BRENT CAMERON, "OATH TO QUEEN SHOULDN'T BE DISCARDED," KINGSTON WHIG STANDARD  (JUNE 14, 1996).

Copyright Kingston Whig-Standard 1996

After being sworn in as federal Citizenship Minister, Lucienne Robillard indicated that the Chretien government was considering amendments to the oath administered to new Canadians. One of these changes would see all reference to the monarchy removed. This, in Robillard's opinion, is a genuine gesture to reflect the "reality" of Canada. But is the elimination of the oath to the Queen actually that, a recognition of Canada's reality?

Admittedly, this opinion does have some appeal. After all, governments rarely do anything without attempting to appease some group or interest. And the recent trials and tribulations of the House of Windsor have done precious little to make the case for the monarchy. But there are at least two sides to every story. And for me, that side was best expressed by one individual, a man who hailed by the name of Amos Martin.

You probably are not familiar with him because he used to go by the name of Tanner. That, and the fact that he was born in 1760 and has long since passed from this earth. But what he has to say does deserve to be heard.

Growing up in Greenwich, Rhode Island, Tanner was confronted head- on with the turmoil and tumult of the American Revolution. While many of his friends and neighbors were sympathetic to the Continental Army of George Washington, Amos Tanner remained loyal in his allegiance to the Crown.

There was a price to be paid for such an unpopular stand. Loyalists or Tories were often tarred and feathered, their homes destroyed and their land confiscated. Some, like Tanner, had the further honor of having a bounty placed on their heads by Washington himself.

These Loyalists, Canada's first political refugees, made their way north, at considerable risk to themselves and their families, with all the possessions they could physically drag through the wilderness.

When Amos Tanner arrived in Canada he was still a marked man. Fearful of meeting an early end at the hands of American spies, he was allowed to alter his name and identity. Amos Tanner became Amos Martin.

Anyone vaguely familiar with the history of Canada knows that these United Empire Loyalists would settle large areas of territory, leading to the creation of the provinces of Ontario, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick - three of the four original partners of Confederation. Even before that, in 1812, these same people, with aboriginal and British military forces, held back an American invasion, guaranteeing our independence to this day.

The Loyalists and their descendants brought trade and commerce, as well as political and social leadership, to the territory that lay beyond New France. The Canada of today is in no small part the creation of these loyal citizens of the Crown. We pride ourselves in being a land of tolerance and diversity, but is this such a surprise considering that much of Canada was born among those seeking political asylum?

And the descendants of Amos Tanner still bear the mark of his stand. They, including my own great-grandmother, still carried the surname of Martin - not bequeathed by birthright, but by the signed warrant of Lt.-Gov. John Graves Simcoe.

In pledging allegiance to the Crown, we commemorate the memory of people who risked everything for the sake of preserving their beliefs. But while it may have begun among the United Empire Loyalists fleeing revolution, the same principles have guided countless others to our shores - from Europe, from Asia and Latin America. What brought my ancestor here two centuries ago is not so different than what brought a friend of mine from China in the wake of the Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989.

Of course, these are the 1990s. The monarchy is done no favors by the torrid tales of Charles and Diana's dysfunctional marriage. For the politician craving a simple answer to our unity ills, or a slight bump in the polls, canning the Queen might make for good copy. Unfortunately, Ms. Robillard and others who are like-minded do not understand that if there is a magic bullet, this is not it.

What she, and those sharing her republican leanings, fails to understand is that the monarchy is not just some nice lady with a British accent and gloves to match her handbag. Elizabeth II is the inheritor of an institution that has influenced our history more than any other. That influence extended to men and women whose sacrifice of home, security and worldly goods created the basis of a national creed - a Canadian creed of tolerance and respect that even non-monarchists are able to enjoy.

That, in itself, should be reason enough to let the oath to the Queen stand. That is, of course, if people like Ms. Robillard have the desire, or the capacity, to understand.

- Brent Cameron is a freelance writer and office manager who lives in Verona. He is a member of The Whig-Standard's Community Editorial Board.