Star. — London, England, 1828-05-03 00:00:00

Although he certainly thought that the Declaration as i t now stecd was not so unobjectionable as it was when originally fr amed by the Right Honourable Gentleman o ppo‘it , . he could not agree with those who considered i t a iteclaration of religious faith. There could be no d o ubt that tins wa: a Christian realm; and all that the D ec lrr.rion tended to was, to show that the individual ni akine. it was a member of the Christian community. It was in no way a religious test. The words were words which had been often repeated by persons who wholly di.bel:eved Christianity. It was well known that the latter part of the life of the celebrated Bolingbroke— n+ose doctrines had, been combated by so many Chris. t o n writers, and among others by that eminent prelate was occupied with the double employment : f iv:iting works against Christianity, and endeavouring ge t into the House of Lords; the previous step oi I ,i s a inii.sion into which must have been a Declaration . ai de •' nu the true faith of a Christian." The other eritions which had been made in the Bill were of still : e ss importance. Having thus generally adverted to the ~übject, he could only say in conclusion, that it aff, rded ;tint great pleasure to be in any way instrumental to the ntensinn of the religious liberty of any part of his Ma. 'esty's subjects. All he hoped was, that in their turn the Protestant Drs enters might be induced to view with indulgence any future proposition to make religious t,olera , ion univee sal —(Hear, hear, hear). Mr. Secretary PEEL said, there were two or three parts of the Bill, as amended, which might be altered. The words. as they originally stood in the declaration, were, The Protestant Episcopal Church, as by Law established in these Realms." For the words in these Realms, England was substituted. It should be recol lected, that the Protestant Episcopal Church was esta blished in Ireland also, and by the Act of Union indis- ' solubly untied with that England. The Bill would bare been more complete as the words stood before. He th.iught the exception of persons who were no: to b e obliged to take the declaration, ought to have been carried further, and extended to clerks and others fill ing norm situations. Though he had been opposed to this measure when first it was proposed, se:ing tha: for forty years the country had been as free as at any for-' trier period from religious animosity, and fearing that the agitation of the question might tend to produce so 'erious an evil, still, even in the opposition given to it, he sever contended that a sacramental test ought to be contained, or that it was necessary to the maintenance of the Established Church. His argument was, that as the annual Indemnity Act rendered the taking of this test unnecessary, there could be no immediate necessity lot the agitation of the question. However, after it appeared that there was so large a majority as 44 in fsvour of the Noble Lord's proposition, he had but two courses to pursue, either to persevere in his opposition, or to propose such an arrangement as would enable him to co-operate in the further progress of the mea sure, and he chose the latter course—(Hear, hear.) — Nothing which had since occurred convinced him that le took a part which could ultiruately prove detri mental to the interests of the Church.—(Hear)----He would not conceal from the House that there were indi viduals who encouraged further opposition, but there ; wee many who informed him that if opposition were per.evered in, the measure would proceed with in creasing maj•oities in favour of it—(Hear, hear, hear.) There having been a majority of forty-four, it appeared to him that the time had arrived for removing the Sa (Tamen, al Test, against the continuance of w hich strong objectioas might be urged, by those who looked upon Sal attreiit as a solemn religious rite, of which those who partook unworthily, par took of it to their own damna- . lion. Such Living Iris view of the question, the arrange. ment he proposed was the declaration as originally' introduced in the Bill. He did riot accompany it wi h any religious sanction, seeing that there were already three oaths, that of Supremacy, of Allegiance, and of Abjuration, and he felt no wish to multiply them— (Hear). Such having been his view, he did not wish to propose any thng in the nature of an oath in this Bill, and be could no: say that it had been improved by the alter ation. Still it would be unwise at present to suggest an.y change which might endanger the ultimate success of the Bill. He must now say a word with respect to the Prelates. He heard it stated of them, with so:ne feeling of indignation, that they showed more anxiety to consult the temporal than the spiritual interests of the Church in the course tl ey pursued in reference to the Bi,l. Never was there a more unfounded calumny uttered against any set of men. Many of them, he knew, entertained the greatest objection, on religious grounds, to the Sacramental Test, arid were reconciled to the exi-tence of it only by the consideration that the taking if it was rendered unnecessary by the Annual ln.leninay Act. They knew that the great body of their Clergy were also unfriendly to such a Test. If these Reverend Prelates contended for the continuance of it, there night be some ground for the charge of neglect ing the spiritual interests of • the Church. Looking, 6 *evet, to the proltai.le profanation of so sacred a rite, and desirous to c inciliate the Dis enters, they gave their support to the Bill; and under such circumstances did not see how it could with any justice be said that they sacrificed the spiritual interests of the Church to make the temporal more secure—(Hear, hear). Sir T. ACLAND said he should have preferred the B II rithoot the alteration made in the other House of irlunient. But even with these alter ations, he felt ,ie in expressing his concurrence with the Bill in , its last stage. He trusted the amendments would mot with the general accordance of the House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he tnae Kith much reluctance to offer any objection to the 41 lendmetits ; but the alteration which substituted the n rds " in England," for th o se o r i g inally in the. Pill ' l ' ll se materi a l, t h at h e t h oug h t i t necessary to not i ce 1 * The amendment would s eem to imply .that there _ , tie.sr.d a l ess strong f ee li ng f or t h e protect i on o f t h at b dinch of the Protestant Episcopal Church established In Ireland, than for the English branch of the same Church. T o obviate any such inference he should pro Prhe, that atter the words " in. England" there should be added a , and Ireland." 11r. STANLEY thought the Amenirnent unneces t, as the Protestant Episcopal Church of Ireland indissolubly united with that of England. Mr.TRA NT supported the Amendment. He thought clause as at present worded in the Bill, tended ;ly to separate the Church of Ireland from that of end. ' J. RUSSELL saw no occasion for the Amend for the Church, as by law established in Engl Ind. 4 1 in fact the Established Church of England and Secretary PEEL said it would have been better, lis part of the Bill the words were allowed to remaio originally s t oo d, f ur th en the Ch urc h o f I re l an d id have been more distinctly included. However, 1-ct sought for by his Right Hon. Friend, in pro. the Amendment, was perhaps sufficiently pro. for in the preamble, which declared the Churches ;land and Ireland to Ire indissolubly united. There test in Ireland, and therefore he supposed it wa's thought unnecessary to insert Ireland in the declaration, as it was not to be taken there. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER with. drew the Amendment ; and the other Amendments of the Lords were then agreed to. Upon the SPEAKER putting the question that the House ad journ to siondas., Mr. BROUGHAM rose, and spoke as follows:.—Mr. Speaker, as the Bill has now been fully discussed, both upon its general principle, and upon the application of all its details, and as the whole of the amendments made by the other House have been agreed to, the Bill will pass into a law, I will take this opportunity of expressing my sentiments of it in its present shape. I would not say one word upon the subject before, but I now rise to take the earliest opportunity, alter the Bill is assented to, to express my entire and decided concurrence with those who have dissented, in the exercise of theirjudgment, from the amendments brought down from their Lordships' House. I thoroughly agree with the Noble Lord, and the Right Honourable Gentleman, ' who have offered an opinion in this House upon the Amendments of the Bill. I also agree with my Honourable Friend on the bench behind me, who opFosed the discussion as regards the Bill with reference to Quakers and Jews. The Bill, S;r, in my opinion, is worse, by a great deal, than that which was originally introduced by my Noble Friend. I consider the addition of declarations at all to be utterly inconsistent with the spirit and principle of the Bill. The introduction of them sanctions a doctrine which I hold in absolute abhor. rence—the doctrine of Tests— of making religious opinions of any sort whatever the test or passport to civil employments—(Hear, hear, hear). But it tests were to be adopted—if, Sir, any form of • declaration was to be introduced, I acknowledge that none could be devised more prudent, more just, or less liable to serious object:on. But I repeat that the Bill has been made worse, very much the worse, in the other House, by the Amendments or Clauses there introduced. They confine its operation, it is true, to very large classes in point of number, and to classes of great weight in point of pro perty; they confine the Bill to a great majority of all sects, and of course include the whole Church ; but still they exclude sects of great respectability—sects highly respectable in point of numbers, of character, and conduct, and entitled—eminently entitled—to the protection of the Legislature.—(Hear, hear). at these accounts I most thoroughly agree with those whothink that the declarations of the Bill have been made very much worse by the additions of the other H lose. I also agree with the Noble Lord, the Member lir Hunting donshire (Lord Mandeville), with respect to one of these additions—that it is both too much and too little—it is too much fur those who hold that no sect ought to be excluded from civil offices, and too little for those who would with to make religious opinions a pass port t t the confidence and employment of the State. It is by far too little for those who made the addi tion. It leaves very vague and indefinite the faith of a Christian, which it requires the party to declare upon. In every respect the addition is too much for our purposes, and by tar too little for the purposes of the propounders of it. 1 agree with those who have expressed their dissent from another of the additions made to the Bill. I would also add, that I concur with the obser vations of a Right Honourable Gentleman, that the law is not very clear. In its present state, the Bill would puzzle any man, whatever his legal knowledge or professional ingenuity; and after it has passed, it will be very difficult to say what the law All these are great and serious objections to the amendments pro posed; but, nevertheless, I consider the great good that will be attained by the Bill when carried, even with (bete objections. 1 consider its eff:cts in promoting re. ligious liberty, and in paving the way to the practice of absolute toleration—(Hear, hear, hear).—lt would have been a misfortune hardly contemplated, if for any of these objection; we had run the risk of losing the mea sure itself by sending it hack to the other House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the House, on its rising, should adjourn to Monday next.—Agreed to. CANADA. Mr. HUSKISSON said, that in rising to bring for ward his promised motion he had to make his acknow ledgments to the House, that, out of the ordinary course,, they had permitted him to introduce it to their notice. The subjt.ct, though uninviting and bearing upon the in terests and feelings of persons rather remoteiy connected with tit', was, nevertheless, a subject of very con,iderable importance. The questions which he wished the House to send for the investigation of a Select Committee, were— whether the Canadas were admini.t red by a Civil Go vernment calculated to ad vanceitshappiness and security consistentlywith the admitted rights of the Crown of Eng- I ind ? and whether a million of British subjt cts should be maintained in those relations of loyalty, allegiance, and affection, which, should ever exist between her colonies and the mother country ? If in the course of such an inquiry it should be discovered that alterations rt commended by Parliament, for the benefit of the Colonies, had not been a-sented to, then it would he for Pediment to deal with the evil, and make such im provements as in their wisdom they might deem neces sary. It defects and imperfections-existed in the system —if the Administration of the Colonies was not such as the present improved condition of society required, then it would be the imperative duty of Parliament to inter ' fere. The Constitution framed for the Canadas was so framed by some of the greatest characters who ever sat within the walls of this House; but when it was con sidered how little was then known of the real condition of that Colony, it could not be made a matter of sur prise that the then existing system, however suitable and proper, now ceased to be so, and that therefore a change became absolutely necessary. In proceeding to investigate thi, matter, the House should always bear in mind the principle on which it had always acted,namely, to keep inviolably our engagements toward, the French settlers—(Hear, hear)—who were the original popula tion; but at the same time to introduce, as far as it could be done with benefit and safety, Bs itish laws and institutions, and that impartial administration of public justice which had so far advanced this country above most others in the world. There could be no diffi culty in examining into the merits or demerits of the present system as given by the Act of 1791. They had the power to alter and to •ary it as they might think proper, and that not merely on abstratt rules, upon which, if necessary, he could justify interference—but upon the express provisions of that Act itself, and on the authority of those eminent men who had in troduced it into Parliament. Mr. Pitt said, that the Act bf 1791 did not forbid any alterations which might become necessary in the course of time, and, he had also provided lands for the Clergy of the Established Church. This Act was to be considered as any other Act of. Parliament—and of course liable to improvement, if improvement were decidedly called for. There could be no doubt in the judgment of any man, that the British Parliament had tree supreme power to deal with differences which might arise between the people of the Colonies and their immediate rulers or local authorities. The British Parliament stood aloof from the party feelings, the jealousies, and animosities which nos unhappily prevailed in Canada, and its de cision must have force because of its fairness and im partiality. He had not the slightest doubt that it would be most thankfully received, and that the result of the inquiries of the proposed Committee would be to allay those animosities which were now raging with so much fury. He was anxious to save the time of the House, and he would not, therefore, go through in detail -those Changes whiCh had taken place in Ca nada since it had come under the controul of the British Crown—further than to make intelligible to the noust the grounds of difference which existed in those Provinces. Those Provinces were ceded by France to England, by the Treaty of 1763—in full and entire sovereignty. The King of England had full possession of them—to deal with them, with the usual beneficence of the British Crown. It would still be ne cessary to state, that Canada had been settled in the year 17CO. The population was principally confined to districts on the river St.,Lawrence, in which there were two cities, Montreal and Quebec, and the number of French settlers might then have amounted to 65,000. In such a small stock, the feudal system of France was sought to be engrafted in all its deformity and extent ; and as applied to such an almost boundless wilderness, the evils that followed from it were almost incalcula bk. But the law of feudal succession which was pri• mogeniture, was not allowed to prevail, and in its place was substituted the unintelligible and unsatisfac tory " Custom of Paris." So that whei 'Canada was parcelled out into fsirdatories or vassals, there was rio real or assignable severance of property ; in fact, it was a species of incorporeal hereditament, and so subdivided, it had, since descended, until at last no man could know to whom he owed suit or service, or by what exact species of tenure he held his land. In order to prove this fact, he could state, that it was only this morning he had seen an adverti‘ement in a Canada Paper for the sale of one-thirteen hunch eth part of a seignory; of the third of the seventh of the half of a sixth of another; of the forty fourth of the fifth of the twenty-ninth part of a third—{Loud laughter)-- and, in short, it N ould puzzle the ingenuity of Mr. Fin- Won himself to tell exactly what portion of land the one party had to sell, or of which another might become the purchaser. But the difficulty did not stop there, for on every alienation of land there was a fine, and other vexatious imposts, and generally the transfer of property was all but impossible. Shortly after the Treaty of 1763, •the king of England issued a Proclamation inviting his loyal subjects to go and settle in this new country—de elating at the same time, that he would grant them the benefit of a Legislative Assembly, and that they should partake of the benefit of British Laws, and Courts of3u dicature, civil as well as criminal; and bet wesn that time and the year 1774, Briti hLaws Here introduced—British Courts we r e established—and, as our records show, the whole system of British jurisdiction, according to that declaration, were introduced—but not the Legislative Assembly. In 1774 it was not thought desirable to grant the appnintmeut of a Legislative Assembly for nrsny reasons—in the first place, in consequence of the state of the neighbouring American districts ; and iq the second place, because the people were by no means pleased with the new Government. Under such cir cumstance. it was the wish of every man in this country, that the Canadas should be conciliated ; and in 1774 they were mentioned in this Hou e, with a view to re calling the previous declarations, the Colonists stating unequivocally their decided preference of the old system. He should have mentioned that the old system, as re garded the administration of civil law and the French settlement of property, continued, though in other .respects the Bri:ish syAem had prevailed, especially as regarded 'the administration of the criminal las.. Be tween 1763 and 1794 the Crown made several grants of land, and all in what we call free and common soccage, and it was conditioned that it should always continue to be so held. But here was a great complication of law. Some 1 ved under the old S ignorial system, some under the British laws, and in the year 1.774. another impor tant Act was passed frr further conciliating the feelings of the Canadians. Certain onerous and vexatiaus duties had been levied by France while under her dominion; but from the year 1774. they ceased, and others of a lighter pressure were introduced, the produce of which was to be exclusively appropriated to the purposes of trade, and the establishments necessary for her Civil Government. Thus in the year 1774 two boons had been conferred upon Canada—ore restoring the laws under which they lived before the British conquest, and the second the recognition of their est ,blished religion The latter was really a boon of immense importance, and he sincerely trusted it was one in the possession of which she would never be in any degree disturbed. Here he must also in candour admit, that if such re storation had not taken place, the reopl's of Canada would not be so happy as they had suite been. In 1778 a law was passed in this country, not immediately bearing upon Canada, but it become necessary to allude to it, as connected with the general subject of the Go vernment of our Colonies; he alluded to the Declara tory Act—by which it was provided that taxes raised in the Colonies should be expended for their benefit.— ' Perhaps technically this Act could not be said to apply to Canada, she not then having any Legislative As sembly, and in this state of things Canada continued until the period of 1791, when' Mr. Pitt introduced the Act, commonly known by the name of the Que bec Act. By this Act, the controul of all monies arising from trade was placed at the disposal of the Legislative Assembly—such duties having previously been allowed to be raised by the Act of 1774. 'Die great object-which the Act of 1791 had in view was to divide Canada into two Provinces, giving to each a sepa parate Legislative Assembly ; and another great object also was, to invite into them those loyalists who had ad hered to the interests of England iii the struggle with America. In this province these were'no Seignories—no feudal system, and Upper Canada was erected into a se parate government and province. The Ilsuse of Assem bly of the province was to consist of fifty, and the mini mum of the other was to be fi•teen, with a power to add to the number according to the increase of the po pulation. In consequence of this regulation, the gal lant officer who then administered the government, and who he believed was still living, had divide! the Lower Province into eighteen counties, with two Mem. bers each, three counties with one, two cities with four each, one city with two Members, and another city with one. The two banks of the St. Lawrence were divided into several small counties, etch sending two Members, and the other parts of the province being thinly settled, were only called upon to send one or two each. It certainly was an error to take the state of the popula tion as the rule of lepresentation, which was to be for ever binding ; and the effect was, that the whole influ ence was thrown into the' Seignories, and from the want of roads and var isms other obstaclesoathers had little or no share in the representation ; and, in fact, there were now several towns in the Lower Province sending only one or two to the Assembly, which in point of wealth, improvement, and population, exceeded all the counties i n which the ,Seignories existed. In an t d he a l: rd er iii Pro vince the distticts were snore, nearly equalized; they at fist seat, ape Member each, gProto 1 their increese a second, but never any more.— However, if that system had continued, as it might perhaps have properly done, there would have been a considerable accession to the Legislatiie Assembly: The English settlers were ndw almost excluded—only the French had influence there—and the result wa-, that after the lapse of 3.5 years since the passing of the Act, no British Member had obtained a seat in the'Lower House of Assemb y. lie made this statement with the more confidence, because all the parties agreed that some change was indispensably necessary, since Eng lish setters, English law, and English industry, had heen excluded from that Province. Ile did not, however, state that as any matter of charge against the French ; he believed they thought they were wily discharging a duty t themselves in acting as they had done ; but the English hart no means of suing or being sued, except in the French Courts, and no means of arranging or settling the various dis putes growing out of mercantile trensactions, except accord•tig to the regulations of the French code. This was a degree of inconveeience to which the sulajects of the King of England should be nn longer subjected. The feudal tenure prevailing in that province could not be altered, and both in practice and in prece lent, it was now not what it was in the reign of Louis XVI. but as it existed in therarliaments of Paris before the year 1760. There was no appeal from their decisions, it was unlike anything to be found in other civilized countries.—it baffled all ingenuity—it had no foundation in common sense—in a word, it was such a species of law as only did and could exist in the wilderness of Canada. The result of all this state of half barbarism was, that the English in those townships were cut off from all speedy communication with the river of St. Lawrence ; they were like aliens in a foreign land, or as if they were a handful of people planted in the centre of France in the middle of the thirteenth century. Hence arose the great difficulty of setting Lower Canada as compared with the Upper Province. Such manifold inconveniences could only be accurately known to and felt by the sufferers; the law of mettpages was alto. gether unintelligible. The registration of deeds was re sisted, in order to shut out English capital ; the law of Corves also prevailed there; and in the last fifteen years not a single new road was made which could be passed, and thus the English were shut out from all commu nication with the St. Lawrence, except by the tributary streams which other parts of the country produced. In like manner the education of the Dissenters' children was altogether overlooked cr neglected, and they rather inclined to the districts immediately bordering the Unite.' States, than to that cause to which they owed an undivided allegiance. Those evils were of cell siderable standing, and they were felt the mere as the people of this country advanced in knowledge and general improvement. The remedy for this complication of evils was attempted about four years ago—in the year 1822, namely, to unite the two Legisiatores, and by so doing to guard more effectually the interest; of the British settlers; but to that there were several objec tions. It was also suggested as another remedy, that all the portions of Canada inhabited by English settlers should be created into a third province ; hut that again was objectienable, and it remained now for this House to make a choice between evils, and do the best they could to reconcile the rival pretensions ot the different parties. This, however, was not the only object which induced him to bring forward the subject on this oc , cation ; another serious evil had re, er tly grown up, and I e wished to have it preci.ely stated what was the degree of comroul which the British Parliament •hould have over the fiscal department in Canada—. (Cr:es of hear, bear). He had aheady stated that in 1774. the French taxes had been abrogated, and others substituted in their place ; those duties still re mained, and were known by the name of the e perma nent revenue," • amounting to about 33 0001. a year and was applied under the direction of the Lords of the Treasury, by warrant, according to tee ineces saty uses, under the Act of 1774.. Besides this, the Crown of England had a small revenue, or at all events comparatively small, called the " casual revenue," amounting to about 5.0001. a year, aupl ed to the civil purposes of the province. The remainder of the revenue was made tip of local taxes, intpo , cd by the L gilative Assembly since the Act of 1791, for the purpose of defraying the expenditure of the Assembly itself—the improvement of the St. Lawrence, and other,Colonial objects, amounting to about 130 or 110,000/. a year. For some time after 1774, nothing cottld go on more -moodily than the affairs of the lower province ; but as the expenditure increased, it was found that the revenue of 35 or 36,0001. was insufficient to meet the various expenditures of whet might be called the Civil Esta blishments, and it would be unnecessary to trace at any length the difficulties which had recently sprung up, in consequence cf the manner in which this sum was husbanded or expended, or under what authority. The Assembly of Lower Canada claimed the right cf appro. priating the permanent revenue as they thought proper; while, on the other hand, it was maintained that th e Crown posses s ed over this revenue the discretion of ap propriating it for civil and judicial purposes. Now, no lawyer would, he thought, deny the right of the Crown to do so, or that it could not fulfil ali the conditions arising out of good faith, in so disposing of it. The Assembly held that the public had no power over the disposal ofsother parts of the public, and indulged the unwarrantable pretension to appropriate it, item by item, not to the purposes for which it wis specially intended, but to such other purposes as they might think proper. That was the state of the controversy 1 1 at this moment. The agita ion of such a question, each party struggling for their extreme tights, produced considerable embarrassment ; it placed the King's Re presentative in the situation cf taking from the House of Assembly the power of appropriating the first branch of the revenue; and in a free country he (Mr. Huskiston) admitted, that such a course could only be justifi• d ty an imperious necessity.—(Hear.) It was not for him to say, while addressing an English House ot Commons, that such an appropriation should have been made, when tl e Legislature of the Colony said it was contrary to law, or what they esteemed (however erroneously) to b n e )ti t i h in e g law. was e ll l u p t en t d b e e d r b es u u t lt v i t i odl w ie as pr a o h y s i t n l c u e tc w iy •as n , e t c h e a i. t sery for the payment of the Administration. Nothing was done for the advancement of the Colony—ea im provement was taking place—no roads were nuking —education, as he befote stated, was overlouktd—. public buildings were decaying—he would nct sa y every thing was in a state of anarchy—but every thing was in that state, in which every interest cf Canada was most materially suffering. He would not go into further - details, as be thought he had fully made out a ease to show, that if the British Parliament had the right to act, he would call on tie m to exert it, and use their beneficent authority fir the protection of the general interests of the province— (Hear, hear). The. Crown had certainly 'the. right to dispose of what might be called the Civil Lk; and it was too much to expect that the Judges and other Officers should p be dependent for thei r sa la r ies on the prejetdites...Oecaptice, or the dislike of the House of - 61 Iteverer to there nil of ing the in hosevei 11- Mite, and to their s ti tK fie did c " they sac make th Str 1 9 1 Bill till Parlidns sot of Pleasuce this its cis xd meet wi r.J Tne( I4 k %it ainendn vorkis Wa s so a it. Thi Lb. exist. d branch Clutch. nt th be ddde Mr. c 1 sary, as 09 ass indi tlt Mr./ ) y the clat fbe rto ng i l age Lliant Pe" Lord if rest; fi rmeant it • "daft& c ir• In this as they `'coldt7 e obi _ r• • 5 41 • 'ded f og Lngb no ~:~;