daughter, we shrugged. When he feminizedrnthe miHtary, corrupted its fightingrnforces with unisex cohabitation, wernshrugged. He’s us.rnHe’s us, but please don’t say that he isrnthe “Great Communicator” —betterrnthan Reagan or Roosevelt. For those ofrnus with long memories, this is outrageouslyrnwrong. He has not coined a singlernphrase, but engages in lachrymosernpandering of unutterable tedium. Hisrnshortest speech—four minutes — camernwhen he tried to tell the truth. No, Clintonrncould not have been elected at anyrnother time but ours and by any other peoplernbut us. Any other era would have unmaskedrnhis moral false-face. He won because,rnlike him, we are addicted, hookedrnon pleasure.rnIn this century, great problems gavernus our edge. We survived the Great Depression,rnwon a world war against fascism,rnand won the Cold War. Now,rnfreed of such tests, we’re re-learning whatrnall civilizations have learned: prosperityrnbreeds self-absorption.rnSo don’t blame it all on Clinton; wernfreely bought him. That’s why it’s onlyrnright that we should stick with him, notrndump him or impeach him. We alwaysrnsaid that what he does in private doesn’trnmatter, didn’t we? Let him serve as ourrnnational expiation.rn—Thomas RoeserrnQUEBEC SECESSION was the subjectrnof an historic judgment handedrndown by the supreme court of Canadarnon August 20, 1998. This questionrnreached the court by a “reference” orrn”renvoi” initiated by the governor general,rnin effect a request by the Prime Ministerrnand his cabinet for an advisory opinion.rnThe judgment is not binding orrnenforceable by writs as in ordinary litigation,rnbut is judicial advice given to therngovernment of Canada.rnThe court held that, while the governmentrnof Quebec has no constitutionalrnright to work a unilateral secession of thernprovince from Canada, the people ofrnQuebec enjoy a constitutional right tornhave a referendum at public expensernand without interference, and that, if thernpeople of Quebec clearly vote for independence,rnthe government of Canadarnhas a constitutional duty to negotiate inrngood faith to accommodate their expressedrndesire.rnCanada, a dominion originally establishedrnunder the authority of the BritishrnEmpire, has by degrees become independentrnthrough organic statutes andrnconstitutional conventions, yet even nowrnis organized around the Brihsh Crown.rnThis dominion is a legal instrument ofrnalliance between many nations, peoples,rnlanguages, and cultures, spread out overrnthe face of a great continent, so that theyrnmight live together in peace and friendship,rnshare their prosperity, and aid eachrnother in time of need. Canada is a confederationrnof ten provinces which arernrich in natural resources, full of incrediblernbeauty, and inhabited by an intelligentrnpopulation.rnThe United States were established tornaccommodate two main civilizations,rnone commercial and modern in thernNorth, the other agrarian and quasi-feudalrnin the South. Likewise, Canada wasrnestablished to accommodate two mainrncivilizations: the older French andrnCatholic, more European in outlook,rnthe other founded by loyalist refugeesrnfrom the American Revolution, and alsornby later English, Scottish, and Irish immigrants.rnThe original British North AmericarnAct of 1867 established a bilingual countryrnwith a bilingual government. In time,rnthe French and Catholic civilization becamerna minority with a geopolitical centerrnin Quebec, while Anglo-Canada becamerndominant in nine provinces. Thernpeople of Quebec refuse to be absorbed,rnand they intend to remain a distinct societyrn—by constitutional accommodationrnwith Anglo-Canada if possible, by independencernif necessary.rnAt the moment, separatism is an activernforce in Quebec, mainly because a newrnconstitution (the Canada Act of 1982)rnwas imposed upon Quebec over thernprotest of her elected government. ThernMeech Lake Accord, an accommodationrndesigned to repair the injury done inrn1982, was approved by the Prime Ministerrnof Canada and the premiers of all tenrnprovinces in 1987 but was wantonly sabotagedrnin 1990 by politicians who actedrnfrom passion and prejudice against thernFrench in Quebec.rnI agree with Queen Elizabeth II, whornsaid on her last visit in 1997 that Canadarnis precious. For this reason, I am anxiousrnto see a calming of separatist feelings inrnQuebec, which can be accomplishedrnonly by moderation and justice.rnI think that Anglo-Canada and Quebecrncan be easily reconciled by the immediaternadoption of the Meech Lake Accordrnas originally negotiated in 1987.rnThis much is owed as a debt of honor tornQuebec. The process could be recommencedrnby resolution of the dominionrnParliament, but I believe there is a shortcutrnwhich doesn’t open old politicalrnwounds.rnThe accord was defeated because ofrnthe mistaken belief that it had to be approvedrnby all ten provinces within threernyears of proposal. This idea developedrnbecause the political leaders of the dayrninadvertently overlooked Section 42 ofrnthe Constitiition Act of 1982, which disallowsrntheir assumption. The distinct societyrnclause (which grants Quebec a specialrnstatus) and most other elements ofrnthe accord received sufficient votes fromrnseven provinces representing more thanrnhalf the population within three years. Itrnnow appears that the items already approvedrnby a sufficient number ofrnprovinces can be promulgated nunc prorntunc by the governor general on the advicernof the Prime Minister of Canada.rnThe remainder of the accord, requiringrnunanimous approval, can be adopted atrnleisure by the two provinces which havernyet to give their assent.rnIn their recent judgment, the supremerncourt of Canada held that there is nornright of secession in the ConstitutionrnActs of 1867-1982. The court was rightrninsofar as these organic statutes includernno express right or constitutional mechanismrnfor secession. Yet by implication,rnthe court wholly repudiated the courserntaken by Abraham Lincoln against thernSouth in I86I-1865. The justices understoodrnthe truth stated by President JamesrnBuchanan on the occasion of Lincoln’srnelection in 1860: “Our Union rests uponrnpublic opinion, and can never be cementedrnby the blood of its citizens shedrnin a civil war. If it cannot live in the affectionsrnof the people, it must one dayrnperish. Congress possesses many meansrnof preserving it by conciliation, but thernsword was not placed in their hands tornpreserve it.”rnThe supreme court of Canada hasrngiven advice to the Prime Minister ofrnCanada not unlike the advice given byrnthe House of Lords to James II in 1688.rnThe Lords advised His Majesty to seekrnreconciliation by calling a free Parliament.rnJames II did not take this advice,rnbut there was a free Parliament anyway,rnwhich produced an extra-constitutionalrnbut peaceable transformation in government.rnThis “Glorious Revolution” usheredrnin the reign of William and Mary.rnUpon this transformation, the Crown ofrnNOVEMBER 1998/7rnrnrn