Most Talked-About Controversies Linked to Sam Hughes

A closer look at the most debated and controversial moments involving Sam Hughes.

Sir Samuel Hughes was the Canadian Minister of Militia and Defence during World War I. His time in this role was marked by controversy and disagreements. Ultimately, his contentious leadership and disagreements with Prime Minister Sir Robert Borden led to his dismissal from the position in 1916.

Sections (5)

Full Timeline Early Life & Education Career & Achievements Challenges & Struggles Controversies & Scandals

June 1907: "Curse upon Canada" Remark at Orange Order Convention

In June 1907, at the Orange Order's national convention in Vancouver, Hughes repeated his thesis that Catholic immigrants were a "curse upon Canada", with the warning that the Orangemen would never vote Conservative again if Borden expelled Hughes.

April 1912: Controversy over Catholic processions

In April 1912, Hughes sparked controversy by forbidding militia regiments in Quebec from participating in Catholic processions, a long-standing tradition, leading to accusations of anti-Catholic prejudice due to his affiliation with the Loyal Orange Order.

1913: European junket with family and militia colonels

In 1913, Hughes took an all-expenses-paid trip to Europe with his family, secretaries, and militia colonels and their families, justified as military observation but perceived by many Canadians as an expensive vacation funded by taxpayers.

June 1914: Currie's Embezzlement

In June 1914, Arthur Currie embezzled some $10,000 from his militia regiment in Victoria, leading to a police recommendation for criminal charges. Hughes was aware of this incident by May 1915.

August 1914: Hughes's reaction to Britain's potential inaction

In August 1914, upon hearing about the German invasion of Belgium and the British cabinet's emergency meeting, Hughes expressed outrage and disbelief, even ordering the removal of the Union Jack from the Defence Department. Only when Britain declared war on Germany did he relent.

September 1914: Hughes' chaotic management and perceived insanity

During August-September 1914, Hughes' management of the war effort was characterized by chaos and controversy. He insulted numerous figures, including the Governor General, and his behavior led to widespread perceptions of insanity among colleagues, with Borden noting his eccentric behavior in his memoirs.

October 1914: Troops Mobilized and Hughes delivers a speech

By October 1914, the troops were mobilized and ready to leave for England. As the First Contingent embarked for Europe in Quebec City on 3 October 1914, Hughes delivered a speech that was not well received, and his actions were described as flamboyant by Borden.

1914: Claimed Service in France

Hughes later claimed in Who's Who to have served "in France, 1914–15" despite not being released from his ministry and not having been given any command in the field.

1914: Hughes's Hostility and Recruiting Failures

In 1914, Sam Hughes's hostility towards French Canada, combined with his decision not to call out the militia, contributed to the failure of recruiting in Quebec.

May 1915: Hughes Learns of Currie's Embezzlement

In May 1915, Hughes first learned that Currie had embezzled some $10,000 from his militia regiment in Victoria in June 1914 and the police were recommending criminal charges be brought against him.

1915: Hughes prevents criminal charges against Currie

Cook noted the strangest aspect of the Hughes-Currie affair was that Hughes did not reveal that Currie was an embezzler in March 1919, something that greatly worried Currie at the time. Hughes may have restrained himself as the fact he prevented criminal charges from being laid against Currie in 1915 would have left himself open to charges of obstruction of justice and abuse of his powers as defence minister.

1915: Mounting Criticism of Hughes

From 1915 onward, Hughes faced mounting criticism for his wartime management of the Defence Department, but Prime Minister Borden, politically indebted to Hughes, kept him in his position. Borden sided with Hughes due to his agreement with Hughes's opinions on the British Army's inefficiency.

1915: Hughes Intervenes for Currie

In 1915, Hughes intervened on behalf of Currie, saving him from criminal charges related to embezzling money from his militia regiment in June 1914.

1915: Exposure of Wasteful Purchasing

In 1915, Scandals continued from the exposure of wasteful purchasing.

1915: War Purchasing Commission Formed

In 1915, the management of spending for supplies was taken away from Hughes and assigned to the newly formed War Purchasing Commission.

June 1916: Criticism from Toronto Globe

On 22 June 1916, The Toronto Globe attacked Hughes for his "swashbuckling" speeches that were damaging relations with Britain.

July 1916: Hughes Booed at Camp Borden

In July 1916, Hughes visited Camp Borden and was booed by "his boys," who blamed him for water shortages.

August 1916: Dinner Confrontation Between Byng and Hughes

On 17 August 1916, Byng and Hughes had a tense dinner where they clashed over promotion powers within the Canadian Corps, leading to Byng threatening to resign if Hughes continued his interference.

September 1916: Formation of the Acting Overseas Sub-Militia Council

In September 1916, Hughes, without informing Borden, announced in London the formation of the "Acting Overseas Sub-Militia Council," chaired by Carson, with Hughes's son-in-law as chief secretary.

November 1916: Ross Rifle Abandoned by CEF

In November 1916, after Hughes' resignation, the Ross rifle was fully abandoned by the CEF in favor of the British standard Lee–Enfield rifle.

November 1916: Hughes's Forced Resignation

In November 1916, after the creation of the Ministry of the Overseas Military Forces of Canada, Hughes was forced to resign. On 9 November 1916, Borden dismissed him from the cabinet due to his assumption of powers he did not possess and the problems he created.

1916: Recruiting Campaign and Battalion Losses

In 1916, the Defence Department spent $30,000 in Quebec in a campaign headed by Colonel Arthur Mignault to recruit more volunteers. After the battle of Courcelette in 1916, two CEF battalions from Quebec, the 163rd and 189th, suffered losses and had to be broken up due to lack of replacements. Also in 1916, the Ontario government's attempt to ban schools for the French-Canadian minority caused resentment in Quebec, further hindering recruiting efforts.

1916: Hughes Recruits American Volunteers

In early 1916, Borden became aware that Hughes had been using Defence Department funds to recruit for the American Legion in the United States, violating American neutrality. Hughes had also appointed Reverend C.S. Bullock, an American Unitarian clergyman, as his chief recruiter and given him a colonel's commission, despite Bullock having no military experience.

January 1917: Hughes's Plans with Beaverbrook and Lloyd George

In January 1917, Hughes floated a plan for Beaverbrook to use his influence with David Lloyd George to have him appointed to the Privy Council. At the same time, Hughes remained frustrated that Garnet Hughes was only commanding the 5th Canadian Division.

January 1917: Hughes Accuses Borden's Government

On 20 January 1917, Hughes accused the finance minister, Sir William Thomas White, of irresponsibly running up the national debt, and his successor Albert Edward Kemp of mismanaging the defence ministry, in his first speech to the Commons after his sacking.

1917: Imperial Munitions Board Takes Over

In 1917, due to the Shell Committee's failures and accusations of war profiteering, the British Minister of Munitions, David Lloyd George, stopped all orders until Canada created the Imperial Munitions Board, headed by Joseph Flavelle. Flavelle ended the corruption and increased efficiency, leading to a significant increase in shell production. This infuriated Hughes.

1917: Negative Impact on Operational Performance

Previous to 1917, Hughes insistence of the utilization of Canadian manufactured equipment, negatively affected the operational performance of the CEF.

May 1918: Hughes denounces Ministry of Overseas Forces

On 6 May 1918, Hughes gave a speech before the Commons denouncing the Ministry of Overseas Forces for an excessive number of bureaucrats, and for the first time indirectly attacked Currie as he spoke of officers with a "reckless disregard for life".

October 1918: Hughes accuses Currie of "useless massacres"

In October 1918, Hughes wrote a letter to Borden accusing Currie of "useless massacres of our Canadian boys, as needlessly occurred at Cambrai." Borden ignored Hughes's request that Currie and his "Black-hand Gang" be sacked.

November 1918: Hughes accuses Currie of attacking Mons

In March 1919, Hughes claimed that Currie had only attacked Mons in November 1918 to have the Canadian Corps end the war where it began.

November 1918: Armistice news ill-received by Hughes

The news of the Armistice on 11 November 1918 was not well-received by Hughes, as he felt that Currie had stolen the glory of victory that was rightfully his.

December 1918: Hughes calls Currie a murderer

In December 1918, Currie learned that Hughes was telling people that he was "a murderer, a coward, a drunkard and almost everything else that is bad and vile".

March 1919: Hughes accuses Currie of needlessly sacrificing soldiers

On 4 March 1919, Hughes accused Currie in a speech before the Commons of needlessly sacrificing the lives of Canadian soldiers and made claims about the Second Battle of Mons in November 1918.

May 1919: Hughes claims Currie is overshadowing him

In May 1919, Hughes wrote to Garnet claiming that instructions had been issued to writers and correspondents to ensure he was overshadowed by others, especially by Arthur Currie.

September 1919: Hughes accuses Currie of cowardice

In September 1919, Hughes accused Currie in a speech to the Commons of cowardice at the Second Battle of Ypres, claiming he fled from his command post when he saw the chlorine gas.

June 20: Hughes claims Currie's reputation is propaganda

On 16 June 1920, Hughes said that Currie's military reputation was "propaganda" and that there were dozens of officers who "are regarded throughout the length and breadth of this country as infinitely superior to General Sir Arthur Currie as a general or as a gentleman".