, which created conscription, Borden dissolved the government and called a federal election. Many Liberals in favour of conscription, including the West’s most influential Liberal – Sir Clifford Siften, joined Borden to form a Coalition Union Government. This union government promoted the use of conscription, wartime prohibition, and an end to political patronage.[6] Borden’s coalition won the federal election with a large majority.[7] As explained by Historian Norman Ward, the effect of conscription was devastating not only for the Liberals, but also for Borden:

The Wartime election of 1917 not merely split the Liberals over the conscription issue, but gave Sir Robert Borden a Unionist majority, composed of Conservatives and former Liberals, which became increasingly difficult to control as the thirteenth Parliament wore on.[8]

     The Military Service Act became law in July of 1917, but it was not imposed until January 1918, after the federal election. The policy was designed to keep Canadian forces at their current level, but did not include plans for expansion. Conscripts were selected based on marital status and age. The Act had three states of appeal. Of the 404,395 men called in for the first class, 380,510 appealed. When the first group was called for training, only 20,000 appeared.[9] Due to heavy casualties, in March 1918 the government was forced to cancel any exceptions to the Act; because of this many farmer’s sons were conscripted right at seeding time.[10] This did little to win favour for conscription among the rural population.

     It did not take long for conscription to become a French/English issue. French Canada was almost unanimous in it’s opposition. From the start there were many issues French Canadians cited. Henri Bourassa insisted that Borden was an imperialist. He advocated the idea that Canada should use the war as an economic tool, by supplying food, equipment, and shells. At the same time he maintained that Canada’s front line was Canada, not the European battlefields.[11]

     Bourassa’s ideas, although believed by many French Canadians were not the only issues Quebecers faced. Tensions between French and English Canada were already amplified by the revival of the school question, not only in Manitoba but also in Ontario.[12] The language issue served only to help destroy the feelings of good will which had been felt between English and French Canada during the early years of the war.[13]

     As a whole, French Canadians were never as connected to the war as were English Canadians. The French did not feel strong ties with either England or France, and tended to look more internally to North American, and more particularly Canadian, issues. The heightened language issues caused them to once again to look at the internal Canadian situation rather than the war in Europe. Added to this were language barriers in the Canadian Military which caused difficulties for French Canadians to enlist and train. Military forces were also not very concerned with the creation of French Regiments, or the promotion of French officers.

     Another possible explanation for the resistance of French Canada was the legacy of Sam Hughes. Hughes, the former Minister of Militia, had angered the Quebec population. He made no attempt to place French Canadian volunteers in French units, and indeed believed they should be receiving orders from English officers. He also angered the Roman Catholics by using Protestant Ministers as recruiting officers in Quebec.[14]

     The alienation Quebecers felt must have been great, as talk in the province circled around topics such as separatism, revolution, even annexation to the United States.[15] Although Bourassa did not outright advocate rebellion, the editorial pages in his newspaper, Le Devoir, saw it as an inevitable result.[16] Eventually rebellion did occur. Over the 1918 Easter weekend, anti-conscription riots broke out in Quebec City. These riots were quelled only when soldiers from Toronto arrived. The soldiers fired out into the crowds. When all was said and done four civilians were dead. Ottawa took these riots very seriously and announced any further protests would result in immediate, on the spot, conscription.[17] This only served to further the opposition to conscription among French Canadians.

     What may have seemed solely a French/English issue was, in fact, not. French Canada stood a united front against the use of conscription. Thins were not as clear-cut in the rest of the country. Many groups did oppose the bill but did not have the forum to present their views. From the beginning, farmers were opposed to the use of conscription on farmers. They felt they were contributing to the war effort by growing food. After exceptions to the Military Services Act were revoked, this opposition from farmers grew stronger. Many workers and unions saw the use of conscription as the first step towards forced service elsewhere. They felt they would be forced to have the same job for the duration of the war if such a plan were implemented. Pacifists and religious groups felt the idea of war was immoral. Pacifists, who had at one time been seen as honourable, were now considered “slackers”[18]. In fact, in the April 3, 1918 issue of The Guardian, the article The Vice of Pacifism condemned pacifism as being “a vice revealing the terrible fact that the conscience has lost its sensitiveness and the soul has lost its courage.”[19]

     The August 1918 battle of Amiens in France was the last battle fought by a Canadian Military made up strictly of volunteers. After this battle there was an influx of approximately 12,000 reinforcements; this was the first injection of conscripts. Specialist in military history, Daniel Dancocks, claims two facts were immediately noticeable:

The first is that the Corps could not have contributed so impressively during the remaining months of the war without the conscripted solders who filled the depleted ranks. The second is that the Corps would never again reach the peak of efficiency displayed at Amiens.[20]

In total, nearly 120,000 men were conscripted; before the end of the war almost 47,000 were sent overseas. Perhaps had the end of the war seemed imminent such large numbers would not have been used. As explained by former editor of The Canadian Historical Review, Ramsay Cook, nobody suspected the war was near an end.

The disruption of national unity was a high price to pay for those reinforcements, but in the spring of 1918 the war was in its most critical phase and neither Borden nor anybody else realized that Germany would collapse in November.[21]

     The use of conscription in the First World War had three major outcomes. It heightened French/English tensions. Precedence was set for the use of conscription. Finally, the conscripted soldiers, although few in number, were an essential part of Canada’s war effort in the final months of World War One. This war effort considerably gained recognition for Canada as a nation, both internally and externally. 

     Had Canada not joined the war with Britain at the start, there is a chance conscription would never have been needed. The general belief that Britain’s war was Canada’s war started the course of events which ended with conscription. This belief was held in both English and French Canada. Tense relations between English and French Canadians has always been an essential part of the country. It is true “La crise de la conscription” heightened tensions during the first world war, but it would be hard to prove the act had any permanent negative effects on relations; rather, it was just one of many issues that divide the country.

     Throughout her short history, Canada has always been a nation with an identity crisis. During the First World War, Canada was learning to stand on her own, looking to her mother for support and guidance. The guidance Britain gave was not particularly maternal, but did allow the country to grow up independent. The push for more form Britain was one of the major influences to use conscription. The actual use of conscription allowed Canada to realize the potential of her abilities. Canadian solders stood proud in the war, an overall contributed a great deal to the allied effort. This helped to considerably elevate Canada’s status as an independent nation. At first, when Prime Minister Borden asked Britain if he could be part of the peace negotiations with Germany, they refused; but, in honour of Canada’s dead, a place was later granted at the newly formed League of Nations. When the American Secretary of State complained about Canada’s place at the negotiations, he was reminded that Canada had suffered more casualties in the war than the United States.[22]

     Borden set a precedent when he initiated conscription. At the onset of the Second World War Sir William Lyon Mackenzie King also vowed he would not use conscription; but perhaps it was not as bitter a pill to swallow when he too had to employ it. Although the conscription issue once again raised French/English tensions during the Second World War, the shock was nowhere near as great when, once again, heavy casualties forced its use.  Even though Canada now has an identity separate from Britain, and will not automatically follow them to war, does not mean we will not be involved in overseas action such as in Iraq. The precedence set by the use of conscription in both World Wars is something for Canadians to be aware of, given the current state of world affairs, and in the event of future conflicts.

     In 1917, casualties were high, enlistment was low, Canada was deep in the war effort, Britain was demanding more, and Borden had to make a decision. It was quite possibly the hardest decision of his career as forced military could spell the death of his political life. It is ironic that, in the end, conscription of Canadian soldiers had little impact on the outcome of the war. However, the decision by Borden to introduce it was the right one. The most important consideration when analyzing his decision is realizing that during the time conscription was introduced and implemented, there were no signs of the war ending soon. As Prime Minister, Borden did what had to be done.

 

Bibliography

Callwood, June. Portrait of Canada. (Garden City: Double Day and Company, 1981)

Cook, Ramsey; John Saywell; John Rickel. Canada: A modern Study. Revised Edition. (Toronto/Vancouver: Clark Irwin & Company, 1977)

Craig John. The Years of Agony 1910-1920. (Toronto: Natural Science of Canada, 1977)

Dancocks, Daniel G. Spearhead to Victory:  Canada and the Great War. (Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1987)

Fillion, John, ed., The Canadian World Almanac & Book of Facts 1988 (Toronto: Global Press, 1987)

Francis, R. Douglas; Richard Jones; Donald Smith. Destinies: Canadian History Since Confederation. 3^rd Edition. (Toronto: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1996)

McGinnis Shulze, Lorine. The Canadian Great War Homepage. (Online. Internet. Feb 25, 1998. Available: http://www.rootsweb.com/~wwIcan/time.htm)

Moniere, Denis. La crise de la conscription. Online. Internet. Feb 23, 1998. Available: http://w3.alphacom.net/~frapb/vigile/hist/conscription/moniereconspiption1.html

Smith, Donald B., R. Douglas Francis. Editors. Readings in Canadian History Post Confederation. 4^th edition. (Toronto: Harcourt Brace and Company, 1994)

Ward, Norman. The Public Purse. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1951)