The Sun.
London, England, 1837-05-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1837

The Clause was agreed to, Lord John Russell undertak:ng
that words to the effect required should be introduced into it.
On the motion that the Chairman report progress,
Lord J. RUSSELL expressed his hope that the proceed-
ings with this Bill would be allowed to take precedence of all
other business on Thursday.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained
leave to sit again on Thursday.
Several Orders of the Day were then agreed to.
FOREIGN GRAIN.

On Mr. ROBINSON moving for leave to bring in a Bill
to allow of the grinding of foreign grain in bond,
An HON. MEMBER moved that the House be counted, when
there not being forty Members present, an adjournment neces.
sarily took place.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Mir 9.
Lord DENMAN, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, took
his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'Clock.
On the motion of Lord SHAFTESBURY the several
private Bills on the table were advanced a stage.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then took hisseat on the Woolsack.
Sir JAMES GRAHANI, and other Members of the House of
Commons, then brought up the Hereford and Carlisle Rail-
way Bill.
Mr. Crowther then brought up papers from the Court of
Chancery in Ireland.
Lord CAMPERDOWN presented a petition from Bath
in favour of the Oxford and Great Western Railway Bill.
Lord RADNOR presented petitions from places in Berks
against Church-rates.

-Lord SONDES presented a petition from the shipowners
of Exeter in favour of the Shipping Gazette.
Lord LIL FORD presented petitions against Church-rates
from St. John's, Hackney, Warrington, from High-street
Chapel, Lancaster, and from several other places.
Lord COLCHESTER presented a petition in favour of
Church-rates from a place in Devonshire.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH presented a similar petition
from a place in Gloucestershire. The Noble Lord then said that
a conversation had taken place in that House relative to pro-
ceedings at an execution at Gloucester ; and as the Noble
Lord then stated that Lord John Russell had written to the
High Sheriff, but had not then received any reply—now,
he ( Lord Ellenborough) had received a letter from the
High Sheriff, stating that he was engaged in prosecuting
inquiries into the matter. He mentioned this, lest any
opinion might be entertained that the Sheriff was negligent
in not doing so before now.

ViscouniThUNCANNON said he had received a letter
from the Home Department, stating that letters had been re-
ceived there to the same effect. The Noble Lord concluded
by stating, that it was his intention that the Milbank Peniten•
tiary Bill should he postponed till Thursday.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that in calling the atten-
tion of the House to the subject the other evening, he did not
intend to cast any blame upon the Sheriff.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said that he did not impute
this to the Noble Duke, for although the Sheriff was officially
liable in such a case, ye( it could not be considered that he
was immediately so ; he considered that when all the circum-
stances were known, it would be found that they had been
greatly exaggerated.
Lord STfiA FFO RD then presented a petition from a
parish in Essex, against Church-rates.
The Bishop of GLOUCESTER presented a number of
petitions from parishes in the diocese of Gloucester, in favour
of Church-rates.

The Bishop of EXETER presented petitions against the
system of National Education in Ireland from Portadown, and
from the Clergy of the diocese of Down and Connor, in Ire-
land. The Right Rev. Prelate also presented a petition from
Hardwick, near Manchester, in favour of a Ten Hours' Fac-
toryßill..

The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition from
Hereford, praying for an amendment in the Poor Law Bill.
The Earl of GLENGALL moved for certain returns rela-
tive to the Police of Dublin and the appointment of Magis-
trates.

The Marquis of BUTE presented a petition from Stirling
in favour of the better observance of the Sabbath.

The Marquis of DO WNS II IR E presented a petition from
a parish in the county of Berks against the abolition of Church-

rates.

CANADA.
Lord GLE NELG then rose for the purpose of asking the
House to sanction the resolutions which had been agreed to by
the House of Commons with respect to Lower Canada. He
was quite aware that the details of the measure were,
if not to all at least to the greater part of their Lordships to-
tally uninteresting, but still he could not shut his eyes to the
fact that they were, taken as a whole, most important to the
inhabitants of Lower Canada. This was not a subject of party
feeling, and he was sure their Lordships would discuss it on
national grounds. He would first take leave to present to
their Lordships a short summary of those facts which it was
necessary to view, in order to form a correct judgment on the
question, and to the situation in which Lower Canada was now
placed. It was well known that the province of Quebec,
comprising at that time both Upper and Lower Canada, was
rendered to this country by a treaty. In 1774 an Act was intro-
duced, by which the French laws were restored to the pro-
vinces in all State matters, and the English law in criminal
matters ; and in the year 1791 an Act was passed, dividing
the province into Upper and Lower Canada. Lower Canada
was given as a reward to the French for their attachment to
this country, and Upper Canada was given to the Americans
for their fidelity to the throne of England. There were two
peculiarities connected with that ; there was a Colonial Con-
stitution embodied in the Act of Parliament, and then, also,
for the first time an attempt was made in colonial history to
unite the Legislative functions with aristocratical privileges
and honours. The Constitution then assigned to Lower
Canada was the same as that of Upper Canada—there
were three branches of legislation, the Governor, the Legis-
lative Council, nominated, by the Crown and holding office
for life, and the House of Assembly. For some period
this Constitution gas not called into execution by Lower
Canada ; they were not ripe for that Constitution ;r and for
a certain number of years they permitted the Execu-
tive Government to control the affairs of the Province. The
materials for carrying on a free Constitution were then
preparing. The Governor took refuge from the ascendancy
of the French by composing the legislative Council chiefly of
English. An offer was made in the year 1815 by the House
of Assembly to take upon itself the whole expense of the
province of Lower Canada—the expense up to that time hav-
ing been controlled by the country ; but in the year 1818 that
power was conceded to them, and from that period to 1828 there
had been nothing but a succession of struggles, in which the
Assembly contested for its fuedal rights and privileges. Those
rights and privileges were step by step conceded to them ; but
those concessions were extorted ; and as usual when conces-
sions were extorted, or tardily given, there was no perfect
conciliation on either side. —( Hear, hear.) On the one
side there was a wish to continue arbitrary power, and on
the other side, there having been a successful dispute
against power there was an emboldened determination to car-
ry on still further the contest, and thus both parties got into a
habit of struggling which had been injurious to the peace
of the province. Many of the honest and well affected of the
English party had joined them in their opposition to the
Government, and the consequence was that a state of ex-
treme • discontent and dissatisfaction was produced in the
Colonies.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord Glenelg) need not
refer to the Committee of 1828, which had dis-
charged its duty with great temper and moderation, exa-
mining into the alleged abuses, and suggesting remedies to meet
these evils. That report was received with acclamation by the
provinces, and was pronounced a fair criterion of the judgment
and discretion of its authors. The Committee had pointed out
the mal-administration of the Government, not that there ex-
isted any defects in the Constitution, and that was the view
that had been previously taken of the case by the people of
Canada themselves. The Committee had all along main-
tained the existence and the integrity of the Constitution,
but suggested remedies for the evils complained of. During
two succeeding years efforts were made to carry into effect
the recommendation of the Committee ; but from the neces-
sity of further inquiry, the greater part of these suggestions
could not be carried into effect. In 1774 an Act was passed by
the British Legislature, abolishing certain duties, and giving
the appropriation of the home duties to the British Treasury.
This was one of the grievances which was complained of. He
would now come to the Bill which had been introduced in
1829, which had for its provisions that the whole of the reve-
nues of the colony should be at the disposal of the House of As-
sembly, if a fixed sum were given for the support of the civil go-
vernment. That Bill did not pass, for reasons which it would not
be necessary for him then to state. It fell to the lot of his
Noble Friend opposite, however, to be enabled to carry into
effect the recommendations of the Committee of 1828 ;
he had applied himself to the task with zeal and
energy, and he (Lord Glenelg) might say that he had
accomplished it.—( Hear, hear hear.) The Noble Lord
who had preceded him in office had recorded a minute, in
which he stated that all the suggestions of the Committee
had been carried into effect, with the one exception,
that he did not think the Legislative Council had been
reformed in the entire sense in which the Committee
had recommended it, for the Noble Lord had re-
quired information, in order to carry into effect that reforma-
tion, and wanted also names from the colonies, and those
which were procured from thence were not so accurate as
they ought to have been. The result of his Noble Friend's
measure, however, had been, that it had detached all the loyal
inhabitants of the provinces from those who were hostile to
the Government, and who had joined the disaffected, thinking
that it was only thus they could obtain justice ; all those,
however, had been detached, and the only contest now was
between the English and French. It was found, also,
that the House of Assembly rose in its demands the
more that concessions were made to them. Up to 1828 he
would acknowledge that they had just cause for complaint ;
but he was bound to say that subsequent to that period
there was no just cause for it.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
His Noble Friend had also referred to time Act of 1794, and
believing that the Assembly was cordially disposed to the course
pursued by the Government in this country, he had introduced a
Bill for the purpose of placing all the revenues of the country
at the disposal of the Crown. That Bill passed the House in 1831.
Now much had been said with regard to the Bill being passed
without a condition ; that was done for the purpose of leaving the
question open and at large, and in order to secure the revenues
for the Government. Shortly after that the Assembly
assumed a hostile attitude, and passed resolutions strongly
impeaching the conduct of the Government in this country.
Hear.) Those resolutions were sent to London, and Lord
Stanley who was then the Secretary for the Colonies, an-
nounced his intention of repealing the Bill, in order to place
the revenues of the colony in the hands of the Crown. In
1835, upon his entering into office, the Assembly refused to
enter into any treaty with the Governor; it, therefore, be-
came his duty to consider by what policy he should
be guided. lie felt that it was a subject which required much

consideration. He felt that he ought to respect the spirit of
the Constitution, and, as far as possible, uphold the laws. He
therefore directed an inquiry to take place into the grievances
that were complained of. He knew that a course of caution
and enquiry was necessary, and he was not inclined to consent
to the proposition of some ardent and fiery spirits who called
for measures of promptitude and action. He thought that Eng-
land might well afford in a struggle with one of its own colo-
nies to act with forbearance, and that the true policy of the Go-
vernment was not to precipitate, but to delay the crisis. If
ample reasons had not existed for that postponement, he felt
that it would have been almost his duty to invent reasons for
delay. It might be objected that he was one of the Cabinet
who, about twelve months before, had concurred in in.
troducing a measure for the repeal of the Act of 1831.
( Hear, hear.) Ile (Lord Glenelg) admitted that he
was in the Cabinet, but his reason for voting for that
measure was that he believed the crisis had then arrived,
although he had since reason to think such was not the
case. When the measure was introduced in the House
of Commons by Lord Stanley, the subject had been referred
to a Committee, who, after several months of inquiry, had
made a report, recommending that the matter should rest
between the Executive Government and the Colonies, thus
pronouncing a negative upon that Bill._( Hear, hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord then went on to defend the appointment
of the Commission, and said that if any inquiry was
necessary, that inquiry would be the best which was
conducted on the spot. He would venture to assert that
so large a mass of information on the internal state of any
country, so laboriously and so ably drawn up, he had never seen.
The rZeport entered into the proceedings, the interests, and
the sentiments of the people, and he could answer for
himself, that he could not have conceived it possible
for any one to obtain a comprehensive view of the
whole subject by any other source than that Report.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) There were many important subjects
on which they had thrown light, which could not have
been obtained from any other quarter ; and they
established this fact, which was the foundation of all our pro-
ceedings, that the controversy in that country was not between
the colonies and a privileged faction, but between the Cana-
dians of English origin and the Canadians of French origin.
Another important fact which it had brought to light was,
that although the English were not adequately represented, yet
the defect was irremediable, and could not be corrected with-
out involving injustice.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It had also
established that the Legislative Assembly was in a state
that should be corrected, but that the Land Company had
conferred great benefits on the province, although it was dis-
tasteful to the French party. It had also been shown that
the revenues in possession of the Crown were adequate to sup-
port the civil government, without recurring to the House of
Assembly. Proceeding from this point, the Noble Lord en-
tered into a defence of the composition of the Commission,
which, he contended, was the best suited to bring out the
greatest quantity, as well as the best description of informa-
don—a fact sufficiently exemplified, he thought, in the reports
they had produced. He came next to the course pursued by
the Commissioners after their arrival in Lower Canada. Lord
Gosford, according to the instructions he had received, im-
mediately summoned the House of Assembly, stated the na-
ture of the Commission and the purpose of the inquiry, and
invited them to pay the arrears due to the civil functionaries of
the Government, informing them at the same time that he was
desirous to keep in reserve the Crown revenues. At first this
intimation of Lord Gosford appeared likely to meet with suc-
cess. The majority against the Government decreased, and
a vote for the arrears due to the civil functionaries was very
nearly carried by a majority of both Houses. But a pub-
lication of the instructions to Sir Francis Head, which en
closed extracts from the instructions of the Commissioners,
having been communicated to the House of Assembly, those
extracts immediately gave an opportunity to the leaders of
the opposition party to excite the feelings of the people, and
to induce the House of Assembly to retrace its steps, to take
no notice of the arrears due to the civil functionaries, and to
pass only a Bill of Supply for six months, coupled with cer-
tain conditions to which the Legislative Council would not
agree, and consequently no supplies whatever were voted.
The Assembly further proposed an address to the King, and
desired their Speaker to communicate their proceedings to the
neighbouring province, and to call for their concurrence and
co-operation. In the address to the King the Assembly dis-
tinctly stated that they would not be satisfied with any thing
less than an absolute concession of all their demands. The
address was accompanied by a report from the Commissioners
recommending an appeal to Parliament, and that the Act of
1831 should be repealed. It became, of course, tile duty of
the Government to consider whether they could comply with
the recommendations of the Commissioners. After mature
consideration they determined that they could not, and what
had since followed seemed to him to bins to justify the cor-
rectness of the determination. The Noble Lord next ad-
verted to that part of one of his dispatches to Lord Gosford,
which had been made the ground of a charge against him
of want of sympathy for the situation of the civil func•
tionaries in Lower Canada, whose salaries had been s
long left unpaid. So far from entertaining any want
of sympathy for the situation of those unfortunate per-
sons, he had directed Lord Gosford, if the arrears were
not paid by the provincial Legislature, to avail himself of all
the resources of the Crow❑ that he might have in his posses-
sion for that purpose ; and, so far as they were available, to
apply them to the payment of the official servants whose sala-
ries had been left unpaid. The consequence was, that Lord
Gosford did advance 50,0001.—being all the money be had in
his possession—for the payment of the civil servants, and liqui-
dated the claims of all whose salaries were under 2001. a year,
and a great portion of those whose salaries were of a much
higher amount. This was in 1836 ; and at that time, in con-
sequence of the instructions forwarded to Lord Gosford, the
civil servants of the Canadian Government were placed in
precisely the same situation as that in which they stood when
he ( Lard Glenelg) came into office. After receiving the
speech from Lord Gosford, the House of Assembly agreed
to another address—not to the King—but to Lord Gosford,
and this last address was drawn up in a tone of menace
and defiance which banished all doubt as to the feeling and
determination of the body from which it emanated.—( Hear,
hear.) He had before stated that he was anxious that the
appeal to Parliament should not be made until the crisis
was mature. It was with grief he now declared that that
period had arrived. All that was wanting on the former
occasion was now supplied—the necessity was palpable—it
was now time to act. The House of Commons had accord-

ingly agreed to a series of resolutions, which, he hoped,
would meet with the approbation of their Lordships. The
Noble Lord then went into a statement of the altered and

improved state of the provinces of tipper Canada and New
Brunswick, showing how all their complaints had been re-
moved, and how anxious they were to co-operate with his
Majesty and the Government of this country, rather than with
the discontented and violent party in Lower Canada. The
demands of the House of Assembly might be divided into

two classes—those which affected the honour and integrity
of the country, and those which affected the sovereignty of
the King. With respect to those which touched the honour
and good faith of the country, they related to the tenures of
land, or rather to the Acts respecting tenures, which in-
volved very many complicated details, with which details,
however, he did not consider it was necessary to trouble their
Lordships. But the point on which the House of Assembly
took their stand was based on the Act of 1791, which pro-
vided for the conversion of feudal tenures into free anp
common soccage ; and upon this the question had been raised
formerly, whether this conversion of feudal tenures did
or did not carry with the English law of alienations and
descents.—( Hear.) To solve that doubt, an Act was passed
in the year 1825, which determined that it should carry with
it the English law of alienation and descent. That law then
was so passed in 1825, and yet in all the petitions of 1828 no
allusion to, or complaint, was made of that law. Subse-
quently, however, it was made a grievance, and an imperial
Act of Parliament was passed authorising the King, with the
local Assembly, to repeal that Act. That point was now es-
tablished under the authority of an Act of Parliament. Titles,
therefore, had been acquired to property, and yet the House
of Assembly sought to abolish all rights acquired under the
sanction of an imperial Act of Parliament, to abolish rights
by which the whole property in this country was defended.
This was what they called the simple and unconditional
repeal of this Act. He prayed the House not to commit any
such breach of faith. So with the case of the Canada Land
Company, which had been incorporated by the charter of
the King, whose legal right to grant such charter could not
be questioned. But as there were in this case certain powers
which only an Act of Parliament could effect, an Act was
accordingly passed giving those powers. It was necessary,
too, that it should be an Act of the Imperial Parliament,
because the domicile of the Company was in this country.
Under the sanction, then, of their charter and this imperial
Act, the Company had bought lands and sold them, because
the whole of their property was thus protected. And yet
nothing was to remain safe if the demands of the Assembly
were to be acceded to—for they called for the abrogation of
this charter. He would say that both their demands involved
a sacrifice of the national faith. But there were other demands
which involved the government of the country, so far as re-
garded every thing which constituted property. The Assembly
required the whole disposal of all revenues—not only of those
arising out of the department of taxation, which were usually
levied by popular assemblies, but also of those revenues which
appertained to Crown property. All these claims were made :
they demanded the disposal of all Crown property at their own
discretion. He need not tell their Lordships that this was a
principle evhich never had been, and never could be, comprised
in the constitutional law of property. The next claim was,
that the Executive Council should be made so responsible
to the House of Assembly as to be dismissible at the will
and pleasure of the Assembly.—( Hear, hear.) If mea-
sures considered in a provincial Parliament, and connected
with local interests had nothing external about them, it
would be of little consequence if the rule were established.
But let it be recollected what must be the situation in which
the Executive Council must be thrown by admitting this
principle. If the Assembly disapproved of an act of- Parlia-
ment, then their councillors would lose their office at the in-
stance of the House of Assembly. What, then, was the course
to be pursued ? Were the Executive Council under such cir-
cumstances to be replaced ? If not, what must be the conse-
quence? Why, the Provincial Assembly would decide in
matters of foreign policy, and exercise its own judgment, in-
dependent of the parent country, and the result would be,
that they would have a series of independent states, each exer-
ting independent functions. Then there was the third de-
mand which had been made, that the Legislative Council
should be an elective council. The object of this was that the
Executive Council should be identical in its principles with
the House of Assembly. In one word, the two Houses were
to be animated by the same views, influenced by the same con
stituencies, and by the same career of policy, whatever it
might tend to. This system would go to put the whole of the
Canadian people under the control of the French Assembly.
Then there were the demands which had been urged by the

House of Assembly, aiid he would ask their Lordships whe-
ther they had left the Government any alternative as to the
course which they should pursue. He might be told, per-
haps, that they had resorted to the power of refusing the sup-
plies in order to obtain a redress of t heir grievances. They
certainly had the constitutional right to refuse the supplies, but
he presumed that the demand which should be made should be
constitutionally made, and of a constitutional character, and
that there should be no abrogation of the Constitution when the
right of withholding the supplies was resorted to. He appre-
hended that it was the corresponding duty of the Assembly to
maintain the conditional principles of that Constitution under
which it existed. The right to stop the supplies had been
exercised in this country only on one occasion, which involved
the general overthrow of all rights. He contended that this
right was given, not to abuse, not to destroy, but to improve
the Constitution. So long, as it was necessary to keep up the
connection between the parent country and the colony, so long
must the constitutional principle be qualified in the case of the
colony, and limited by the very principle of its dependence.
It was competent for the colonial legislatures to suggest alte-
rations, but not to enforce, in any particulars, the overthrow 0,
the Constitution, because this could only be regarded as a law-
less abuse of a remedy placed in their hands. It might be said
that there were other grievances. What were those grievances?
Were they those of 1828? The grievances of 1834 were in
course of inquiry, and during that inquiry these unfortunate
differences sprung up. But it was said, why have recourse to the
resources of the colony ? He believed it had been made a matter
of taunt in the other House of Parliament that some members of
the Government felt no great regret and reluctance at being
compelled to adopt these resolutions. Now, for himself, he
would say that he should be ashamed if he did not feel the
greatest compunction at the necessity to which he was re-
duced. He knew what Constitutional rights were; he knew
it was quite impossible for any man not to feel the utmost
repugnance when such measures were rendered necessary.
The French people of Lower Canada were of most peaceful
habits, and were happy until they were roused by those who
had taught them to consider their grievances were irreme-
diable ; and these French people possessed virtues which ex-
posed them to the machinations of ambitious and designing
men. It was then only under the most urgent necessity that
he called upon their Lordships to adopt the resolutions which
he should submit to their consideration. But look to' the
case of the public servants who had been deprived of their
recompense. If it were said that this was an infraction of
great Constitutional right, he would say, the House of As-
sembly had no right to withhold the salaries of the public ser-
vants. He thought it was quite impossible to regard the case
of these sufferers without feeling the greatest commiseration
for them. He would not take the matter up even on the
ground of humanity, but upon that of national justice, be-
cause they were not at liberty to trifle with the public ser-
vants. The King bad called these individuals to their duty,
and a compact had been made with the public to remunerate
them for their services. They had patiently performed their
duties under all circumstances ; and again he would say this
was not a question of humanity, but it was a solemn debt of
justice due from the King and the Canadian people, whom
the King had the right to compel to pay their servants out
of those revenues from whence they had before been paid.
Would this country pay these officers ? Did their Lordships
think that if they gave their negative to these claims they
would obtain a liquidation of these arrears, if on every occa-
sion these claims were treated not only with contempt, but
the House of Assembly, moreover, stated their determination
as to the disposal of the public men in the province ? He knew
a plan had been proposed by an Hon. and Learned Gentleman
in another place, which that Hon. Gent. believed would con-
ciliate all parties. That plan involved the important topic
of the abolition of the Legislative Council altogether.—
( Hear, hear.) He (Lord Glenelg) felt he need not argue
the question of the proposition itself ; but he should like to
know on what authority it was supposed the Assembly could
consent to such a proposition, which was totally inadmis-
sible, because it laid the government of the whole colony
prostrate at the feet of the French House of Assembly.
Matters had reached that crisis that further delay in dealing
with the evil would be most injurious to the British population
in Canada. That people formed the minority ; they had
watched all these proceedings with intense interest for some
time; they had suffered what a minority would be content to
suffer ; they had borne the efforts of the opposite party to in-
terfere with their interests; their commerce had been inter-
fered with, their resources had been narrowed, and their greatest
efforts had been weakened. He was not there to defend in-
discriminately the conduct or temper which the British popula-
tion had evinced. lie did not mean to express his approba-
tion of the manner in which they had conducted themselves
ith respect to their French fellow-subjects, but great allow-
ance was to be made for them. But if there was any danger
of these animosities and hostilities increasing, it became the
duty of the Government to interfere. The French people of
Canada were warmly attached to the British Constitution ;
vie had raised them from their small beginning to their present
state—we had respected their laws, their church, and their
priests. Unfortunately many speculative notions had been
raised by their leaders ; but he would call upon them to recol-
lect that the Constitution of 1791 had been and was their asy-
lum, and that nothing was so dangerous to them as embarking
in theoretical disputes with the parent Government. lie
hoped, however, that the intervention of Parliament
would arrest the progress of these animosities, and that the
French people would be able to see their true interests. But
he might be told that this measure was feeble and inadequate,
and that if they did interfere they should interfere effectually
that they should repeal the Act of 1831. After some further
observations, the Noble Lord observed it was proposed that
the revenues of the colony should supply the deficiencies up
to the 10th of April last. He therefore contended that this
measure limited itself to the strict necessity of the case. It
was proposed to draw strictly for the arrears due to the 10th
of April, and orders had been issued that subsequent to that
date the Governor would carry on the government of the co-
lony on its own resources. By the Report of the Commis-
sioners it appeared that these resources were adequate to a cer-
tain extent. But when it was said that the present measure
was inadequate for the purposes required, was it intended to be
argued that it was inadequate because it did not discard the
House of Assembly altogether from taking any share in the
proceedings connected with the colony ? Was it meant that
because they had not resorted to the principle of governing
the colony without reference to the Assembly, that therefore
it was inadequate ? That, surely, was a recommendation to
the measure, for he never would recognise any principle of
action which should exclude the aid of the House of As-
sembly. Much might be done by the declaration of Par-
liament, and he was persuaded that the French people
would see how slow the Government were to adopt the
measure now proposed, and how seriously they were im-
pressed with the necessity of the case. But when the Go-
vernment was called upon to repeal the Act of 1831, would
the repeal of that Act prevent the House of Assembly from
carrying on a war of annoyance, if they should think fit to
do so ? One hundred thousand pounds a year would be in the
hands of the Assembly for the supplies. In submitting this
measure to their Lordships he was anxious to state the inten-
tion of his Majesty's Government to bring forward a variety
of measures with a view to amend the Constitution of the
Legislative and Executive Councils. It might be well to con-
sider whether in this great colony they should not give every
facility to opening outlets to our superabundant population to
emigrate. It was the intention of the Government to avail
themselves of the situation of the country, and to affix a
boundary to Lower Cenada. Their attention should be di-
rected to New Brunswick and Canada, which were advancing
in the scale of nations. It was necessary, indeed, with refer-
ence to our colonies in North America, that there should be
some presiding authority to watch over the immediate in-
terests of the people ; and for this purpose it was in-
tended to nominate a Committee to consult together for
the common interests of these growing colonies. Looking
to Upper Canada, it would be seen she was advancing with
gigantic steps, not only by increase of population, but 11
the influx of strangers. The population in twenty years had
increased from 90,000 to 400,000. That province, however,
was landlocked, and had no outlet of her own ; they would not
avail themselves of the St. Lawrence. The people of Upper
Canada had prayed to be placed in a more favourable situa-
tion, and had begged that Montreal and the town of Montreal
should be added to that province. It had been suggested,
therefore, that a Committee should be appointed, to be corn-
posed of men chosen from each House of Legislature of each
province. This would have the effect of diffusing a new in-
fluence—of elevating the public mind ; whilst measures re-
commended by such Committee would come with great weight
to the different Houses of the Logislature, and would outweigh
the obstinacy or ignorance of party, whilst it would enable the
parent country to appreciate, and better inform herself of, the
wants and wishes of the people of the colony. It could 110 t
be denied that the time would arrive when the relations
between the mother country and her several dependencies
might require some modification ; and in that case the
authority and influence of the body to which he had been
adverting might be most advantageously exercised towards
all parties. The Noble Lord concluded by moving, that their
Lordships concur in the resolutions under their consideration..
The Earl of RIPON observed, that his Noble Friend had
stated so fully and ably all the circumstances of tho case, thet
were it not for the peculiar situation in which he (Lead Ripon)
had been placed, he should have abstained from troubling
their Lordships on the present occasion. No small part of the
difficulty of the existing circumstances arose out of the Act of
°f
that
time which he had induced their Lordships to pass. At tna,-
time his Noble Friend at the head of his Majesty's Gover'L
ment and other Noble Lords entertained apprehensions on the
subject. Uufortunately those apprehensions were realiset
and his hopes were disappointed. In consequence of what
had since occurred, he certainly considered it absolutely r'_er..
cessary that the Imperial Parliament should interfere, in
der to redress the evils which existed in Lower Canada. ion_
Noble Friend had adverted to the Report of the Commission'
ers on the subject. He ( Lord Ripon) confessed that he renter-
tained doubts with respect to the value of that Report. n this
i
Commissioners got no int'ormation which was not
country before. In fact, it was difficult to know in 11u_sy
.
respects what the real opinion of the Commissioners.
red
There were five Reports ; yet no sooner were they
Gentleman,
than one of the Commissioners, a Learned b
fie r;_li go
added to the general report a particular report
his signature, but certainly not very consistent wit. t",
that
Report in which lie bad originally concurred ; ar.ei after,
another Commissioner, a military man, fired his battery ot7o
position, not only against his brother Commissioners, but
siurto
his own mouth. Onh the fullest consideration of the mea.
of 1831, and °fits results, he (Lord Ripon)had been a parnitYeat
the manner in which the subject had been treated by the.
at
sure proposed by his Noble Friend in 1834, conceivingottlotbie
that time the colony was ripe in the course which his N
h he
Friend now proposed. On the whole, he confessed t ,at
hat,
thought the Commissioners had been a dear bargain..
however, was at present a question of coinparatively lit"'l, th in e
portance. What their Lordships had now to do with viajdis,
resolutions before them, To those resolutions he was not