Francœur Motion
Motion in the Quebec Legislative Assembly
The Francœur Motion, introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Quebec in 1918 by Liberal MLA Joseph-Napoléon Francœur, declared that Quebec would be prepared to leave the Canadian federation if English Canadians felt the presence of Quebec was "an obstacle to the union, progress and development of Canada".
Que cette Chambre est d’avis que la Province de Québec serait disposée à accepter la rupture du pacte confédératif, si dans les autres provinces, on croit qu’elle est un obstacle à l’union, au progrès et au développement du Canada.
(That this House is of the opinion that the Province of Quebec would be prepared to accept the break-up of the Confederation Pact if, in the other provinces, it is believed to be an obstacle to the union, progress and development of Canada.)
Francœur's motion was a response to the harsh reaction in English Canada to Quebec's strong anti-conscription feelings during the Conscription Crisis of 1917 of the First World War. Many Quebecers opposed conscription because of anti-imperialist sentiments. The motion attracted widespread attention in the press and was notably approved by the newspaper Le Canada. Premier of Quebec Lomer Gouin finally convinced Francœur to withdraw the motion because he did not wish to see a vote taken on it.
The public source identifies “Francœur Motion” as motion in the Quebec Legislative Assembly. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Francœur, Motion and Quebec.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Francœur Motion”, the useful work is to connect “motion in the Quebec Legislative Assembly” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 20, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q5484737. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1918 and 1917.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Francœur Motion”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Francœur Motion primary sources, Francœur Motion archive and Francœur research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Francœur Motion”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Francœur Motion” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.