The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-12 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 12, 1853.

TINAaiS MOUT (II:M.104D) BILL.—By Serjeant SII EH,
from the inhabitants of Craigboy, In the barony of Ards,
county Down. and Dellyhay, county Dawn ; Mr. SWIFT,
signed by 1,220 inhabitants of the parish of Cirry, county
Sligo; in Livour of.
AriiittallATED AblAt'Ll's BI:L,—By Mr. PHINN, from
Maidstone, signed by 4fis persons, in favour of, and praying
that corporal ptniihment may be inflicted on persons con-
rived ut amanita on woinrn and children.

REMoVAL AND SETTLEMENT OE THE POOR.—By Mr.
FULLIiIt, from the board of guardians of West Elite, SUS-
Sex. for the repeal r.f.
RESTRICTION OF ItArLwAT TRAFFIC ON SVNTATS.—
By Mr. WHALLEY, frion reterbarough, pining for.
CocxTT Counrs JVIIISDICTION.—By Mr. WHALLEY,
from the inhabitants of LI ingyllin, Montgomeryshire,
prryinq for extension of to Chancery.
Tue TRUCE STaren.—By Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, from
the bakers and others to $u .bury, Suffolk, complaining of.
At GMENTATION OF THE ARMY.—By Mr. THORSRLY,
fern W.dstrharapton, against.
TITHES, CHURCH RATES, ttE.—By Mr. HUME, from
Sandbach, for the abolition of.
COLONIAL PINNY POSTACIE.—By Mr. MOFFATT,
from Tobago, in favour of.
Pcitttc-nocses (SCOTLAND) HILL.—By M►. CRAU-
FURD, from merchants, spirit dealers, and inhabitants of
Ayr Inumerously signed); Mr. litiME, from Montrose
and Paisley ; against.

to observe exactly how the matter stood at the time of the
second reading. At the time that the bill was read a second
time they were told that tho great object of the measure was
to give to the Canadian legislature the sole power over all
matters of purely local concern and interest, but when they
examined this bill in committee they found it would not be
confined in its operation to those matters which were purely
of local interest, but that in fact it rioted to investments
made in this country, and that it would enable the Canadian
legislature to deal with those investments under the plea of
local self government. No local interest was in any way
affected by such investments. Again, at the time
of the second reading of the bill, they were
told that the effect of it would be to put the English and
Scotch churches on precisely the same footing as the Roman
ealiolic clergy in Canada, but when the question was exa-
mined in committee it appeared that they were placed on a
very different fo.Aing, and that the endowments of the Ro •
man cathulics could not be touched without the concurrence
of the imperial parliament, while the endowments given to
the protestant, in Canada could be touched, could be dealt
with, and could be destroyed by a maj irity of the Canadian
legislature alone. ([fear, hear.) Again, at the time of the
second reading of the bill they were told, and properly, that
there were certain existing interests reserved for them to
whom they now belonged on the ground that the faith of
the crown was ple:lged to maintain them, but when
they pressed her Majesty's ministers to give them an an-
swer as to the way in which that pledge was given, no
answer had as yet been elicited, because they knew that the
faith of the crown was no more pledged to these particular
interests than it Aram to the whole of th sc reserves. And,
lastly, let ham point out that at the time of the Fecund revil-
ing of the bill they were told that the settlement of 1810
was nut a compact in the sense of its being a national agree-
ment, and when they got into committee the third clause
was withdrawn from the bill, on the express ground that
the settlement of 1810 was a contract so far as to alf,ct the
liability of this country ; and mark the consequence—the
consequence being that the prior obligation resting upon Ca-
nada in rsspect tit which the guarantee WAS given by this
country could be entirely taken away by the Canadian legis-
lature. Now there wire clauses—there were anomalies
with ri ference to this bill which convinced hint that it
could not have been brought forward with that considera-
tion which he should have expected from her Majesty's
government; and he could only account fur it in one of
two ways, either because the government was divided on
the question, or because—which he thought was perhaps as
much the truth—that when the matter came to be discussed,
they felt that the bill, as it originally stood, was not, in rc-
lettuce to what they did in 1310, either wise or lust. That
'acing so, let them examine on what principle this
bill was founded, and what were the considera-
tions mainly inducing the government to being it
forward. The principles on which it we: founded,
and the considerations which induced government to

bring it forward were moat ably stated by the Chancellor of
the Exchequer ; and he thought the argument pot by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer might resolve itself into two
points—first, that it was their duty to give to the Canadian
legislature the largest power with reference to matters of
purely local self-government ; and secondly, that if those
powers were in any way abridged by them (the imperial
parliament) there was a danger of promoting di-content iu
that colony, nr, as he thought he forcibly put it, a
danger of occasioning a collision between the colonial legis-
lature and the imperial parliament. Now there., he took
it, were the main considerations which had induced the
government to bring in this bill. Well, then, let
them see how the matter stood. He was not
going to dispute the question of local self-go
?moment, for he blieved he had advocated that
question before some of those whom he now saw oppo.
site to him had advocated it. Ile was for giving local self-
government in the fullest sense of the word to their dif-
ferent colonies as soon as they were capable of exercising it
constialtionally but be doubted very much whether the
question of selegovernmentnrese on this question, and for
this reason, that he thought there were anterior obligations
resting on the imperial parliament to take care that cer-
tain rights which were guaranteed by the imperiel parlia-
ment should be preserved to those for whom they were in-
tended. Assuming that there was a trust, he denied that the
question of local self-government arose at all. If it did, he
should concur with the government iu giving to the colony
the power of exercising that government, but denying, as he
did, their premises, he wax bound to resist their conclusion.
(Hear, hear.) But now came the material question—was
there suck a trust ? That must be determined by a refer-
ence to the statutes and charters under which the reserves
were originally granted, and subseque ttiy confirmed to
the protestant clergy of Canada. The title of these reserves
was c seal with the cess:un of Canada itself. At that period
the colony was peopled by Roman catholic. ; and there-
fore the parliament of this country most properly and most
wisely, by a statute passed in the year 1774, secured to the
Roman catholic clergy all their accustomed dues and rights,
bat as it was thought desirable to encourage protestant im-
migration to this new posse. sion of the British Crown, the
other dues and rights which had not been appropriated to
the Roman catholic clergy were, by the same act
of parliament, secured to the protestant clergy.
That we, allowed by the royal proclamation of 1770,
which directed for the first time' that one.seventh
of the unappropriated lands should be applied for
. .

that purposelso.that the title of the Roman cilkolic and
the protestant clergy rested upon precisely the same
foundatieu ; and if they shook the one they must
shake the other also. (Hear, hear.) No change wes
made in the statute of 1791 by the imperial parliament until
the year 1840, when it was enacted that one-half of the re-
serves shuuld be distributed by the governor and execteive
council atrongst the different religious bodies in Canada in
proportion ;to tho numbers of the respective sects in the
colony. That settlement was considered to be a perma-
ne•t one; and he appealed to the house whether it
was wise, or even decent, to disturb it? (Cheers.) If ever
a settlement was solemnly made, if ever a guarantee was
distinctly given, if ever a duty was imposed upon parlia-
ment, that settlement, that guarantee, and that duty were
involved in maintaining the existing settlement. If they
passed the bill they would be, in fact, establishing the
voluntary system on the destruction of religious endow-
ments. In the next place, they would run the risk of ex-
citing great religious *trite with reference to those whose
endowments they were not going to touch. And thirdly,
they would shake the confidence of the colonies in the pro-
tection which they derived from the imperial legislature.
Mr. DRUMMOND said that tlt nigh as the debate pro-
seeded since the introduction of the bill, it had been much
simplified, and the bill itself had been somewhat altered, it
was still neither more nor less than a measure of church
plunder. (Hear, hear.) So many extravagant things had
Men enunciated siuce its introduction, that he was loth to
let it go away without something likes parting benediction.
(Laughter.) When his noble friend at the head of the go-
vernment announced the principles on which the govern-
ment was to be conducted, he told them that they
were to be those of "conservative melee's." The mea-
sure under discussion was a measure of " progress" no doubt,
but he much feared that his noble friend, in sticking to the
substantive, had forgotten the adjective, for the " conserva-
tive" quality in the measure he was at a loss to discover.
(Laughter.) It was progressive, but it was in the direction
of the destruction of all religious establishments. (Hear,
bear.) The Aberdeenshire phrase, therefore, of " conser-
vative progress," when translated into pure Cornish, meant
consistent radicalism. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.)
This measure certainly bore a greater analogy to the latter
than to the former. (Hear, hear.) Another most extraor-
dinary thing connected with the bill was that when a
bishop thought it right and fair to stand up for his
absent brethren, he was forthwith denounced as
the pest of hie diocese. (" Hear," and laughter.)
Though it might be secundmin artem to abuse an absent ad-
versary, yet to abuse him in this manner was hardly fair,
and it certainly was more like consistent radicalism than
" conservative progress." (" Hear, hear," and laughter.)
Another bishop, however, did strongly recommend the
plunder of his brethren in Canada. This brought to his
mind the anecdote of King James, Andrews Bishop of
Winchester, and Neale Bishop f Durham. When
the king asked if he might not take some part
of the temporalities of the elute', the Bishop of Durham
made answer, " Sire, you are the light of our eyes and the
breath of our nostrils ; take what you please." Bishop
Andrews was silent, and when the king asked him for his
opinion, he said, " I think your Majesty may securely take
the property of my brother Durham." (Laughter.) It
was well worthy the consideration of the Chancellor of Ale
Exchequer whether he might not take in like manner the
temporalitiesof the see of Oxford. (Laughter.) The dis-
cussion of this bill afforded a curious instance of
the way in which gentlemen could commit crimes,
provided they did not use harsh language. There
were on the ministerial bench many soi-disant friends
of the church, and the words sacnlrge and ecclesiastical
plunder sounded very harshly in their hearing. They
therefore banished these words, and said they would not
hear of such things in Canada, but they said " we will
allow the Canadians to deal with church property."
(Cheers.) Now he believed that the gentlemen behind the
ministerial bench who supported this measure had too
much sense to quarrel about words. (" Hear, hear,"
from the liberals.) Yes, " Hear, hear," but he
would ask her Majesty's ministers if the same
argument and language would not be as strong if Ireland
were substituted for Canada. (Hear, hear.) He doubted
very much whether the " Pope's Bran Band " would care
very much about the word, provided they got the power of
dealing with the church property in Ireland. (Hear, hear.)
He did not think so badly even of the dishonesty of the
proposal as the humbug with which it was sought to be
glossed over. (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said he believed and hoped that the Canadians
would not secularise the church property. Faith
and hope were cardinal virtue+, and he should
be sorry to deprive any gentleman of them,
and he knew no persons who needed a larger share of them
than Chancellors of the Exchequer. (Laughter.) But faith
and hope •ere good or evil, according to what they rested
on. He had faith, but no hope, that they would secularise
this property, because they said plainly that they meant to
do so, and because a great many of those who supported the
measure in that house did so with that avowtd intention.
(near, hear.) Ho (Mr. Drummond) did not like doing
things by halves, and since her Majesty's government
were going to act the part of Filch in Canads,
they ought with equal justice play the part of Sixteen
String Jack in Ireland, and follow it up by coming out as
Cap4oi.l Macheath in England—making a beginning with
the see of Oxford. (" near, hear," and laughter.) When-
ever he joined them in their system of church plunder, he
gave notice that he would begin his plunder with the rich
instead of the poor man. (near.) He would plunder the
wealthy church of England, and not the poor church of
Canada. (Hear, he ir.) The morality would be the same,
and the profit would be much greater. (" Hear, hear,"
and laughter.) It might be a good thing or
them, when they were fairly quit of those colo-
hies which had got representative government, and
which would begin by secularising church property. They

they. thought it would be
little what was involved
confined to cotton and to corn. The separation of those
ibnadthgauttqfuteuestrondot freebut thtritTebsultif
colonies would he the necessary consequence of that mea-
sure. lie hoped that this was the view taken of this great
question by her Majesty's government. The colonies
would be glad to come to a compromise by getting leave to
rid of colonies
elect • president. This would enable them to get rid of
many troublesome questions when they got
that brought nothing to them but disgrace and shame.
(Bear, hear.)
Mr' li.-SEYMER said that he intended to vote for the
thirdreading of the bill, and not with the view of having I
these clergy reserves secularised—a circumstance which he
should see with regret. (11,ar.) Ile should support the
bill as a conservative and for the conservatiun of the union
between the mother country and Canada. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. LIDbELL said that they heard a great deal in the
course of this debate of the majority of public feeling, but
ho denied that a majority of public feeling was:al-
ways a just criterion of what was right. The early
French republic acted in accordance with public feeling
when they confiscated property ; but would it be contended
that it was right to be guided Ly public feeling in such a
case.? What was the use of supporting a large force in
Canada if it was not for the purpose of maintaining the
dignity of the crown and the English law in that country ?
Ile maintained that it would Le a breach of faith to pass
this measure ; and the right hon. gentleman, the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, had admitted that it would !v., inch in
ISM The minority in Canada had been faithful and loyal to
the mother country, and it would be using them must ill to
pass this measure in despite of their feelings. (Hear, hear.)
He should certainly vote for the amendment; and he re-
gretted that this iniquitous bill had ever been laid on the
table. (Laughter.)
Sir E. DEItINU said it appeared to him important that
the house should determine whether or not the enact-
ments of 1791 and 1840 were to be considered
permanent and irrevocable. If they should be of
opinion that no alteration whatever could be made without
a breach of faith, it would, he apprehended, be their
bounden duty, totally irrespective of the opinion of the
people of Canada, to apply the rest reel to these purposes,
end those purposes only, for which they were originally de-
signed; if, on the other hand, it should appear that they
were susceptible of revision, the question then narrowed
itself into the issue, was legislation to be undertaken by
the imperial or by the colonial legislature ? (Hear, hear.)
Having listened with great attention to the various argu-
ments which had been adduced, he had arrived at the con-
clusion that the existing arrangement was not to be consi-
dered permanent and irrevocable. Placing reliance on the
religious feeling of the people of Canada, he would cheer-
fully leave to them the solution of the question ; confident
that they would pursue such a course as would secure to
the colony the blessintts of internal peace Red tranquillity,
and thus contribute most effectually to its future welfare
and its lasting prosperity. (Cheers.)
Mr. CHILD looked upon this as an imperial ques-
tion, and one which if decided in accordance with the
wishes of the Canadian parliament would involve a viola-
tion of the plighted faith of this crown and kingdom.
Mr. F. PEEL said that he had before explained that
the principles he ventured to lay down with refer-
ence to this bill had no reference whatever to re-
ligious endowments generally, but to one particular
country, Canada ; and to one particular endowment, namely,
the clergy reserves of that province. It was not because lie
supported a certain applicatiou of these rest ryes in Canada,
that therefore he wavered in his attachment to the esta-
blished church. Ile supported the church of England be-
cause he himself belonged to it, and because it was in unison
with the sentiments of the great body of the people, hut the
case was entirely different with respect to Canada. It
had been attempted to Paten upon the government
an imputation of breach of trust, but he (Mr. F.
Peel) felt satisfied that they had fulfilled every obligation
of public faith. They had respcsted all existing rights, and
miuisters of every religious endowment had been held
intact in the positions they previously occupied.
Having recapitulated the history of previous legislation on
this subject, which has been more than once reported, the
hon. member proceeded to say, that the present bill fulfilled
all engagements of public faith, and maintained the strictest
impartiality and equality of dealing towards all religious
denominations, while, at the same time, it supported that
policy which had been of late years carried out with such
eminent success in Canada—he meant that of leaving it,
in so far as was consistent with its dependency on this
country, in the entire and unrestricted management of its
own internal affairs. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. NAPIER, thought that the question would be
very simple one if the view taken by the hon, gentleman
who had just sat down was the view in which the govern-
ment presented the bill to the House of Commons, but that
did not at all appear to be the case. There had been great
evasion, and changing and chopping in the arguments of
the government. One argument on which the bill had been
rested was, that it was to place the protestant reserves and
the property of the church of Rome in Canada on a footing
of perfect equality. That, however, was not at all the fact.
(Hear, hear.) Ile maintained that the ecclesiastical rights
of the church of Rome would remain protected both by the
aces of 1791 and 1810, and that thus that church
would remain, under this bill, in a better posi-
tion than the church of England. (Hear, hear.)
The faith of the crown was pledged, and could not be broken
by law ; and because they could not violate it themselves
the government proposed to put it in the power of others to
violate it. (Hear, hear). The guarantee was not to pay
7,1001. a.year, but one-third of the value of all the land
that might hereafter be sold. The contrast ought to be
kept as a contract would have been kept between the noble
lord and Sir Robert Peel. It ought to have been kept as an
arrangement between two honourable gentlemen. They
ought not to ride off on an opinion of the law officers of the
crown, that if the reserves were secularised the guarantee
would be lost. The mission of England was not merely to
make a great market for Manchester ; but she had a great
moral obligation to discharge. (Hear, hear). Let us pre-
serve our own honour and faith, and whether our colonies
remained ours or not, we should retain a position before the
world that would be worthy of the name and glory of old
England. (Loud cheers).
The SOLICITOR-OLNERAL would not have troubled
the house but for some words and principles which had
been freely used by the right hon. gentleman who had just
spoken. They had heard a great deal about parliamentary
title and private rights ; and so far as they existed they
were preserved entire iu the bill. (Hear, hear.) lie de-
sired the house to discriminate between parties who were
in the enjoyment of stipends and the power of giving a
society here in England to distribute a large amount of
money amongst certain individuals they might cleft.
(Hear, hear.) He would admit that when a private indi-
vidual, or even a public body, had acquired property, it
ought to be preserved. The act of 18411 had provided cer-
tain stipends during the lives or incumbency of the Cana-
dian clergy, and then it stipulated that the whole should be
thrown into one sum for tho benefit of the people of that
colony. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman hail talked
about parliamentary conduct, the faith of the crown,
and public duty ; but fur whose benefit had the stipulation
been entered it.to ? For the people of Canada ; and what
had been called breaking a compact was simply to put the
compact under their control and disposal. (near, hear.)
Having made provision for a certain number of men, they
said to the Canadians, " There, now, deal with it as you
please. We meant it for your advantage, deal with it as
in your own judgment you think is best for your own in-
terests." (Cheers.) Yet that was represented as an inva-
sion of private rights. By a singular confusion of terms it
was called a breach of parliamentary and royal faith to re-
move from the people of Canada that badge of subjection
involved in having this money doled out to them by a so-
ciety in England, and to commit the management of those
funds to the representative body of the whole people.
(Cheers.)
Bir J. PAKINGTON said that in his opinion the pro-
ceedings of that day had thrown a stain upon the character
of British statesmen—(laughter)—and that that opinion
had not been affected by the short and feeble speech which
they had just heard. (Hear, hear.) He should be
sorry to say anything personally offensive to any member of
the government or to any hon. gentleman on the other side
of the house; but the time had come when those who had
any respect or reverence for fair dealing and honour in the
conduct of public affairs ought not to shrink from a declara-
tion of their feelings in plain terms and at any cost. (Hear,
hear.) After the extraordinary course which the govern-
ment had taken, he was not disposed to dilate upon many
comparatively unimportant features of the debate; nor
' would he dwell upon the singular vacillation, the inconsis-
tency, the self-contradiction, and the contradiction of one
another which marked the proceedings of the government
upon this bill. (Cheers.) lie would pus over for instance
the attempt of the right hon. baronet (Sir W. Moleswortb)
to show that the object of the bill was to place Roman
catholic and protestant interests on the same footing—
a statement which the noble lard had been obliged to cor
rect. Surely the right hen. baronet, of all men, ought to
, have known something of the measure, seeing that when
, the late government had refused to touch it, he had himself
given notice that he would bring it in. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord, again, had said that bill was doubtfully worded
as to the right of either house to interpose by en
address to the crown ; and he had amended it upon report
by the insertion of the word,' 39th section :" but he (Sir J.
Pakington) was told by learned friends that the clause woo
' still ambiguous. What was the noble lord's next proceed•
ing in committee? Why, Ito omitted the third clause, be-
' cause, as he had told the house, he felt hound to retain the
guarantee upon the Consolidated Fund which had
been given by the act of 1810. Yet that night
, the noble lord had told them that though it was the opinion
of the law officers that the guarantee would be lost if the
estates were secularised, yet he did not intend to propose any
, clause to prevent that from being thecase. He (Sir J.
Pakington) was grieved and astonished at the noble lord's
announcement. The noble lord and his colleagues were
bound either to withdraw the bill, or to insert in it a provi-
sion which should give due effect to the guarantee.
(Cheers.) It was a sadday for England. (Laughter.) No
affected ridicule should deter him from giving expression to
his sentiments. (Hear, hear.) Ile treated such affected
ridicule as it deserved, and lie repeated that it was a sad day
for England when party necessities and party feeling in-
duced men, whom he believed to be of as high honour and
character as any in this "reentry in their private capacity,
when they were transacting the public business, to
deviate from those principles which would have
actuated them in their private affairs. He regarded
this bill as an act of spoliation; it had become more so than
ever after the aclnrisa' which Lad beets made tomightfrith
regard to the guarantee, and lie denounced it as, in his de-
liberate conviction, a breach of faith on the part of the
crown, a compromise of the honour of parliament, and as
inconsistent with the welfare of the country.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I must, in the first place, say, that
the hon. and learned gentleman tho member for the Uni-
versity of Dublin and Cie r;glit hon. gentleman who has
just sat down, have not from 'sting all the fatal

and lamentable coneequencee which they anticipate from
this measure. They bare not Meister, either, frote etatiem
that if the refusal of this power to the legislature of Canute
should lead to the separation of Caned* from this empire,
they are prepared to embrace that alternative. Wear,
hear.) Now, before the house rejects a bill from weed,
such consequences are predicted, it is surely worth their
while to ceusider whether there are any sufficient reasons,
in justice or policy, why that rejection should take place.
The right hon. gentleman has epoken much of the pain
with which he has viewed them guarantees broken, and
those princiel, s departed from which he thinkeought to be
maintained. (Hear, hear) Ilut before we assent to by
doctrines on this subject, let us look a little at the nos.
ture of this property of the clergy reserves, anti mime
is its present position. In Feel, Mr. Pitt, proposiug to
separate Canada int, two provinces, of which the one
should bePench and Renton Catholic, and the tither should
be English and protestant, peeweed that, in order to 111101
Min a pruttstaut clergy in respectability, onemeventh of
the land, beleneing to the crown, the waste lands, should
be devoted to the maintenance of a protestant clergy.
Wh m premed by Mr. Fox us to the inconvenience of such
an arrangement, as to the numbers there might be jellaba-
log that province, who were not protestant),, or being pre-
testauts, did not belong to the Church—Mr. l'itt said, fairly
awl candidly—" This is an arreugement open to revision ;
and if it should be found that the quantity of land is too
much, that the protestant clergy do oat require so large
provision. this, liee every other part of the act I am propos.
ing, will be sate et to revision.' Accordingly a power to
altar and repeal that act was included in it. In 1831, Lord
Goderich, with the opprobution of the crown, advised the
legislature of Upper Canada to part with the
endowment altogether, and to appropriate other-
wise the fun& arising front that endowment.
Nor did Lord Godethh, the le..eretary of State, swum
that this was an inelientible endowment with regard to
which the bononr of the cr iwn was pledged. In lel3
bill came over here from Creeds proposing to make an
alteration in the distribution of the proceeds of these clergy
reserves. I found that it was impossible to obtain the ap-
probation of parliament to that bill. I found that it WO6
liable to objection in poiut of law. I found alto that so
arrangement of a similar kind was out likely to pass
through the other ho me of parliament; and I cemented,
though I did not think the arrangement au equitable one,
to a division of the recce& of these r. serves. lem yeti
ready to state that I considered this is the view of a lied
arrangement of the matt. r, that I believed the churches
of Ei.gland and &ottand would employ those sums which
were devoted to them by that act of parliament. At the
same time, it woe impeeiehle not t e see that, in the coarse
of events, the etfairs of Celia& might take that CAR.
plexien, that it would be it: peasible to maintain
that guarantee. Well, what has happened ? For men;
years the arrangement was undisturbed. The right roan.
gentleman who hoe just sat down sees that the Rummies
has been lightly withdrawn. Was it lightly withdrawn?
In:J sly, 1330, the Canadian Assembly addressed the crown,
requesting to have the power to dispose otherwise of the
clergy reserves, or of the funds re isiiig from them. 'the
opplication was considered by the government of that day;
and Lord Grey answered that it was a matter exclusively
affecting the domestic concerns of Canada, and therefore,
although the government greatly regretted that the act of
parliament should be disturbed, yet they could not, accord-
ing to all the principles which they had held and professed,
refuse to Canada the power of interfering with that are
!enurement, and making a new distribution of those re-
serves. (Hear, hear.) Was it a matter of domestic con-
cern for Canada, or not, that the members of the Church
of England, being one-eighth of the population of Upper
Canada, should have o"•-half of the proceeds of these re.
serves? Was that a domestic concern of Canada, or of Great
Britain, or of the United Kingdom, or of the empire at
large? (Hear.) I think it cannot well be denied that the
persons most interested in that arrangement were the
people of Canada themsele CA, (Hear, liar.) But what
said the right hon. gentleman when he was Secretary of
State ? He mid he was Inc re-distribution. (Hear, hear.)
lie said that he should not object, when it woe shown to be
expedient, to depart from or disturb the existing arrange-
ment. But now he says that re-distribution it entirely
different from spoliation. (.' Hear, hear," from the
opposition.) Tire right honourable gentleman and
Mr. Walpole have talked of the various arguments
that have been put, anti have said that there is no
end to the melees grounds upon which the Pleasure has
been supported. The tact is, they have endeavoured to
shift the ground ; and when they have been answered upon
all these points, they turn rouna and say, " lota argue the
question upon various grounds, and do not put it upon any
great issue." But that has only been done to meet the
shifts and expedien's by which they were endeavouring to
oppose this bid. (Hear, hear.) We have never denied
that the great (Lime is. whether or no you will give the
province of Canada the power of legislating on this subject.
(Hear, hear.) And that is my answer to Mr. Walpole,who
tells the house that the voluntary principle is a very bad
principle, and that the principle of church estableh-
ments is a very good principle, and leads the
people to prosperity and to happiness. All I have
to say upon that subject at present is, that is an
argument which I advise the right hon. gentleman to ad-
dress to the Assembly of Canada. (Hear, hear.) If we
were arguing the question in this house, with respect to the
United Kingdom I should Agree with him. But with re-
gard to this question as it effects the people of Canada (for
Ido not shrink from that consequence) I say we arc of
opinion that church establishments are not for the benefit
of Canada, and that religion will not be injured by Adopt-
ing the voluntary principle ; and that neither the church
of England, nor the church of Rome, nor the ministers of
any other denoinination, sh iuld have incomes from the
state, or any part of these clergy reserves, it' that is the
conclusion, the strong determination, of the people of
Canada on this question. (Cheers.) I say they must have
their own will in tare matter. (Cheers.) On the other
hand, if they shall think that at least a large portion of
these clergy reserves should he ilistributee equally among
the ministers of religious denominations, I believe they will
come to a very wise conclusion ; but it is a conclusion
which I will use no force or compulsion to
make them arrive at. (Cheers ) The right hon.
gentleman has argued as if this was a new principle
altogether, and we were endeavouring to establish a system
which had been hitherto unknown. But if he will loot
back to tire debate in 1791, he will see that, en the first in-
troduction of the Conetitutional Act by Mr. I'itt, Mr. Foe
laid down that rule which we now adopt, and which we
think must be our rule on this suteect. Ile said "he was
willing to declare that the giving to a colony so far distant
from Eugland the power of legislation and of governing it-
self, would exmedingly predispose him in favour of every
part of the plan. If the colony was to have a local govern-
ment liberally formed, that would incline him to overlook
defects in other parts of the bill because he was prepos-
sessed with the belief that the only way of retaining distant
colonies with advantage was to enable them to govern them-
selves." That was the principle laid down by Mr. Fox in
1791, 62 years before the present time. (Cheers.) It is the
only principle by which we can hope to maintain harmony
and union between this country and Canada. If we say
we must have our own notions, must make our own ideas
prevail, and that our own laws and regulations must be the
normal rules and regulations of Canada, then indeed the
connexion between this country and that great province
will be very doubtful. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Walpole says
that the imperial legislature must govern the colonies
according to its own views, leaving the colonial assemblies
to regulate minor matters. It is quite obvious to me—and
I am sure the majority of the house will agree with me—
that that is not the kind of connexion which can long sub-
sist. (Cheers.) When you have a province with two mil-
lions of inhabitants, which is daily and hourly increasing
in population and wealth, which is 3,000 males from our
own shores, the condition of which differs in many respects
from that of the United Kingdom—ie it wise—is It possible
to say to such a province : " We will make laws, leaving to
you only the minor regulations ?" (Hear, hear.) No, sir,
the conuexion must be founded upon liberal and upon
generous principles. (Cheers.) If you so conduct your
legislation, 1 believe the connexion may long endure. 'They
will value yeargenerosity ; they will maintain their deference
for the name of Britons. (Cheers.) I believe that such a con-
nexion—highly honourable to both, highly honourable to
thes country and to the colonies—may be the source of pros-
perity to both. (Hear, hear.) But if, on the other hand,
you attempt to go back to that system of minute regulation,
then indeed you may bid adieu, not to this noble colony
alone, but also to many others. (Hear.) These principles
are not new principles; they are the ancient principles upon
which our colonial empire wan fouaded. I hope the house
will not depart from them this night; and if you confirm
the third reading of this bill, I believe you will strengthen
and perpetuate the connexion with our colonies. (Cheers.)
The house then divided—
For the third reading
Against it
The bill was then read a third time, anti passed.
CONSOLIDATED FUND AND NATIONAL DEBT