The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-09 00:00:00

IRISH POOR-LAWS.

established in that colony; that those embarrassments and dis-
contents were in a great measure attributable to the manner
in which the Executive system was administered; thus laying
the whole blame against the Colonial-office of that day. But
at that time we had a Tory Colonial-office, and he was not
surprised at this; but now, though the Council of his Majesty
was changed from a Tory to be a Whig one, it was by no
meal& clear to him that greater justice had not been done by
the Tories to the colonies than by the Whigs since they
came into office.— (Hear, hear.) Had not the colonies
an equal right to expect a redress of their grievances at
the same time with this country ?—( Hear.) Unfortunately
that was not the case,4and the same abuses existed now that
existed in 1828. He would ask them, was it fit or proper to
call upon that House to abrogate the Constitution of Canada,
and to deprive the people of Canada of their liberties ? The
petition of the people of Canada stated that no alteration or
improvement with respect to Canada could be attended with
the desired effect, unless they established a constitutional sys-
tem of government in that country. But what more did this
petition contain ? It contained, amongst other things, the al-
legations involved in the amendment of his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Leader). The second paragraph of the petition expressed
their deep regret that neither the recommendations nor the
benevolent intentions of that honourable House had been exe-
cuted by the Executive Government in a manner so as to pro-
duce the desired effect. The recommendations of the Com-
mittee of 1828, had now, up to 1834, been unattended with any
redress whatever. The people of Canada had hoped that the
House of Commons of Great Britain had seen an effectual
remedy of the evils of their system, when their agent was
asked in Parliament if he thought that a Legislative Council
could obtain the respect of the people, unless the principle of
election was introduced into its composition, and he answered
that it could not, and that no measure could give peace to
.Ca-
nada, or satisfaction to the Canadians, unless this principle
was conceded to them. All reforms beneficial to the country,
all the wants expressed by the almost universal opinion of the
House of Assembly of that country, were thwarted and set at
nought by the proceedings of the Legislative Council. They
had in Canada an assembly not only impeding all reform, but
the individuals forming which were admitted by the Noble
Lord (Lord John Russell) to have bean guilty of high of-
fences—men who had been guilty of disgraceful crimes.
These persons were continued in office up to the present mo-
ment ; and the Noble Lord only told them that henceforth no
individual should be appointed to the Legislative Council who
had been convicted of disgraceful offences.
Sir G. GREY said that the Hon. Member was mistaken
n stating that the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) had used
hose words.

Mr. HUME said he took the words down at the time.
Sir G. GREY—What his Noble Friend said was, that
whereas the present Act of 1791 did not give the power of dis-
missal except in the case of offences against the Government,
be would introduce a Bill to alter that enactment, by giving
the Crown the power of dismissal in the case of persons who
should be convicted of a misdemeanour. _

Mr. HUM E said that the Crown had this power without
the interference of Parliament. They had used the power
over and over. This was merely throwing out a tub to the
whale.—( A laugh.) The petition to which he had before re-
ferred consisted of sixteen pages: it was presented to that
House as containing at full length the abuses that existed in
Canada, and the complaints made by the people of the colony.
What had that House done 1 Literally nothing. What did
the Canadians do? The people of Canada, finding that his
Majesty's Government was unwilling to carry into effect the
wishes of that House, drew up ninety-two resolutions, detail-
ing at full the abuses which were continued in Canada, and
those abuses they set forth in a manner which was not to be
mistaken. Those complaints had been repeated again and
again; but they had received similar attention from the Exe-
cutive Government, notwithstanding the remonstrances of that
House. The second Committee of this House pointed out to
the Government the necessity of conciliation, and of doing
away with the abuses that existed ; but notwithstanding their
remonstrances the Executive Government kept on in the same
course ; the same system, so disgraceful to all the parties con-
cerned, except these who were sufferers, were continued up to
this day. In resolution 11 they affirmed that the Legislative
Council ought to be popular and independent in order to ob-
tain confidence ; and that nothing but the principle of election
would give satisfaction to the country, and place them in
that station to which they claimed a right--that of a Consti
tutional Government. The existing system did not produce
the result of good government. Lord Glenelg directed the
Commissioners to inquire whether the Legislative Council
had been productive of good government, and whether it
answered the purposes for which it was instituted. In con-
formity with these directions the Commissioners endeavoured
to ascertain how far the Legislative Council had answered
the object of its institution, and of what amendments they
considered it susceptible. What was the result of these in-
quiries ? The Commissioners all admitted that it did not
answer its purposes ; but that, on the contrary, it was the
cause of all the abuses that were complained of, the cause of
the stoppage of justice, and the cause of the failure of those
measures of legislation which the Representatives of the
country deemed necessary. The Commissioners were also
directed to enquire into the most effectual means by which
the Legislative Council might be formed so as to enjoy the
greatest share of the public confidence, and the exercise of
an independent judgment. What was the result of this in-
quiry ? The Commissioners stated that, as at present con-
stituted, the Legislative Council did not answer these
purposes, it did not give satisfaction, it did not ob-
tain the confidence of the people : on the contrary, the
Commissioners told them—and it was well worth atten-
tion—in their last address of September, 1836, that the
provincial Legislatures were interfered with and para-
lysed in their functions by the Legislative Council. How
was that Council constituted? There were incapable and im-
proper men in that Council—men whose conduct was disgrace-
ful in their high station—men who had lost the confidence of
the people and of the House of Assembly—men who had
been guilty of tyranny and oppression in its worst character.
This system was disgraceful. The Commissioners stated
that it was necessary that essential reforms should be intro-
duced into the administration. This was in 1836 ; the pe-
tition from 87,000 of the people of Canada had been pre-
sented in 1827 ; and since that time up to the present hour
no improvement or amelioration bad taken place. The Ca-
nadians had for ten years borne this system of misgovern-
ment. Was not this a sufficient ground for complaint and
discontent ? What were the grievances of which the House
of Assembly complained? They complained that the Exe-
cutive Council stopped all legislation that was for the interest
of the colony. They complained of the rejection by the Le-
gislative Council of all Bills that were for the benefit of the
colony. In 1822, eight Bills were thus lost of the greatest public
importance; in 1823, the number of Bills thus lost was fourteen;
in 1824, twelve; in the following, year, twelve also; in 1826,
nineteen; in 1830, sixteen; in 1831,eleven; and in 1832, four-
teen. These Bills were all passed by the House of Assem-
bly, and were of the greatest interest to the country. He was
satisfied that any lion. Gentleman who read over these grie-
vances would see that it was not without good reason that the
I-louse of Assembly had come to the resolutions to which ho
had alluded. The people of Lower Canada complained that
Lord Gosford, in laying before the House of Assembly his
instructions, withheld some most important information which
was not known to the House of Assembly of Lower Canada
till it was published in Upper Canada by Sir Francis Head.
Was it likely to promote conciliation, or to heal the differences
that existed in this important province, to find the Commission
that was sent out to satisfy the colony acting in this manner ?
The knowledge of this fact was quite sufficient to induce the
House of Assembly to come to the resolutions they bad adop-
ted. These resolutions were the only consistent course of pro..
teeding that the House of Assembly could adopt—he meant
particularly the resolution of stopping the supplies. The
Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) stated that the supplies
were stopped in the House of Assembly. It was no such
thing. The House of Assembly passed the supplies, and on
the 29th of February the Bill for the supply went up to the
Legislative Council, who, on the 9th of March, threw out
the Bill. The Legislative Council insisted that the arrears
should be paid, eed the House of Assembly said—" Re-
dress our grievances first."—( Hear, hear.) They were de-
termined to have their complaints attended to before they
granted the arrears of supply. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when Colonial
Secretary, took upon himself to do that which was a most un-
justifiable proceeding. He took upon himself as Colonial Se-
cretary to violate the Constitution by appropriating- from the
military chest the sum of 31,0001. to make up the deficiency of
the supply that had been voted. Such a proceeding was con-
trary to the interests of the colony, and contrary to the privi-
leges which they enjoyed under the Constitution. He would
be glad to know what precedent there was to justify this ?
He found that in 1828, when a petition was presented from
Upper Canada, a petition was at the same time presented from
Lower Canada by Mr. Stanley. What did that petition cora-
plain of ? It complained in the same manner of the Legisla-
tive Council of Upper Canada, as they now complain of the
Legislative Council of Lower Canada. What did Mr.
Stanley say in his letter acknowledging the receipt of that pe-
tition ? Upon the subject of the Legislative Council he (Lord
Stanley) did not hesitate to say, without meaning any disre-
spect, or casting any reflection upon the individuals that com-
posed it, that it was the root of all the evils complained of in
both provinces ; and he further added that a constitutional re-
medy was open to the public, by stopping the supplies. This
was the advice of Mr. Stanley when he presented the petition
in 1827, and he (Mr. Hume) had in his hand a copy of the
letter sent to the Chairman of the Reform Association of
Upper Canada. The Legislative Council thus described by
Mr. Stanley still continued in office, and was it a matter of
surprise that complaint and discontent also continued ? One
was the natural and inevitable result of the other. Lord
Glenelg himself, in one of his dispatches to Canada, stated
that he did not deny the power of the House of Assembly to
refit-re the supplies where a case of necessity existed for so
doing; and yet should it now be said, at a time when the
grievances of which they had complained, and complained of
for years, were stilt unredressed, that the power of levying
and appropriating the public funds should be taken out of their
bands, and that, in 'open defiance to their wishes and votes,
money should be taken out of their treasure-chest and applied
to purposes which they did not approve of ? The Noble
Lord the Home Secretary, the other night said, that the Im-
perial Parliament had the power to appropriate the funds of
the Canadians, so that they did it for the benefit of
Canada. But who was to judge what was for their
benefit but themselves ? And they in their judgment
had already declared that they did not think these payments
under existing circumstaxices, were of that nature, and refused
to grant them. He would now state to the Committee the
reason why the Canadians refused to grant these supplies.
They were of opinion that the Legislative Assembly contained
many improper persons, wholly disqualified for their several
functions, and they refused their salaries accordingly ; and ha
(Mr. Hume) was quite ashamed that the Noble Lord should
come down and propose the enforcemm.: of payments in this

Mr. SHAW wished to know from the Right Hon. the
Chancellor of the Exchequer whether tho second reading of
the Irish Poor-law Bill would be brought on before Easter?
The CHANCELLORof the EXCHEQUER replied that
he was unable to answer the question.
Mr. C. BULLER complained of the irregularity of Go-
vernment proceeding with motions uon Wednesday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
that adjourned motions took precedence of all others, and it
would have been the right of the Government to have pro-
ceeded with the Canada debate on Tuesday, but they had
given way, as it had been the day fixed upon by the Hcn.
Member for London for bringing forward that question to
which he attached so much importance.
Sir R. INGLIS asked if the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
Bill would come on upon Monday?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQ-UER was un-
derstood to say that it would not.

vv
An HON. MEMDER on the Opposition sidelasked what day
the House was to be adjourned after Easter?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUERstated that
it was impossible for him to consider that question at present.
AFFAIRS OF CANADA.

Mr. ROEBUCK wished to know if there was any objet•
tion on the part of the Government, before the House pro-
ceeded with the Bill relating to Canada, to bring before the
House the evidence taken before the Committee in 1834? If
there was any objection to it, he should move for the produc-
tion of the papers.
Sir GEORGE GREY said that whether the House pro-
ceeded with the Bill or not, he did not see any objection to the
production of the evidence. However, it was his intention to
procec with the Bill, and it might even be passed before that
evidence was formally printed. To its production he had not
the least objection. It had indeed already been printed, ra-
ther irregularly, in Canada, and he saw no reason why Hon.
Members, if they desired it, should not have the evidence
before them. _ _ _ _ _

Mr. ROEBUCK now ad►erted to the subject because the
Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary had been prevented
from reading a portion of that evidence, because it was not
printed by the House.
Mr. HUME asked whether any dispatches had been re-
ceived from Lower Canada subsequent to the 30th of Novem-
ber, 1836 ?

Sir GEORGE GREY replied no dispatches had been
received bearing materially on this question. Confidential
instructions had been sent to the Governor of Lower Canada.
A delay had taken place as to the forwarding of official dis-
patches, as the Government wanted to make a communication
in which would be embodied the resolutions adopted by that
House.
The House then went into Committee : Mr. BERNAL in
the Chair.

Mr. HUME was sorry to be called upon to oppose the pro-
ceedings of his Majesty's Ministers, but he considered that the
present was one of the most unwarrantable proceedings he
had ever witnessed in that House, with the exception of the
Coercion Bill against Ireland. With that proceeding his Ma-
jesty's Ministers ought not to be allowed to go on, and if they
attempted to do so, he at least should sfate fairly his opinion as
to what were the results likely to follow from it. The ques-
tion before them was one that appeared to him to involve civil
war. It behoved then every person who entertained such an
opinion to speak out fairly upon the question. What he
asked was the value of her colonies to England, if she treated
them as conquered provinces? What would be their value if
they were to require continually the application of physical
force to reduce them to obedience?—of what use would such
colonies be to England ? It would be much better that she
was without colonies, if they were to bo a source of weakness
to her, and not a supply of strength. What would be the
benefit they could confer on this country, if they were to be
fettered with the chains of slavery, and only to be re-
strained by coercive measures such as were now proposed ?
—( Hear, hear.) Let them look to the condition of Lower
Canada with regard to this country. They were now
about to take up measures of coercion, to compel the Cana-
dians, if they could, to adopt measures inconsistent with their
liberty, hostile to the charters to which that people had a right,
and contrary to the Act of the Legislature by which their in-
dependence was guaranteed.—( Hear, hear.) If, instead of
affording to the Canadians beneficial protection, they had
acted unjustly, the House ought to pause before they consented
to pass the resolutions on the table of the House.—( Hear.)
The Noble Lord bad not told them of the strife that existed
between the people of Lower Canada and England, nor why
it was that they had determined upon resistance. It was
because they had approached to that House year after year,
that they had year after year gone to the Throne, and had
laid before both the grounds of their complaint. Even two
Committees of that House admitted the reasonableness of their
complaints, and recommended that they should be remedied ;
and yet, by the speech of the Noble Lord, it was admitted
that all the evils under which they laboured were to remain
uncorrected. He was sorry to find Hon. Members in the
House interrupt such important proceedings with their con-
versation. Kip thought it much better for such Hon. Mem-
bers, if they did not find it convenient to attend to these pro-
ceedings, to leave the House.—(Cries of " Order, order.")
He regretted to say that he considered the Colonial-office as
one of the greatest nuisances connected with the Govern-
ment. He did not know whether the fault rested with the
Noble Lerd at the head of the department or with the clerks,
as the Hoe. Member for Bath had hinted, but this he must
say, that he was quite sure that it stood in the way of
justice being done to the colonies.—( Hear, and cheers.)
He held in his hand a paper of some importance : it was a
petition from the House of Assembly of Lower Canada. This
petition proved the complete want of attention and culpable
negligence on the part of Government. The petition was
signed by upwards of 87,000 inhabitants of the colony, and
upon its being presented to the House it was referred to a
Committee. That Committee, on the 18th of July, 1828,
rep
whiocrhted to the
had long
House that
prevailed the
i ncanembarrassmentsadahad ar
iseann
from
discontent
s co n
variouse n t
defects in the system of the Legislature and the Constitution

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 1837.

unconstitutional manner which they had disallowed. Amongst
the persons whose salaries were thus refused, for instance, was
one who, being a Member of the Legislative Council, acted
also as clerk to the Executive Council, and the House of As-
sembly, decreeing these two offices to be wholly incompatible,
very properly refused to pay this individual's salary as clerk
of the Executive as long as he remained a Member of the
Legislative Council. Then there was the Speaker of the
House of Assembly, with a salary of 9001., and who held several
other lucrative offices; and the Assembly consented to allow
him this salary provided he did not continue to receive any
equally large sum from any other public situation. Then
as to judges, about whom such a melancholy tale had been
attempted the other night by the Noble Home Secretary.
These persons, besides their judicial offices, held several other
lucrative situations under the Crown, and the House of As-
sembly very properly refused to allow them their salaries in
the former capacity, as long as they retained other situations
of the kind, a practice so incompatible with their high and
solemn functions. The Noble Lord spoke with much indig-
nation of the pretence set up by the Canadian Assembly to
refuse supplies, unless accepted under conditions in this way.
He (Mr. Hume), on the contrary, insisted that such a pro-
ceeding was a very constitutional and a very proper one. Lord
Goderich himself had admitted this principle, and the right
of the House of Assembly to vote their supplies with any con-
ditions which they thought fit. In the exercise, therefore, of
, their privilege and their duty in accordance with this principle,
the House of Assembly had refused to allow salaries to parties
who held several incompatible offices. They consented to their
salaries in some of these offices, but not in all, and he (Mr.
Hume) thought they were perfectly right in making this
condition. With respect to the failure of Lord Gosford's
mission, that result was not owing to any fault on the part
of his Lordship. How could it be expected that a peaceable
adjustment could be effected by him when he had not the
power of granting one concession, or of applying a remedy
to one of the numerous grievances which were crying out for
redress ? Was there no limit to human patience ? Was there
not a stage of oppression and insult which might drive the pa-
tient to madness ? When this period arrived—when all hope
of obtaining justice from the good feeling of others was wasted
in neglect--were the people of Lower Canada to blame be-
cause they, in the mildest and gentlest manner, refused to vote
away their money unless their abuses were remedied ? Were
the people of this country so blind to their own rights and in-
terests as to allow the Noble Lord to override the people of
Lower Canada, and deprive them of their constitutional rights?
All the people of Lower Canada required of England was this,
" Do unto us and you would be done by." With this reflec-
tion on their minds—with the abuses unredressed which he had
enumerated—would the people of this country stand by
and consent to the passing of this Coercion Bill for the people
of Canada ? But even if it were passed, there was another
question—would they be able to enforce it 2—( Hear, hear.)
The House of Assembly in 1830 voted all the supplies they
had been accustomed to do, only with the exception of the
items they objected to, for the reasons above stated. What
would be said if the House of Commons were to-morrow to
vote that a Judge of the land should receive his salary pro-
vided he did not also hold office and receive pay as Speaker of
the House of Commons Would that be deemed so unwar-
rantable and unconstitutional a condition ? And suppose the
Bill of supply so framed were to be sent up to the Upper
House, and they were to refuse to pass it, or rather to put it
into Committee, from which it was doomed never to come out ?
If the House of Lords in this country would have a right so to
interfere with the authority of the House of Commons in mat-
ters of supply, then, and not otherwise, were the Legislative
Assembly justified in what they bad done with respect to the
votes of the Representative Assembly. But if they were not
justified in the course they had pursued, what right had the
Ministry of this country to come down and call upon the House
of Commons to enforce the payment of money without the
express conditions imposed by the House of Assembly ; grants
to which, under circumstances, they would not assent to ?
Sir G. GREY interrupted the Hon. Member to observe,
that the Government did not wish to enforce payments con-
trary to any of the conditions with which they were accompa-
nied when last they were voted in 1833. The resolution did
not propose to pay any items which had not been sanctioned
by the Assembly in 1833.
Mr. H UM E—But I am speaking of the vote of 1836, when
the conditions in question were introduced.—( Hear, hear. )
Would the House of Commons, would the Government of
this country, pretend to deprive the House of Assembly of
their right and power to impose conditions in these matters?
If they did, shame would stand on all their faces and all their
heads. The Colonial Secretary admits the intention of the
Government to do this injustice. The proceeding altogether
was most unjustifiable, and while the people of this country
were struggling for their rights, he would ask, were they not
bound to assist the colonies, and protect them against oppres-
sion to the utmost of their power? He trusted the House
of Commons would never sanction such a sharnefel exercise
of power ; lie trusted the House would recollect that, some
years ago, when supplies were voted by the House of Assem-
' bly for six months, and that a sum of 6,3511. was left un-
appropriated, in the hope that the local government would
redress the grievance of keeping up the establishment for
which that grant was formerly made, the Colonial Govern-
ment failed to correct the abuse ; and what was the result?
The Governor took that sum out of the military chest.
When stating this fact he directed his observation more
particularly to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was
Colonial Secretary at the time, and he did it with the
more confidence because Lord Glenelg, in one of his dis-
patches, had admitted that the House of Assembly bad the
right to withhold the supplies or not as they saw fit. Now,
when these grievances were not redressed, and the House of
Assembly refused the supplies, the Governor, with the sanc-
tion of the Colonial Secretary, seized the money ; and was not
that a monstrous proceeding ? Was not that robbing the pub.
lie purse ? Why, what would be said if a Minister here took
one thousand pounds, or any sum, out of the Exchequer, for
any purpose, without the consent of the House of Commons ?
Would not a motion to sanction such a proceeding be rejected
unanimously ? Yet such a proceeding had taken place in
Canada with the sanction of the Colonial Office, lie must
say that such a measure was highly unconstitutional, and if
we had a House of Commons representing completely the
sentiments of the people, Mr. Rice and others would have
been impeached, and called upon to answer for their conduct
at the time of this transaction.
Mr. ROEBUCK here moved that the House be counted,
and the Gallery was cleared, but more than forty Members
being present, the Gallery was re-opened, and
Mr. HUME proceeded. He said that while the House
was sitting and deliberating on the liberties of six hundred
thousand of their fellow-citizens, who were to be deprived
of their constitutional rights, it might have been expected
that more than fifty members would have been present.—
( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member, after adverting to a de-
claration of the people of Canada, in which they set forth
their grievances, and prayed for redress, said the Govern-
ment, nevertheless, were determined to persevere in their
course, and call upon the House of Commons to assist them
in passing a coercion Bill against the House of Assembly.
and to enable them to trample on the rights of the people of
Canada. The language of the Noble Lord amounted to
that • and the language of the Noble Lord was the language
of all the Cabinet Ministers. They had made it a Cabinet
question—they all agreed in a measure for oppressing the people
of Canada ; and they called on that House to aid and join them
in countenancing such illegal proceedings. If the majority of
that House were to be the tools of the Cabinet in this transac-
tion, it was high time for him, and those who acted with him,
to tell the people of Canada what to do—to tell them
that they themselves must provide the remedy. Their
prayers here had been refused—they had been oppressed
by the Colonial Minister—they had appealed to the Throne,
and all in vain. Hating, as he did, oppression at home or
abroad, and indignant that he should be called on to act as a
co-oppressor against the rights of men, and least of all
against the rights of his fellow-subjects, he must express the
greatest regret that such resolutions had ever been brought
forward. The Noble Lord in excuse said the Home of As-
sembly had refused the supplies. He denied that, and the
Cabinet, therefore, proceeded on a false pretence to take
away the rights and privileges of their fellow-subjects. He
trusted that a different course would be pursued, that
means would be adopted for satisfying the people of that
country, and that the Government would reflect before it
was too late. He regretted the Noble Lord was not pre-
sent, because he was more likely to be open to convic-
tion than some of those with whom he acted. He did
not believe it was the act of the Noble Lord, but, on the
contrary, he believed he was the dupe of those who had got
up the scheme. Had the Noble Lord been present he
would have asked him if he were prepared to act on a princi-
ple different from that on which he would act towards Ire-
land. The Honourable Member for Bath had made the cases
of the two countries as identical as possible, and the Noble
Lord, in answer to speeches made by Honourable Members on
the other side of the. House, asking why he interfered with
the system of Government existing in Ireland, said he con-
sidered it his duty to interfere whenever grievances existed
and redress was refused. The Noble Lord had said he would
follow the advice of Mr. Fox, and that advice was, that con-
cession should be made to the people of Ireland, and if he
found he had not conceded enough he would concede more.
My wish," said Mr. Fox, " is, that the whole people of
Ireland should have the same principles, the same system,
the same operation of Government • and though it may be
a subordinate consideration that all classes should have an
equal chance of emolument, in other words, I would have
the whole Irish Government regulated by Irish notions and
Irish prejudices, and I firmly believe, according to another
Irish expression, that the more she is under the Irish Go-
vernment the more she will be bound to English interests."
That was the principle on which the Noble Lord had pro-
posed to act towards Ireland, but now nothing was held out
to Canada but threats and coercion. He should have thought
the Government would have been tired of coercion ; they
ought to learn experience from the Irish Coercion
Bill, for all the evil predicted of it had been ve-
rified. He would ask if Canada would be more sa-
tisfied than Ireland unless the same principle was acted
upon—the principle of Mr. Fox, that the best way to govern
Ireland was to let her have her own way. Ho would
advise the Noble Lord, therefore, to adhere to that prin-
ciple, and govern Canada as he would govern Ireland. The
Hon. Member here quoted a number of passages from the
Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the
grievances complained of in Lower Canada ; and adverting to
their various recommendations, observed that it would be much
better for his Majesty's Ministers to go openly to work, and to
repeal the Constitution of Lower Canada. Did any one sup-
pose that the people of Canada would be alarmed by such a
paper as the Report of the Commissioners going out to them ?
Let the House remember that the people of no country were
long dissatisfied without having good ground for their discon-
tent. To the grievances which the people of Canada already
suffered was now to be added the grievance which the Noble
Lord proposed to inflict upon them by his resolutions. Ho

(Mr. Hume) raised his voice on the part of the people of Eng-
land against such a proceeding. The people of England, while
they maintained their own rights, were always desirous of sup-
porting the rights of others. It was in opposition to their feel-
ings that the just complaints of others should be neglected.
The Canadians were men like ourselves. If we superseded
all their constitutional rights, if we deprived them of the pri-
vilege of legislation with reference to their own finances, and
compelled them to pay money to persons whom they con-
sidered unworthy, the people of England would unite in
reprobation of such conduct. So much with regard to Lower
Canada. Now for Upper Canada. He had only that day seen
a document, published recently in a London newspaper, in
which he was charged, in no measured terms, with holding
treasonable opinions towords the people of Upper Canada.
He would then, and once for all, show how little liable he was
to that charge ; although, when he considered by whom it was
made, and the tone in which it was couched, he could not be-
lieve that it would for a moment be believed by any rational
person. The document to which he alluded was published in
the Times; and it purported to be the Report of a Select
Committee of the House of Assembly of Upper Canada, to
which had been referred the consideration of a petition of Mr.
T. Duncombe, a member of the House of Assembly, which
had been presented to the Ilouse of Commons. That petition
was presented to the House of Commons in the last session of
Parliament, just before the prorogation. He (Hr. Hume)
had been requested to present it, as he had before pre-
sented other petitions from Canada. He would now make
a few observations upon the Report of the Committee ;
hoping that no time would be lost in obtaining from the Go-
vernment of Upper Canada those documents which would
enable him to contradict the statements of that Report com-
pletely. At the same time, he must at once protest against
its being supposed to speak the sentiments of the House of
Assembly. He knew from whom it emanated. The Com-
mittee was composed of six Tories and three Reformers ; and
he repeated his protest against their being supposed to
speak the sentiments of the House. In that report, after
alluding to Mr. Duncombe's statements and endeavouring
to refute them, the Committee thus proceeded :—" Before
closing their report the Committee feel it their duty to call
the attention of your Honourable House and the country
to the fact that the petition of Mr. Duncornbe was pre-
sented to the House of Commons by Mr. Joseph Hume, a
Member of the Imperial Parliament for the county of Mid-
dlesex, and that that Gentleman appears to have been chosen
as the agent through whom Mr. Duncombe and Mr. Robert
Baldwin have conducted their communications with the Co-
lonial-office. And it further appears from letters of Mr.
flume addressed to some of the Ministers of the Crown, that
he is desirous of representing himself as the agent, or, at
all events, as being authorised to express the sentiments, of
the people of Upper Canada on the subject of their political
feelings, and the public affairs of the province. Your Com •
mittee are of opinion that the honour and character of his
Majesty's loyal subjects in this province require that it should
be spromptly and emphatically declared by their representa-
tives that Mr. Hume is among the last men they would select
to advocate their cause, or represent their feelings or wishes
to the British nation. The people of Upper Canada recollect
that in the year 1834 Mr. Joseph Hume addressed a letter to
a correspondent of his in this country, which, referring to his
correspondent's recent expulsion from and re-election to the
Assembly, contained the following treasonable language and
advice Your triumphant election on the 10th, and ejection
from the Assembly on the 17th, must hasten that crisis which
is fast approaching in the affairs of the Canadas, and which
will terminate in independence and freedom from the baneful
domination of the mother country, and the tyrannical conduct
of a small and despicable faction in the colony. The pro-
ceedings between 1772 and 1782, in America, ought not to be
forgotten, and to the honour of Americans, and for the inte-
rest of the civilized world, let their conduct and the result be
ever in view.' And when it is remembered with what indig-
nation and disgust the publication of this detestable communi-
cation was received throughout the province, his Majesty's
loyal subjects cannot but regard with abhorrence the idea that
the person who bad thus insulted them should be supposed
by their Sovereign and their fellow-subjects in the United
Kingdom to be their accredited agent—that they held any
communication with him, or that he was in any way clothed
with authority to speak their sentiments or represent their
views, on any subject, public or private."—This was the
charge made against him. To repel it, it became necessary
for him to read to the House the letter on which this charge
was founded. It was addressed to W. L. M‘Kenzie, Esq.,
M. P., York, Upper Canada, and was as follows :
" Bryanston-square, March 29.
"My Dear Sir—l lately received files of the Vindicator
and Reformer journals, and am pleased to observe that the
electors of the county of York continue firm and consistent in
their support to you, and that you manifest the same deter-
mined spirit of opposition to abuse and misrule.
" The Government and the majority of the Assembly ap-
pear to have lost the little portion of common sense, and the
prudence which society in general now possess, and they sa-
crifice the greatest of public principles in gratifying a paltry
and mean revenge against you.
" Your triumphant election on the 16th, and ejection from
the Assembly on the 17th, must hasten that crisis which is
fast approaching in the affairs of the Canadas, and which will
terminate in independence andfreedomfrom the baneful domina-
tion of the mother country, and the tyrannical conduct of a
small and despicable faction in the colony.
" I regret to think that the proceedings of Mr. Stanley,
which manifest as little knowledge of mankind as they prove
his ignorance of the spirit and liberal feelings of the present
generation, encourage your enemies to persevere in the course
they have taken. But I confidently trust that the high-minded
people of Canada will not, in these days, be overawed or
cheated of their rights or liberties by such men. Your cause
is their cause—your defeat would be their subjugation. Go
on, therefore, I beseech you, and success—glorious success—
must inevitably crown your joint efforts.
" Mr. Stanley must be taught that the follies and wicked. -
ness of Mr. Pitt's government, in the commencement of the
French Revolution, cannot be repeated now, either at home
or abroad, without results very different from that which then
took place. The proceedings between 1772 and 1782 in
America ought not to be forgotten, and to the honour of the
Americans, and for the interest of the civilised world, let their
conduct and the result be ever in view.

" I remain, yours sincerely,
" JOSEPH HUME.
" P. S. The people in Lower Canada are taking the means
of forcing their affairs on the Government, and will, I hope,
succeed."
The House would see how different these sentiments were
from those imputed to him in the report of the Committee of
,the House of Assembly. Would any friend of liberty cen-
sure him for applauding the conduct of the United States of
America in their successful struggle for independence? But
for their glorious example the cause of freedom would at a later
peilbd have been overwhelmed in Europe. Long might it flou-
rish ; and let that justice be done to Canada which would pre-
vent the active defence of that cause from becoming a matter
of duty. The lying report of the Committee of the House of
Assembly declared that his ( Mr. Hume's) letter had been
received with disgust and indignation throughout the pro-
vince. He held in his hand resolutions which had been
agreed to by the Common Council of the city of Toronto,
which he would read to the House. (The Hon. Gentleman
here read the resolutions to which he had adverted. They
bestowed the highest encomiums upon him for his sentiments
and conduct with respect to Upper Canada, and spoke with
reprobation of the unhappy policy which bad so long been
pursued towards that province by his Majesty's successive Go-
vernments, and especially by that Government of which Mr.
Stanley was the Colonial Secretary.) But that was not all ;
,similar expressions of approbation of his conduct had pro-
ceeded 6om twenty counties and twenty towns of the pro-
vince. (The Hon. Member here read several of those docu-
ments, and especially one from the township of Caledon.)
h might be asked, what had induced him to write the letter
' which he had written to Mr. M'Kenzic ? His answer was,
indignation at the conduct of the Noble Lord opposite. When
Lord Goderich was the Secretary of State for the Colonial
Department, his Lordship had sent a dispatch to the Gover-
nor of Upper Canada, expressing a wish that the grievances
complained of by the inhabitants of that province should be
taken into consideration. When that dispatch was laid on
the table of the House of Assembly, it was treated with marked
disrespect and insult by the Attorney and Solicitor-General.
The Honourable Member proceeded to advert to a second
dispatch of Lord Goderich, in which that Noble Lord stated
that he thought the Attorney and Solicitor-General were
bound to act to the best of their views, but that if they dif-
fered from his Majesty's Government it was obvious that they
could not remain in office with advantage ; and in order, there-
fore, that those gentlemen might be at liberty to follow the
dictates of their own judgment, he (Lord Goderich) had his
Majesty's commands that on the receipt of the despatch, they
should be relieved from the duties of their respective offices.
This dispatch was in reply to a communication that had been
made to the Government at home. These gentlemen, then,
were the firebrands ; and when they came home after being
superseded, the Noble Lord ( Stanley) who was at that time,
unfortunately as he contended, at the head of the Colonial
Department, thought fit, in despite of and in the teeth of Lord
Goderich's dispatch, to promote one of these gentlemen to a
Judgeship in Newfoundland. What was the consequence ?
Why, that in the elections which took place some time after,
such was the disgust of the people of Canada at the proceed-
ings which had taken place, and at the conduct of the Govern-
ment, that every one of the Reformers—of those men who
associated themselves " with Mr. Hume, the firebrand" were
returned by large majorities by the people of Upper Canada,
who approved of his (Mr. Hume's) letter and of his conduct.
That letter was received with the warmest approbation by the
official bodies ; and when a vote of censure on him was pro-
posed by the Deputy Grand Master of the Orangemen in the
colony whom, by-the-bye, he (Mr. Hume) had since given a
lift—(Laughter)—joined by all the Tories—that vote was
lost. The ex-Attorney-General of the colony, who had been
stated to be such a temperate man, in expressing his opinion
upon the letter, had done so in terms which little accorded
with the character which had been given him. The Hon.
Member here read an extract of a speech attributed to this
Attorney-General, in which he denounced those who sup-
ported Mr. Hume's party, and declared that he spurned them ;
that they were his utter detestation ; that they were recreants
to their Sovereign. He now came to another charge. By a
resolution of the House of Assembly they had agreed to the
appointment of a Select Committee, on the petition of Mr.
Duncombe, which he (Mr. Hume) had presented last year
to the House of Commons, and the prayer of which he
had been requested to support; and he was astonished that
a Committee should have been found to tell such lies and
falsehoods. It only remained for him, however, to say that
all the charges made in that Report, so far as they were
levelled against him, were wholly unfounded. He might,
perhaps, read the resolutions which had been agreed to
in respect to his letter, and indeed he had got the official
documents; but he could state with confidence, that there

was not one allegation in the document to which he had re-
ferred, in respect to the manner in which his letter had been
received, that was true. The Hon. Gentleman, in order to es-
tablish the fact that the letter bud been well received, and that
his own conduct had been approved of, proceeded to read in a
low tone various extracts from private letters which he had re-
ceived from parties whom he did not name. One of them,
dated the 29th of June, 1834, commenced with the words, "
congratulate the Colony on the removal of Mr. Stanley, from
what I know of Mr. Rice, and from what has passed." Here
the Hon. Gentleman exclaimed, " Oh, Sir, how lamentably
have I been deceived in Mr. Rice l—(Laughter.) Never did
any man in the world deceive me and my expectations of him
more than Mr. Rice has done."—( Loud and renewed laughter. )
I say that the Right Hon. Gentleman ought to be impeached,
and it is only the want of power that prevents me from moving
that question."—(Laughter from both sides of the House.)
‘• Yes, yes, you know on a former occasion I said that I should
be delighted to catch a Whig for the first prosecution by
impeachment, in order that we might establish the peinei-
pie of responsibility in the Colonial Department." And now
with regard to the resolutions which had been propounded
to the House by the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for the
Home Department, he objected to them zn toto. If that
House wee to pass resolutions which affected Canada, they
must be so framed as to meet the wishes and wants of the
great majority of the people of Canada, who for ten years
had been suffering under admitted grievances. lie had
shown the House that they had petitioned in the years 1827,
1829, and 1834 ; they had appealed to the King in Council ;
and they had come to certain resolutions also in the year
1834. In all these instances they sought for nothing but to
manage their affairs themselves, and to promote good govern-
ment ; but the present Government stepped in to prevent this
by insisting on a Legislative Council. If they annulled the
just rights of the Canadians they would commit a direct rob-
bery upon them ; and this country must expect, if the Legis-
lature sanctioned such proceedings, that men thus used would
not consent to give up all those privileges which they now
enjoyed. What, then, was to be done? If the House of
Assembly did not vote the supplies of money, were they (the
House of Commons) to carry on the legislation of Canada by
votes of that House ? If that were intended, it would be
better to repeal their Constitution, and with it the Act of
1831. In conclusion, the Hon. Member contended that he
had made out a case which was not to be disputed, that there
were grievances still existing with reference to the colony of
Canada ; that those abuses had not been removed ; that they
had rights as well as we had; and that it was now intended
by resolutions of that House to deprive them of what they
were by law entitled to. He should give every opposition to
the resolutions, and he hoped the House would rause before
they sanctioned them.
Mr. W. GLADSTONE, in addressing the House, said
that with reference to all colonies, they were to be regarded
as the children of the parent country. He did not mean,
however, to say, that we ought to maintain the institutions of
Canada for ever in the subordinate situation in which they now
existed; but he thought it was a vain distinction to claim for
the Houses of Legislature there a position analogous to that
of the Legislature in this country, so long as they were in the
situation of a colony. He could not help lamenting the fact
that the Hon. Member for Middlesex, who was an economist
of everything except the public time, had chosen, after a dis-
quisition on the affairs of Lower Canada, which was certainly
not restricted to any narrow limits, to superadd a disquiel-
tion of one hour's duration on the state of Upper Canada--
(Hear)—nor could be (Mr. Gladstone) help adverting to the
lengthy epilogue by which it was followed, and which he
supposed would sink into obscurity, with all its details.
The Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Hume) had quoted the sen-
timents of the Members of the Common Council of Toronto
as if they were to be taken as indicating the general feeling's
of the country. Let the House see with how much truth they
could be regarded in that light. Were the Gentlemen who
recorded the opinions quoted by the Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesex still Members of the Common Council of Toronto ?
On the contrary, these Gentlemen, as he understood—in no
small degree on account of the vote they had passed in favour
of the opinions expressed by the Hon. Member for Middlesex
in his letter--were shortly afterwards ejected from the Com-
mon Council, and were succeeded by a body of Gentlemen
who, amongst their first and most prominent acts, expunged
from the records of their body that very resolution of their
predecessors which the lion. Member for Middlestnt had quoted
with so much seeming triumph. So much, then, tor the Hon.
Member in Upper Canada. It appeared that he had been
fairly drummed out of that proviuce—( Laughter and cheers)
—although he seemed to think that he had still some
',round to occupy in Lower Canada. —( Hear, hear.) The
?lon. Gentleman had talked much about the grievance's
of Lower Canada ; but throughout the whole of his wo-
tracted speech did he succeed in establishing one Tingle
case of real grievance? What were the grievances of Lover
Canada? Was their personal security invaded? Was their
property inadequately protected by the laws?—(Hear, hear.)
Was their religion oppressed ?—( Hear, hear.) Was taxation
heavy ?—(Hear, hear.) Upon which of these several parti-
culars, the usual grounds of grievance, had the people of
Lower Canada reason to complain?—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman, who talked so much and so long about the
grievances of the people of that province, alleged after all but
one, and what did that amount to ? It amounted to this, that
whereas in the province of Lower Canada the scale of official
salaries was with respect to many offices so extremely low, s°
totally inadequate to the maintenance of a proper officer, there-
fore a number of them had been joined together and placed
c"!II
the hands of a single individual, and the Legislative Coun,,'
though repeatedly requested by the House of Assembly, had
uniformly declined to disjoin the offices so united, and by that
means to place each separate office in the hands of a class of
society totally incompetent to the proper discharge of the du-
ties that belonged to it. This was the sole grievance alleged.
Did it constitute a sufficient reason to justify the House of
Assembly in stopping the supplies ?—( Hesr, hear, hear.) If
'
there were danger of convulsion in Lower Canada, it would
not arise from taking the course which the Government in-
vited them to adopt, but from suffering the present state of
things in the province to continue.—( Hear, hear.) Did the
Honourable Gentleman mean to deny that at that moment
payment of the arrears was refused by the House of Assembly
unless the Home Government would consent to the establish-
ment of an elective Council ?.---[Mr. Hume intimated that he
did not deny that fact.] Then the case stood thus—in a coun-
try where life and property were secure, where there was n°
oppressive law, where the franchise was wide and liberal,
where the church of the majority was in possession of the
church property—( Hear, hear)—where there was no tangible
grievance capable of being put into terms and brought be-
fore that House—in such a country the Imperial Legislature
was called upon to grant an organic change in the constitu-
tion as the condition upon which, for the future, the ear
plies necessary to carry on the government of the province
should be voted by the Provincial Legislature.—( Hear, hear.)
As far as the alleged undue preference of the English race was
concerned, he begged the House to look for a moment at 06,
fact. During the administration of the last two Governors 0`
Lower Canada there had, he believed, been eighteen appoint-
ments to the Legislative Council, and of those eighteen er
pointments ten had been given to persons of French origio--;:
(Hear, hear)—and the remaining eight to persons of English
descent. It was true that ten did not bear that proportion to
eight that the whole French population of the province did t°
the British ; but it must be remembered that the French po-
pulation did not comprise so great a proportion of the upper
class—of persons fit to be appointed to so important a situ's'
tion as that of a member of the Legislative Council—as the
British. It could not be said, therefore, that any gross Of
glaring partiality had been exhibited in the appointments Oa'
of late years bad been made to the Legislative Council.;
( Hear, hear). The Hon. and Learned Member for Bail read
them a lecture the other night upon the extreme expediend
of every one who advanced an opinion in that House telling
all that he meant, and leaving nothing in reserve. He (Mr'
Gladstone) wished that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
had acted upon that principle himself.—(Hear.) They Were:
told that the conduct of the Legislative Council was the potty
_
upon which were concentrated all the grievances of Lowe;
Canada. What was the fact ? The Legislative Council lid
been the outwork and defence of the Government. In all its
most essential acts it had been countenanced by the Gae'
nor and Executive Council, who, in their turn, had beeo
borne out by the Government at home, and the Governme°t
at home had been borne out by the Imperial Parliament.--;
( Hear, hear.) Two Committees had been appointed by 012
House, the one in 1828, the other in 1834, in both of whicb
the fullest investigation took place into the affairs of Lower
Canada ; and the result of the inquiry was in both instancea
to vindicate the conduct of the Government. The question'
then, was not so much one between the House of Assembly
and the Legislative Council in Lower Canada, as betWeel
the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Bath and the Imperia
Parliament as to the policy pursued towards the province.--;
( Hear, from Mr. Roebuck.) What was the situation of Levi's
Canada ? It was divided between persons of two differe'lci
races, who did in fact regard each other as aliens in blood
and language," and between whom there unfortunately existed
a great deal of excitement and exasperation. The Hon. ar,
Learned Gentleman the Member for Bath had spoken e'
" howling herd of officials ;" but could the Hon. and Lear be
Gentleman charge any one individual of the class whom 0,,
designated in such disparaging terms with a dishonour(' IA
act ?—( Hear.) Had they not been serving the public withos'
_
any requital for the last five or six years ?—( Hear.) What 0
for
the difference between the Hon. and Learned Member 1,
Bath and the howling herd of Canadian officials? The °Va.-
difference was this—that the Hon. and Learned Gentle old
had received his salary, upon which he (Mr. Gladstone) "I'oo,,
no': then pronounce an opinion, without the sanction of the 'der
whilst the officials, who held regularly-constituted offices °are,
the sanction of the law, had received no salary for several Yeti's
although they had continued punctually to discharge the d tot
attached to their situations.—( Hear.) Then it was said I;sig
the British party in Lower Canada was composed of nutb 'dee
more than a miserable monopolising minority of the puPe-i's'd A
of that province. What was the fact ? Ile held in his ba!sa,
copy of a petition presented to that House from Montreal in 'oe
signed by 10,197 of this despicable minority, Did this '
bear
out the representations made by the Honourable and ilancoer
Member for Bath as to the nature of the conflict in -`!:00e
Canada ? Did it show that the popular voice was all no,
side, and that the British interest was supported only ;,',04
contemptible few ? For from it. It showed that there, iOO
a great division between the people themselves—a ditt* 'ene
accompanied with great exasperation and much exGdetirof
of feeling ; and, ehowing this, it proved that of all aea-
&at could he chosen to discuss the question of the
tion of Lower Canada from the mother country, the jr, of
sent was the very worst.—( Hear, hear.) In illustratfosr
this point the Honourable Gentleman quoted scorn' Foe
sages from the provincial newspapers, and also fronlfroy,
speeches of some of the Members of the House of Asse weal
in which very strong language was used towards thelbeecr
Government and the policy of the mother country. e be
he feared, were not isolated instances. They wer

feared, but too true specimens of the temper that prevailed
amongst the leaders of what was called the popular party in
Lower Canada. Was this, then, the fit period for them to
enter into the discussion of the separation of the colony from
the mother country ?—( Hear, hear.) The Honourable
Member for Middlesex had talked of revolution and civil
war. For his own part, he (Mr. Gladstone) did not believe
that the people of Lower Canada wished to throw them-
selves into the arms of the United States. 'What had been
the conduct of the United States towards those communities
that she had amalgamated with herself ? Had she continued
to them the same degree of nationality that had been pre-
served to Canada under the dominion of Great Britain ?
( Hear, hear.) Would the inhabitants of Lower Canada mend
their condition in reference to taxation by joining the United
States ?—( Hear, hear.) At present he believed the people of
Lower Canada were free from the direct influence of taxation,
and that the amount of revenue annually paid by them was in-
finitely less than that of any of the provinces joined with the
United States. Supposing Lower Canada to be joined with
the United States, how would its wild lands then be disposed
of?—(1-lear, hear.) Unless the Government of the United
States consented, in deference to the lion. and Learned Mem-
ber for Bath, to deviate from its fixed practice in the distri-
bution and sale of wild lands, would the Canadian province
have any reason to congratulate itself on the exchange it had
made from the dominion of Great Britain to that of the United
States? In 1831, when the Noble Lord (Lord Howick) the
Member for Northumberland had charge of the colonial depart-
ment in that House, and brought forward the resolution upon
which Lord Ripon's Act was founded, how did the Honourable
Member forCaliddlesex act ? He promised that if the Act
passed the Canadian Civil List should be granted. The Act
passed ; but where was the Civil List ?—( Hear, hear.) Up
to 1831 the attention of this country had not been sufficiently
directed to its colonies, and in the Canadas many things had
been allowed to grow up which required correction, and that
correction was administered by the Act to which he had just
referred. He therefore took 1831 as that upon which the
o)urse now proposed by the Government was to be justified.
What was the language of the House of Assembly in 1831 ?
On the 28th of January, in that year, the House of Assembly
agreed to an address expressing an earnest desire that harmony
should exist between the different branches of the Provincial
Legislature, and that full effect should be given to the Con-
stitution of the province as established by law ; and that ad-
dress was signed by Mr. Papineau, as Chairman of the As-
sembly. The question, then, that he wished to put to the
Hon. Gentlemen who supported the amendment was this : if
there were no grievances in 1831 that induced the Assembly
to demand a change in the Constitution, what grievances had
since arisen that could justify the House of Assembly in with-
holding the supplies and making an organic change in the
Constitution the condition of granting them ?—( Hear, hear.)
He thought it was perfectly clear, from the language used
by the Hon. Member for Middlesex, with reference to the fu-
ture conduct of the House of Assembly of Lower Canada
(if, indeed, he was the responsible organ of that body, as he
Was then supposed to have been)'on the occasion of the passing
of Lord Ripon's Act, that that body would have been satisfied
to have proceeded in harmony with the Government of that
colony. Did the Hon. Gentleman believe that that Act would
have been passed unless upon the perfect conviction that the
House of Assembly would have granted the supplies? The
Government, in passing that Act, were entirely deceived in
their expectations, expectations that were reasonable and just.
if, then, there was no practical grievance affecting the people
of Lower Canada, which justified (and he admitted that real
grievances might justify) a demand even for organic change,
then what, he would ask, was the ground for stopping the
supplies, and what the ground for demanding this organic
change? Unless this House was ready to adopt an organic
cisange in the Constitution of Lower Canada, with the per-
fect knowledge and conviction that that organic change
Would only be the first of a series of changes—for the change
now demanded was not final in its character--and unless they
were resolved to enter upon a boundless course of unrea-
sonable concession, they must adopt the course which was
proposed by his Majesty's Ministers. Ile felt all the pain
which his Majesty's Ministers must experience in proposing
such a course to the House —a course undoubtedly coercive
in its nature, and intended to set aside for a time the privi-
leges and principles of ,the Constitution.. He fully agreed
that nothing but the very last necessity could justify such a
line of policy. But he agreed also with his Majesty's Govern-
ment in thinking that a case of urgent necessity had been
established. He thought that experiments had been tried to
the uttermost, patience was exhausted; and the question now
was, whether the Parliament of this country would consent
to stand disgraced and dishonoured, not only before the
people of Lower Canada, but before the whole world; or
whether by interposition, arising out of the necessity of the
rase, and limited strictly by that necessity, it would relieve
tl.' honest and faithful
.servants of the Crown from the
diNculties and calamities they now endured, and the Go-
verneeent itself from the moral degradation into which it
would fall, were the present state of things suffered to
cantinut ?—( Hear, bear.) Ile regretted the precise terms
in which the fourth resolution was framed. He thought the
resolution went beyond the necessity.of the case. The prin-
ciple he would venture to lay down was, that where it was
their object to manifest the opinion of the Imperial Par-
liament in one particular case only which was at issue, it
Was desirable not to pledge the Parliament or the Govern-
ment to anything beyond that case. By acting other Wise,
they narrowed too much the ground on which they had to
proceed. He thought it would tend greatly to prevent any
disagreement, and would produce a very strong and general,
sand all but unanimous, expression of opinion on this occasion,
if the Hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary of the Colonies
would devise some other mode of framing the fourth re-
solution, so as to obviate the objection to which it was
now liable. In that case lie should give his most un-
qualified support to the propositions of his Majesty's Minis-
ters.---( Cheers. )
Mr. LABOUCIIERE came down to the House prepared
11" give a reluctant and silent, but he must add, a decided
"t° in favour of the resolutions proposed to the House
by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Depart-
keest. But some things had occurred in the course of the
discussion which had made him desirous of stating-, in a few
Wards, the grounds upon which that vote would be given.
It bad fallen to his lot, since he had the honour of a
teat. in Parliament, to call upon the House for an expres-
sioo of its opinion, and even to adopt resolutions relating
to thte colony, the affairs of which were this night under dis-
cussion. His object had been to retain these colonies to the
alotlie; Country, by every means in our powor, as long as we
could' ; but, above all, that to the last hour during which that
e 4iTlection lasted we should act towards these colonies libe-
es-LY sand justly, so that whenever the moment of separation
"fight come, were it sooner or were it later, we should be
able ;,
the face of tne world and of posterity, to have a
°°"(lcas e, and not to stand before either convicted of having,
41,1 far as we were concerned, neglected the duty of a Mother
Country towards her colonies. In consonance with this opi-
11,1°11 he hat; frequently had to urge upon the House what ap-
reared to him tho well-founded grievances inflicted upon the
hett"lonies of Lower and Upper Canada, sometimes by the mis-
"ken views of the Mother Country, more often by the acts
lat. the Colonial Office, through the management of the Go-
Zeruors in those colonies towards the people. Ho had often
17d to express opinions extremely contrary to the Government
Ho he day with regard to the policy pursued in the Caliadas.
th had always so strongly felt the truth of the position
I, at a country such as Canada could only be go-
reetrrated
:rationally, and that it was only possible to
I" as a British possessien, in any way that
could be useful to either party, by carrying with us the rea.
3°l;Lhand the affections of the people of that country—( Cheers)
our isztjt he for one always thought it was our interest and
zoctiouty, as much as possible to leave them the di-
possibil of their own concerns, and toe d
as little as
0 with them. But he must say that there was one limit,
and one limit only., that he could conceive to that general
rule. As long as the colony of • Lower Canada remained part
British empire, he would not consent to anything that
would_ou tend to the degradation of the British Crown. He
Parliament
consent to abandon that high privilege and duty
of
se' nan!ent to see that no act of injustice or oppression
theeymicommitted in any part of the British dominions, wherever
t that sittatiobe" . He thought that things were approaching to
rn
Ce in Canada, that unless the British House of
0\ -ent might t Commons interfered, there might he danger that some such
t
he thought,
supplies
elhee r Place
lig y
thhetrle. Hon. Gentlemen had spoken,
stop page of
tossiblen of the evils consequent upon the
lay, Was it p
ta country for nearly four years and a
stept-nt of the state of _ o read without the deepest concern the
being Lower Canada, which was described as
uision the verge of a dissolution of all society ?—( Hear,
!!seaatr_•) ie was sorry to have heard the lion. Member for
b, who, however much they might differ in their politi-
cal opinions, he (Mr. Labouchere) admitted generally took
large and philosophical view of all subjects of which he
treated—he was sorry and very much surprised to hear that
Honourable Gentleman tall; about the Judges being deprived
of their salaries in that colony as a mere pinching of their
bellies, and of the privations of official men as a mere insigni-
teant state of things. In any country, and especially in a
cso,,iony, such a state of things could not happen without the
nrocutive Government beinc, brought into utter contempt. He
was quite of opinion with Mr. Fox that it was most unfortu-
nia.lecehat when the Constitution of the Canadas was estab-
lsn d .that the Legislative Council was not made elective.—
?ear.) He firmly believed that many evils had arisen in
consequence of that course not having been followed. There
were two Councils in Lower Canada, constituted on widely dif-
ferent principles. The popular party entrenched themselves in
whatthe one ; and . he for shortness only would call the British
ti,,a
a,rtY, or the minority, entrenched themselves into the other.
t had been the consequences 2 These two Councils had
‘..a• 7, ays been in a state of violent opposition. He thought it
not possible to find a better recipe to perpetuate those dis-
4,en.asi en_s_ than to perpetuate the Constitution of Lower Ca-
cao was upon abstract grounds not opposed to an elective
Legislative Council in Lower Canada. How any Hon. Gen-
'theman could contend that it was against the British Consti
tuti°n. and of our colonial system that there should be an
..er e Coun,lil in Canada—how any Gentleman who had
read the history' of our colonies could maintain this pro-
23:t!on, in the teeth of the fact that in America more than
tr half of our colonies were actually governed by elective
e.oglslative Councils, he could not conceive. Admiring as
d d the great statesmanlike views of Mr. Fox in many
sztu,,u Igs, he never admired him more than when, in 1795, he
1, with prophetic sagacity, the result of giving to Canada
tr ri-, legislative Council upon an aristocratic principle. H
ed the House of that day, and said, " If you don't takey,
°Le: , volt will have a Legislative Council which will riot be the
4!‘o et. of reverence, respect, and affection of the people, but
I:t.ti,,lbst et of their hatred and contempt." What was Mr.
44stw, aresument ? His -only reply to Mr. Fox was—" I will not
glees vfyo or; the whole thing is only an experiment."—(Loud
two of eszbelecar, hear.") lie thought it was quite clear that
ommissioners, Lord Gosford and Sir chinks

Grey, conceived that it was very unfortunate the principle of
an elective Council was not originally introduced into the
Constitution of Lower Canada, and that theylthought it would
be a material improvement to introduce that principle into
the Legislative Council, under some modification or other.
On this point he entirely agreed with those Commissioners.
He would not lay it down that the elective principle ought
to be universally adopted, but lie would say that neither
from reason nor precedent could lie discover any good arge_
ment against such an institution. Having admitted this prin-
ciple, the question before him was narrowed to this point—
whether lie was prepared to take the alternative offered him
both by the House of Assembly of Lower Canada and the Hon.
Member for Bridgwater, and instead of voting for the resolu-
tions of the Noble Lord, express it to be his opinion that
the Legislative Council of Lower Canada should be imme-
diately made elective. But this was not the °illy proposition
he was called upon to affirm; there were others, some of
which appeared to be so unconstitutional, and others so fraught
with injustice to individuals, that he never could give his con-
sent to them.
Mr. ROEBUCK—What are they?
Mr. LA BO ITC HERE would tell the Hon. Member at
once what they were. The first was that which referred to
the Executive Council being made responsible to the House
of Assembly. He really could hardly conceive a public body
of the respectability of that House of Assembly making any
such claim. It was incompatible with any relation between
a colony and the Mother country. The next was with re-
gard to the repeal of the Quebec Tenures Act. lle thought
that would be a work of positive and gross injustice ;
it would be an act of spoliation. Having made up his mind
that it was the duty of Parliament to interfere in order to
put an end to the present state of distraction in Lower Canada,
and enable the machinery which was now standing still to
move at all, he then conceived that it was the duty
of Government to propose only such a measure to Parliament
as should be as little beyond the ordinary course of the Con-
stitution as possible, in order to produce that effect,
and he did apprehend that the resolutions proposed
by the Noble Lord were exactly the policy which ought to be
followed. The effect of those resolutions would be to put an
feed to that most unseemly thing—that of public officers not
having received any salaries for several years. He should,
however, have felt it extremely difficult to vote for that re-
solution, which refused for the present to consider the ques-
tion of an elective Legislative Council, if to that had not
been appended another, which pledged the House and the
Government to take effectual steps for rendering the compo-
sition of the Legislative Council of Lower Canada more fit-
ting to perform the functions than it was at present. He
heartily rejoiced that the Government, by these resolutions,
pledged themselves to look seriously to that point, with a view
to render it more effectual for the purposes for which it was
intended. He was more anxious to say this, because the lion.
Gentleman opposite (Mr. Gladstone) had argued the case for
the Legislative Council, and against the House of Assembly,
as if the House were going to give a vote this night as for the
one and against the other. His (Mr. Labouchere's) vote,
would be nothing of the kind, for the Commissioners stated
in their Report, that while the Legislative Council professed
the greatest desire to do their duty, yet they actually obstruc-
ted passing into law various measures passed by the House of
Assembly for the establishment of local governments in all
parts of the colony. With this before us, it was impossible to
say that the faults were all on one side. He would not trouble
the House with any further observations, but he had felt
himself called upon to justify the part he had taken on
former occasions—and also to state the grounds which
would induce him to give his vote that night. —( Hear.)
Lord STANLEY said that before he proceeded to the sub-
ject matter of discussion, he trusted that he might be permitted
to take notice of one circumstance, which, although in this
country it might produce no effect, might be misunderstood,
and probably, from what had taken place, was calculated to
be misunderstood in the colonies. He alluded to a subject
which probably few Hon. Members then present were ac-
quainted with; he meant that at the fatal hour of half-past 7
an attempt was made to count out the House.—( Hear, hear.)
What did Hon. Members mean by cheering ? Was not the
gallery cleared ?—was not the House counted—thanks to the
Hon. and Learned Member for Bath—and were there not suf-
ficient Members present to constitute a House? And why
was this done ? Was it not to show how small a number of
Members were present at the discussion on the affairs of Ca-
nada 2—( Hear, hear.) But he begged to recal to the recol-
lection of lion. Members the state of the House the night be-
fore last, for in his life he had never seen, on the discussion
of a subject of British and domestic policy, a more full atten-
dance of Members, and a more anxious and attentive House
to the discussion of the subject.—( Hear, hear.) But, however,
patience has its limits.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He was one of the
Members who had been present nearly all the evening. Ile
came down to the House at a quarter before five, and on Isis
road he met shoals of Members coming away ; and on asking
what was the business before the House, the universal answer
was, " Hume is up."—( Great laughter, and cries of " Hear.")
This was at a quarter to five. The House was counted at a
quarter to seven, and the Hon. Member for Middlesex was not
only then speaking, but he had not finished his speech at a
quarter to eight.—( Laughter and cries of " Hear.") Was
the Hon. Member speaking to the subject or not ?—(Hear,
hear.) Let those who sat and listened to him for three mortal
hours state what was the case, or let other Hon. Members read
the reports ; of which, however, they might be deprived,
unless the Chancellor of the Exchequer was pleased to make
some relaxation as to his superficial rule as regarded newspa-
pers.—( A laugh.) lion. Members, however, might become
acquainted with this fact by means less irksome to themselves
than by reading the Hon. Member's speech, for he did not wish
to inflict such a punishment on them. The greater part of the
Hon. Member's speech referred to a question not before the
House or connected with the subject matter of debate. The
subject matter on which the Hon. Gentleman addressed the
House at such length was a quarrel on the subject of a
correspondence that had taken place between Mr. M`Kenzie
of Upper Canada and Mr. Hume of Middlesex.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter)—letters were read of the date of
March the 10th and other periods, from Bryanston-square,
and others in reply from Toronto.—( Laughter.) The House
were then told that in the debate in the House of Assembly in
Upper Canada the question was set aside by 13 to 7 against
Mr. Hume, and they had given to them the names of the mover
and seconder, and the only wonder was that they had not the
speeches read to them at length.—(Laughter.) The Hon.
Member then proceeded to make various desultory observa-
tions on Mr. Haggerston, and this occupied the greater por-
tion of the time during which he addressed the House. For
his own part, he believed that no greater punishment could
be inflicted on the unfortunate delinquents complained of at
such length by the Hon. Member, than compelling them to
read. the Hon. Gentleman's speech.—( A laugh.) lie would
not notice the attacks the lion. Member was pleased to
make on himself ; but he wished to notice that for two hours and

a half of the time of a most important discussion on the affairs of
Canada the Hon. Member chose to indulge in matters having no
relation to the question, but rather relating to himself per-
sonally. When, therefore, the Hon. Member complained of the
thinness of attendance and the want of attention during his
speech, he should consider that it was not that the House of
Commons regarded Canada less, but that they deprecated
Hume more.—( Cheers and laughter). He wished now to
return to the question immediately at issue. He felt that it
was a subject of unparalleled difficulty and danger to their
colonies. lie agreed with the Hon. and Learned Member for
Bath that that was no time for indecision or passive conduct—
that was a time when the Legislature and the Government
must frankly concede or boldly deny—( Hear, hear)—they
must boldly assert the principles on which they meant to act,
for this was a question which admitted of no tampering, but
they must be prepared to face the subject boldly.—( Hear,
hear.) If he felt any difficulty as to the vote he should give,
it was not as to the side of the House which he should take
when they were called upon to come to decision, but he felt
more deeply than he had ever done before how much his vote
might be misinterpreted. Fearing, therefore, to give his sanc-
tion to a course so indecisive and doubtful as that proposed by
his Majesty's Government, he felt bound to speak openly and
candidly his sentiments.—( Hear.) He affirmed—and he did
so in the broadest and most open manner that it could be given
—that, in the present state of Canada, the House could not and
dared not yield to the demands of the Canadians.—( Hear. )
The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had referred to the

Acts of 1774 and 1778, passed during the early period of our
colonial government there, and which they had been told had
'been violated. He asked what were the specific grounds of
complaint as regarded these Acts, which had been put forward
by the House of Assembly of Lower Canada ? He asked what
were the demands made, and what would be the consequences
of concession to the colony as well as to this country ? They
were told that the Government and that Houso wished to

trample on the liberties of Canada, and that by denying— tbe
demands made by the Assembly of Lower Canada, they would
violate the liberties of a free and independent people.—( Hear. )
Did Hon. Gentlemen opposite place such a construction on
the proceedings ? He was sure that it was an accidental ex-
pression that fell from the Noble Secretary for the Colonies, to
call the Canadians an independent people.—( Hear.) A free
people they undoubtedly were, but as independent people they
were not. In this laid all the fallacy of the argument used on
the other side. There were three chief demands. Two of these
were for rights and privileges which the mother country did not
possess herself; and the third was one which, if conceded, would
render impossible any further connection with the mother coun-
try. Let the House examine them, not merely scanning them in
all their bearings, but taking a general view of them. But what
were their demands ? He would take them seriatim; and he
would ask the House of Commons whether the House of As-
sembly of Lower Canada did not demand privileges and powers
which that House had never arrogated to theniselves. The
first of these demands to which he wished to call the attention
of the House was, that the two branches of the Legislature
should be elective. Was this a power which was demanded or
desired by this country ? Was this demand for Canada meant
as a precedent to lead to the same result in this country ? So
far from a right of this kind being in unison with the British
Constitution, it was a right directly at 'variance with it, and not
possessed by any portion of the people. What was the second
demand ? It was for a power which the House of Commons
did not possess—it was a demand which no House of Com-
mons or Government would allow, and which, if allowed, no
Government could sit on those benches for three weeks. The
demand was, that the House of Assembly should vote every
item of expenditure from first to last.—( Hear, hear, hear. )
Hon. Gentlemen said " Hear, hear;" but, he asked, was the
Crown in no respect independent of that House ?—( Hear.)
Did the Hon. Member for Middlesex mean to tell him that
the Crown had no hereditary revenue ?—( Hear, hear, and
" No.") The Honourable Member for Middlesex had sat
long in that house, but he had sat to very little purpose indeed
if he was ignorant of the fact that at the commencement of
every reign the Sovereign waives the possession of a right
which passes indefeasibly to his successor—namely, those in-
dependent possessions which the Sovereign holds independent
of Parliament; anti the income of which no yields up on Par-

liament giving bins a fixed Civil List for the time of cession ;
and when the Civil List ceases, the hereditary possessions of
the Crown revert to the Sovereign._-( Hear.) Was not this
the law of Parliament as well as the uniform practice ?
( Hear.) Was it not also Parliamentary law, that certain
salaries were paid, by a permanent arrangement, out of the
Consolidated Fund, instead of their being called upon year
after year to squabble on questions of a halfpenny about their
salaries with the Hon. Member for Middlesex?—( Hear, hear.)
Was not this the case with respect to the payments made for
the administration of justice and the salaries of the civil officers
of State? It was absolutely necessary, in conformity with
the British Constitution, that there should be some permanent
source of revenue for the objects he had mentioned inde-
pendent of the vote of the House of Assembly.—( Cries
of " Hear, hear, hear.") The total revenue of Lower
Canada was 150,0001. a year. Not one farthing of this was
withheld from the control of the House of Assembly—( Hear)
—there was one shilling of it expended which they did
not dire Ct—there was no act of expenditure which they did
not know of. Let the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath
deny the correctness of this statement if he could. There
were certain revenues in Lower Canada, over which, from the
foundation of the colony, the House of Assembly had no con-
trol—he meant casual and territorial revenues, analogous to
the land revenue of the Crown in England. These revenues
arose from certain payments as seignorial rights in Lower
Canada, from the sale of timber on waste land, and from a
right which he had never heard disputed, namely, the waste
and unappropriated land of the country. There was also
another point at issue, namely, as to the right to the du-
ties which were imposed by the Act of 1772. The Ho-
nourable Gentleman referred to the Act of 1774, and to the
Act of 1778, to prove the right of the House of Assembly
to deal with these duties. The Honourable and Learned
Gentleman, when it suited his purpose, referred to the Act
of 1792, but he did not on this point; and the reason was
perfectly obvious ; that Act stated that Parliament would
not impose duties or taxes to be paid in Canada with-
cut the assent of the Legislative Houses in Canada.—( Hear,
hoar.) Until within these few years it had never been
disputed that this Act had no past reference. Nothing had
been said on this subject until 1820; but he begged the House
to recollect what had taken place in 1831. In 1831, his
Noble Friend, then Colonial Secretary, and upon whom the
Hon. Member for Middlesex had passed such panegyrics at
his (Lord Stanley's) expense that night, had endeavoured to
satisfy the Colonial Assembly on this point. He offered that,
saving and except the casual and territorial revenues of the
Crown, the whole taxes levied in Canada should be given up
to the control of the House of Assembly in the provinces, on
condition that the Governor and high officers of State, the
Judges and the officers necessary for the administration of jus-
tice, should be secured from the capricious control of the
House, by having their salaries secured to them at the com-
mencement of each reign for the life of the King. The con-
dition was thankfully accepted on the part of the Canadians.
What followed? Upper Canada gratefully accepted the con-
cession, and passed the Civil List. Lower Canada, however, re-
fused to do so. And these were the men who charged us with a
violation of their constitutional rights—with violating the free-
dom of their Constitution, in imposing on them taxes, the right
of disposal of which rested solely with themselves, rights which
they never had till they received them from us in 1831—
received them on terms which they had since most disgrace-
fully departed from.—( Hear, hear.) So much for the two
first points as to an elective . Legislative Council and the
financial question ; next a few observations on the subject of
the Executive Council. This was a body whose functions
were to act as advisers of the Governor on affairs of state when
required so to do, something after the manner of our Privy
Council. Here the demand was that the Executive Council
should be rendered directly responsible to the House of As-
sembly. Here again was confounded altogether the wide and
manifest distinction between an independent and a subordinate
state ; the King was subordinate to no one ; the King's Mi-
nsters were responsible for him to the country ; but what was
the position of the Governor of this colony ? He was re-
sponsible to the Crown here, to the Ministry here, he acted
under the orders of the Ministry, and for his acts were the
Ministry responsible to the Legislature. To impose on him,
then, a double responsibility—a responsibility to the Govern-
ment at home if he did not obey their instructions, and a re-
sponsibility to the House of Assembly if he acted contrary to
their orders—would be to constitute two independent Legisla-
tures interfering with and counteracting each other ; yet this
was the position in which it was desired to place the
affairs of Canada. He ( Lord Stanley) perfectly agreed with
the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, that this was no sub-
ject for half and half measures, no question of expediency, but
a question of empire—( Hear, hear)-_a question whether or
no this colony was to be held, or was to be given up.—( Hear.)
A middle course, so far from disarming enmity, and softening
down the claims of the Lower Canadians, would but the mere
provoke them. The house must declare itself prepared either
to resist the demandsAS the House of' Assembly, or to accede
to them. 'What said the Hon. and Learned Member fur Bath
as to the propositions before the Committee ? That Hon.
and Learned Member declared with great frankness and man-
liness, and the Hon. and Learned Member's opinion was en-
titled to very great weight in the Committee, appearing as he
specifically did as the retained, the salaried advocate—and he
( Lord Stanley) used the term with no offensive intention—
the salaried advocate of the dominant majority of Lower
Canada, whose duty as such was fully to ascertain what
were the passions and prejudices of that majority—what did
that Hon. and Learned Member say ? Ile declared the
step proposed to be taken to be unjust, impolitic, and inade-
quate. He (Lord Stanley) also considered the resolutions—
he would not say unjust, but impolitic—impolitic because
inadequate—( Hear, hear) ; for while they amounted to as
great a violation as their powers could be guilty of of those
constitutional rights which they so loudly invoked and ex-
pressed so great a reluctance to tamper with, all they proposed
to do for those who had been suffaring for four or five years in
penury and indigence, the result of Ministerial indecision—.
(Hear, hear)—was to give these injured parties the paltry
arrears of their salary, leaving them exposed for the future to
the certainty—as the Hon. Member for Bath candidly ad-
mitted—of precisely the same or more bitter sufferings and
privations, and to the increased hostility of their present per-
secutors—and all this because Ministers could not make up
their minds to say yes or no.—( Loud Opposition cheers. )
The Hon. Member for Middlesex had done him the honour of
saying that ho (Lord Stanley) had been, in 1831, the source
of all the inconveniences and distresses of the colony, although
it was notorious that the stoppage of the supplies commenced
just eighteen months before he accepted the colonial office. It
was rather singular that in the very correct and detailed account
which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had gone into

of all the proceedings which had taken place, he had never
for a single moment adverted to the fact that in 1834, at the
time when he (Lord Stanley) filled the office of Colonial Se-
cretary, a Committee was appointed by the House, which mi-
nutely, patiently, and carefully investigated every grievance
alleged by the agents of the Canadian population, of which
Committee the Hon. and Learned Member himself was a

member. At the conclusion of the inquiries of that Commit-
tee, at the instance of the Right Hon. Gentleman who suc-
ceeded him in the Colonial Department, he had abstained from
asking that the evidence taken before the Committee should at
that time be printed, or that any report should be drawn up
on the subject. If, however, Parliament proposed to enter
into this colonial question, it was most desirable that the evi:

dente taken before that Committee should be printed and laid
before the House.

The CEIANCELLOR of the EXC E Q LTE R said that
it was intended to print the evidence, and bring it before the
House.

Lord STANLEY was rejoiced to hear that such was the
case, as it was most essential that the whole question should
be before the House and the public.--( Hear, hear.) He would
not trouble the House with many details, but he would call
their attention to what Lord Gosford had said on the subject
on the 12th March, 1836. "We are far advanced in the

fourth year, since there has been any appropriation of provin-
cial funds to the use of Government ; and although a sum,
temporarily contributed from the British Treasury, has re-
lieved the civil officers so far as to give them one year's salary
during that period; the third 'year is pasiing away, during
which they have not had the smallest fraction of their earnings
in the service of the public. The distress and embarrass-
ment which this state of circumstances has inflicted on the

... ~. .....,
functionaries of the province, may be easily conceived. Many
arc living on money borrowed at an exorbitant interest; some

cannot but be reduced to the verge of ruin: and to show
that this suffering of individuals is not unattended with dan—
ger to the general welfare, it may be enough to remark,
without painfully dwelling on private circumstances, that the

judges of the country are amongst those who are left to pro-
vide for their subsistence as best they may, after three years'
stoppage of their official incomes." This letter from Lord
Goaford was received by Lord Glenelg some time in June
1836, and an answer was sent in the same month ; and what
was the answer to this tale of distress and ruin ? Why, the
answer was that " his Majesty's Ministers were quite confi-
dent there must be some mistake"_( Hear, hear, and laugh-
ter)—and Lord Glenelg further communicated to the Chief

Commissioner that "conscious that measures had been adopted
with an earnest solicitude for the welfare of all classes of Ca-
nadian subjects, his Majesty waits with tranquillity the result
of this long and painful struggle."—( Hear, hear, and laugh-
ter.) • It was possible that Lord Glenelg might await the
result with great tranquillity, but he (Lord Stanley) was
sure that no other Colonial Minister in the world could do
ee._( Hear, hear, hear.) In the same communication Lord
Gosford 'was desired to ascertain from the House of As-
sembly whether there •was not a mistake in the matter.
Lord Gosford put the question, and was told in so many
words that there was " no mistake" in this case at all
events—( Great laughter and cheers)—and the House of
Assembly intimated that they thought they had expresed
themselves in terms which it was impossible to misunder-
stand.—(Hear, hear.) Such was the position of Canadian
affairs; such were the perilous circumstances under which
Ministers came down to the House with their resolutions,
talking about their extreme reluctance to take any unconsti-
tutional steps, their desire to limit themselves within the nar-
rowest bounds which the exigencies of the case required,
showing their teeth but not daring to bite.—( Hear, hear.)
But he would put it to the House what were these inadequate,.
these insignificant proceedings—these " waitinLrs a little
longer," but a premium for continued and enlarged demands
cn the part of the Assembly.—( Hear, hear.) Ile would not
follow up the parallel which had been instituted between this
question and that of Ireland ; but he would just call to the
recollection of Ministers a sentiment in reference to Iceland
uttered by a Noble Friend of his not then in his place, and
much cheered on the opposite side, to the effect that " if the
majority of the people demand a change, that change must
be conceded ; and if it be not deemed sufficient, further con-

cessions must be matle."—( Ilear, hear.) Now, let the House
reflezt that this sentiment would be treasured up and applied
:0 their own case by the people of Lower Canada►—( Hear)-__
that moreover they would read the speech of the Noble Se-