The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-07 00:00:00

IV

privileges of any legislative body). If the necessity had not arisen
which the Noble Lord so forcibly pointed out, unquestionably
the British Parliament ought never to support such a propo-
sition as that which was now made. He contended that the
privilege of the House of Assembly in Canada, and the pri-
vilege of that House, of stopping the Supplies, was a privilege
which ought never to be exercised except in extreme cases.
He was anxious to uphold the 'legitimate privileges of the
House of Assembly ; but he would cheerfully support the
Noble Lord's proposition to empower the Crown to take suf-
ficient out of the public chest of Canada to pay the arrears due
to the public servants of the colony; and, be it remembered,
that to do this it was not proposed to tax the peeple of
Canada. No ; the money was in the public chest, but
the House of Assembly would not appropriate it ; and
where, he would ask, was the analogy between this case
and that of America ? With respect to other points he
would not detain the House; but with regard to the proposi-
tion for making the Legislative Council elective, who could
suppose that in doing this they would not abrogate, to all
intents and purposes, the constitution ? Who could doubt that
the fact of making the Legislative Council • elective would
be anything more than creating a nominal second branch
only, without any real power, unable to interpose any check?
Who would doubt that the effect of such a proceeding would
be to throw upon the Governor-in-Chief the onus of rejecting
any measure of which he did not approve. He took it for
granted that if this point were conceded—if the Noble Lord
were weak enough to concede this point to please a party, the
next thing would be, that if the Governor did not feel himself
bound to pass a measure. the odium must be thrown on the
King's representative. If there were any analogy between
this case and that of the United States, why not ask for an
elective Governor? The Hon. and Learned Member for
Bath, he believed, said, "Wo do." Following up, then, the
course of the most ardent Reformers, and of the advocates of
popular rights, and overlooking other considerations, those per-
SOll5 asked for that which was only consistent with a Republican
form of Government. Now he'differed a little from the Noble
Lord on the fourth resolution which he had proposed. He
did not understand why he should introduce the words "in
the existing state of things ;" because, if they conveyed any
meaning at all, they meant this, that the time might arrive,
and circumstances might occur, in which the Government
might concede the point at issue. Now, wishing for an ami-
cable adjustment, the Government must be firm, though they
must concede every thing in reason to the Canadians ; and
every thing should be conceded to the prior claims of those
especially who were the original possessors of the soil, which
was reasonable and just. The Commissioners had declared
that since the existence of this Company, a most important
effect had been produced in the colony, the Company
having taken a vast capital out to that colony. The waste
lands had never been before cultivated ; and thus the founda-
tion was laid, if the Government pursued a wise course, of a
system for promoting British settlements there, which must
tend materially to improve the colony, and to render it as
flourishing as it would have been long ago but for the preju-
dices of the Canadians themselves. But then came the auda-
cious proposition of the denial of the right of the Imperial
Parliament to legislate for the colony. The Noble Lord had
insisted on this , principle very properly last year, when the
House of Commons legislated for Jamaica ; and he would ask,
Were any objections raised to that proceeding by the lion. and
Learned Member for Bath ? Did any Hon. Members object
to that measure ? If there were any who did so, their numbers
Were so few that they were not noticed. The very fact of ac-
ceding to the demands made by the House of Assembly would
lead to this, that it would go to destroy the prerogative of the
Kin°. in that. colony. He had no idea of those who had the
benefit of British protection denying their allegiance to the
Crown and obedience to the Acts of the:lmperial Legislature.
Was Canada, he would ask, to be governed by the French-
Canadian people ?—( Hear, hear, from Mr. Roebuck and other
Hon. Members.) He asked was Canada to be governed with
reference to the whole, or a portion of the people ? That was
the real question at issue. Ile hoped that the French Cana-
dians would see that with reference to the adoption of these
resolutions it was their duty to submit; because ho saw no
reason why the difference of opinion now existing might not
be amicably adjusted in that good spirit which he presumed
the Noble Lord anticipated. The Hon. Gentleman concluded
by stating that he should give his full support to the resolu-
tions moved by the Noble Lord.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the lion. Gentleman had told the
Homo very distinctly, that lie was a man of very liberal
°pinions ; •and as he had said so the House was of course
bound to believe it.--( Hear.) But the Hon. Gentleman had
really the most modest manner of showing his liberality that
ever lie (Mr. O'Connell) saw; and especially on that occasion,
when he used such exceedingly harsh language towards the
representatives of the Canadian people. Ile, the Governor of
the North American Land Company, and a man of very libe-
ral opinions, had ventured to talk of the audacity of the re-
presentatives of the people of Canada.—( Hear.) The auda-
city of men in every respect his equals.--( Hear.) If lie (Mr.
O'Connell) were to use the word he should be disposed to ap_
ply it in a different quarter. Those of whose audacity the
lion. Gentleman spoke were men selected by the people
to represent their wants in the provincial Legislature ; and
with a fidelity and firmness that did them honour they had
llwen true to their trust, and persevered against every
obstacle in maintaining the rights of their constitu-
ents. This was their "audacity."—( Hear, hear, hear. )
The Honourable Gentleman the Member for Worcester
should recollect that he, as Chairman of the North
American Land Company, was one-of the grievances of which
they complained—(A laugh)—complained, no doubt, with ex-
ceeding bat! taste, though some people were blind enough to
think them perfectly justified in so doing.—( Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) Having said so much for the attack made by the Hon.
Member for Worcester upon the representatives of the Cana-
dian people, he had next to express the deep regret he felt at
the propositions that night emanating from the Noble Lord
(Lord J. Russell.) He was bound to say, that he thought the
resolutions proposed by the Noble Lord contained some of the
'Worst political principles he had ever heard of.—( Hear.) The
resolutions appeared to him to involve two broad principles—
first, the very principle which created the civil war between
England and the present United States of America ; secondly,
the principle which had distracted Ireland for so many years.
(Hear, hear.) The analogy between the case of Canada
tad that of Ireland appeared to him to be perfect.—( Hear,
bear-) Under one of these resolutions the Home Govern-
ment was to lay hold of the money of the Canadians. At
present the Canadian representatives had two function Sr--first,
to raise the supplies ; second, to appropriate. Those two
functions could not be separated without destroying both._
(Hear, hear.) It was but a mockery to the representatives
hll the Canadian people to tell them that they should have
leave to raise money, if, when they raised it, they were not to
bave the power of disposing of it.—(Hear, hear.) It was
this that drove the Americans to resistance. It was a prin-
'ciPle that ought above all others to be avoided in that House.
Hear, hear.) It was a principle in which was involved the
/try spirit of resistance. It had been stated on the Ministe-
tikl side of the House, and the Hon. Gentleman the Governor
11f, the North American Land Company had repeated the opi-
nion, that the measure proposed by the Noble Lord was jus-
tified by necessity. Necessity I ever and again the tyrant's
plea. Was it not the plea of necessity .that gave us a Coer-
cion Bill in Ireland ?—( Hear, hear.) The Canadas complained
teertain grievances—was this to be the reply ?—( Hear, hear.)
rivt_as not Great Britain free at least to do them justice ?
ealar, hear.) Justice for Canada I—(Hear, hear.) Give
them a Representative Council, elected by themselves. —( Hear,
tiar.) Give them justice—place them in possession of all
tie
rights and privileges which, as British subjects, they
eviol 9ld reasonably demand, and then, if they persevered in
ent oesition to the views and wishes of the home
Uovernmenppt--(liear)—it would be time to think of adopt-
rsome such measure as that brought forward by the Noble
Ord. (Hear, hear.) For his own part he (Mr. O'Connell)
sicerely hoped tht the Noble Lord would see the propriety
'5 not pressing hisa motion to a division. The Hon. Member
for Worcester bad over and over again spoken of the Canadian
~"People," then of the Canadian ' party." Was not that the
ry Same thing that was done in Ireland? Did not the
Orangemen of Ireland (the small minority) characterise all
(+posed to them (die great majority) as a factious party ?
'(Hear, hear.) So in Canada, a small oligarchical minority
.took upon itself to designate all the rest of the people a " fac-
tifo_
is
party." Yet this " party" embraced so large a portion
ei people as to be able to return eighty out of the eighty-
hght ) Members who sat in the House of Assembly.—( Hear,
He had before stated that the cases of Canada and
inlreland. were identical. The only difference was this—that
the
one country the small domineering party was known
as the Orange party, in the other it was called the British
Tiarty, The nature of both, the aim of both, were exactly the
33a1
n4ie•---( Hear, hear.) Of the high situations in Canada,
were filled by the British party, and only about 40 by
Canadians. In all the Canadian offices the proportion of
,persons born in Great Britain was exceedingly great as com-
pared with those born in the Canadas. In fact the British
qty in
in Canada was what the Court party was in England;
vrole was sorry to see how evidently, throughout the
report, the Commissioners were disposed to lean to
'!..i
I,7tparty.--(llear.) There was hardly a word said of the
tish party in Canada that might not be put into the
aamouth of an Orangeman in Ireland. And from that spot
b .(Mr. O'Connell) hurled upon some of his countrymen who
ad gone out to Canada and formed the British party--(the
l'_eena:nder of the sentence was lost amidst the cheers and
u net• erecheers with which the first part of it was re-
tivd. ) Yes, yes,—some of them had consulted him upon
e e
!übjeee, and he invariably told them that if they joined
British party- they would in fact become Orangemen in
eaeva,iiada, and assist' in inflicting upon the country the .same
l
and same grievances as had so long afflicted Ireland.—
ir, hear, hear, and cheers.) Why should not the Cana-
aoiati-
no people have a Representative Council ? What rea-
-7 was stated against it? It was not a novelty; it had been.
5,4._0
nepted, and for many years successfully and happily acted
, in the United States. Was it not right that they should
e Piave a Representative Council ? What could be a more mise -
.731 mockery than the left-handed House of Lords with which
Y were at present oppressed ?—(Hear.) Why should they
,croanbject in any way to an irresponsible body, elected by the
?—( Hear.) The Canadas ought not to be considered
i,,ree,trounds of British policy or British interest.—(Hear.)
aci at Britain did not want the paltry surplus that could arise
%_ rein the revenues of the Canadas.—( Hear.) There was not
tan in the House who would not scorn the idea of Great
I,l' aim being maintained on the surplus of a colony. In the
Esolwernment of the Canadas, then, the interests of the Canadas
,lat.ea the only interests we should have in view—(Hear)—and
111, h ere- were anything in our mixed form of Government which
thas_s fnutsd inapplicable to the different state of society in
t._°• provwees, let the British Government generously and
~_4o4vd,dly free them from restraint, and say, " As we cannot
ta,,,eres for yens' good, we will not govern you for evil."_.
°f .hear.) He implored the House, in the consideration
ete`''m evestion, to be careful of these two things—first, not to
°it 0 PT isupport a court party in the Canadas; second, not

not to maintain in these provinces a miserable minority, which
when it came to the fair test of popular representation hid its
diminished head, but which around the Government House
howled loud and violently.—(Hear.) He besought the House
not longer to suffer that party to plunder the pockets of the
Canadian people. Justice required that the Canadians should
have the distribution of all the money for which they taxed
themselves.—(Hear.) At all events, until they were satisfied
that the British Government was governing them for their
good, let no attempt be made to take from them any portion
of their money.—( Hear.)
Mr. P. STE WART contended that there was no analogy
either between the cases of Ireland and the Canadas, or the
United States and the Canadas. There were no religious
distinctions in the Canadas ; this was one difference between
them and Ireland. They had a House of Assembly ; this
was another.—( Loud eries of Hear, hear.) The difference
between the United States and the Canadas was as broad
and distinct. The quarrel between the American colonies
and Great Britain arose out of this circumstance—that Great
Britain insisted on taxing them. In the case of Canada
there was no shadow of a similar complaint. [The Honour-
able Gentleman then proceeded to read a passage from one
of the petitions received from the Canadas, in which the
petitioners expressed their regret at the continued and syste-
matic opposition of a particular party in the House of Assembly.]
The petition was signed by upwards of 12,000 persons. The
petitioners had been compared to the Orange lodges of Ire-
land. On the contrary, they were men of all classes and of
all liolitical principles. Such was their designation, and yet
the House were told that it was the unanimous prayer of the
people of Canada that the legislature of this country should
consent to that which was refused in 1791, and introduce an
upper chamber upon the slippery and unstable foundation of
the elective principle. The Hon. Member for Bridgwater de-
precated any interference on the part of this Parliament with
the internal affairs of the Canadas. Sir James Mackintosh
did not entertain any such opinion. That eminent man in
1822 admitted that Parliament had the power of interference,
and that circumstances might arise when it ought to inter-
fere. This was Sir James Mackintosh's opinion when he pro-
posed-to put off for six months the motion of the Hon. Member
for Coventry, on the Canadian Government and Trade Bill,
for incorporating the two legislatures of Upper and Lower
Canada. He acknowledged the difficulties of the case ;
but he submitted to the gentlemen who were near and
around him that the Government was proceeding in a consti-
tutional manner by resolving to legislate against the wishes of
the people. -His defence was, that the wishes of the majority
were founded upon a principle vicious and untenable.—( Hear,
hear.) It had been said by an Hon. Gentleman, that Mr.
Pitt stated in 1791 that the Act was a mere experiment. It
was an experiment, and part of a mixed and unsound system.
On that very occasion there was laid down one franchise prin-
ciple for Upper Canada and another for Lower Canada. One
was on the double basis of population and property ; the other
other on population alone. That portion of the experiment
was altered in 1829; but still a vicious principle was kept up.
What he required was, and what he was sure those Hon. Gen-
tlemen who were prepared to deprecate these resolutions would
readily agree to was, that the franchise should be so framed as
to include the widest range of the population settled there, so
that all should be represented directly or indirectly in the House
of Assembly. He wished to be understood by the Government.
fie inferred from one of the resolutions that a Federal Assem-
bly was to be formed of the two provinces, and that to it were
to bo entrusted the entire regulation of the trade, naviga-
tion, and other matters connected with the trade of the St.
Lawrence ' • and that the old and cumbersome system was to be
superseded. If that was to be case, then he would say that
the resolution of which he spoke was one of the most valuable
of all the resolutions proposed by the Noble Lord. Ho knew
that the House would have a forcible denunciation from the

on. Gentleman the Member for Bath. He would, however,
no doubt act on this occasion, with regard to the Canadian
question, as he had done with respect to the general state
policy of the Government. Before any special Act was in-
troduced, the Hon. Gentleman denounced the whole course
of the Government and their measures ; but when the special
measures came before the House, then the Government and
the House had the advantage of his acute and able assistance,
and of his eloquent and zealous support of every one of them.
He ( Mr. P. Stewart) was not, therefore, disposed to put much
stress upon the denunciation of these resolutions by the Hon.
Gentleman ; because, upon second thoughts, the Hon. Gen-
tleman would no doubt give 'them his earnest support. He
hoped his Majesty's Ministers would pursue the constitutional
part, which, though difficult, was sound and safe, of extending
to Canada the power and protection of the Imperial Parliament,
the imminent necessity of which was now acknowledged.
Sir W. MOLE S WORT 11—The Noble Lord, by the re-
solutions in my hands, intends to propose in the Committee
that the Governor of Lower Canada should be authorised for
the present to appropriate the revenues of that province with-
out the consent of the representatives of the Canadian people.
I contend that no arguments can be adduced to justify such an
act on the part of the Imperial Parliament, for it would be an
act of tyranny ; consequently the question ought not to be en-
tertained. After the discussion of to-night, it is hardly neces-
sary to enter into any detailed account of the state of affairs
Lower Canada. That province is simply Ireland on a small
scale. The vast majority of the people on the one side, a mi-
serable monopolising minority on the other, arrogating to itself
superiority of race, treating the people as aliens by blood, as
foes by religion, calliug upon this country to aid in oppressing
the people, and in resisting their representatives. The people
of Lower Canada complain or certain grievances.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) The representatives of the people have adop-
ted the constitutional means of refusing to grant supplies till
those grievances be redressed. The Noble Lord proposed
that the British Legislature should evince a sovereign
power, and that it should interfere with the control of
the House of Assembly over the public purse. Has he any
right to make such a proposal ? I deny that he has. I deny
that the British Legislature is sovereign in Canada with re-
gard to money affairs. The question is one of sovereignty.
According to the Constitution of Lower Canada the sovereign
power is divided between the House of Assembly, the other es-
tates of Lower Canada, and the estates of the British Legis-
lature. In what manlier the sovereign power is apportioned
between the various estates it is not necessary accurately to
determine, except that the rights, privileges, and powers of the
House of Assembly with regard to Canada are analogous to
those of the House of Commons with regard to England.
They are founded upon the same principle that the represen-
tatives ought alone to determine the mode in which the monies
levied from the community are to be appropriated. In virtue
of the 18th and 31st of Geo. 111., and the Ist arid 2d of Wm.
IV., the House of Assembly is supreme in all money affairs.
With that supremacy the Noble Lord proposes to interfere,
and consequently he intends virtually to alter the Constitution
of Lower Canada. The plea of the Noble Lord must be that
the conduct of the House of Assembly is bad. I deny that either
he or this House is, constitutionally speaking, a judge of that fact.
The House of Assembly is not responsible to us ; it is respon-
sible to its constituents, and those constituents only, for its con-
duct. The Crown has constitutionally a right to negative the
measures passed by the Canadian Legislature. But the Mi-
nisters of the Crown have no right to cite the House of As-
sembly before this tribunal, or to deprive the Representatives
of the Canadian people of any portion of their control over
the public purse. Perhaps the British Legislature has the
power, though not the right ; but it is a power founded only
upon force, and consequently tyrannical. Gifts of power to a
people are not easily taken back. Constitutional rights once
conceded to a nation are rarely to be reassumed except by the
sword, and then only when the people have become degraded
and debased. If the Noble Lord attempt to carry out his reso-
lutions, the question is one which can only be settled by
force. The British Legislature has granted to the House of
Assembly of Lower Canada sovereignty in money affairs—
that sovereignty the Noble' Lord now wishes to reassume. The
control of the purse every one knows constitutes the essence of
freedom. The Canadians are still free. Will they permit
themselves to be changed into slaves by these resolutions ? In
a similar cause the people of this country worked out a great
and glorious revolution. They justly punished a Monarch who
had dared to tax them without their consent. For a similar
reason our fellow-citizens of' the United States bade us defi-
ance, and shook off our yoke. No man can doubt how the
Canadians would act if they belonged to the English race—
if they belonged to that race which produced Washington,
Jefferson and Franklin. Tho Saxon will permit no one to in-
terfere with his purse ; he will fight for it first ; that is the
peculiarity of the race. It is proper that the people of Eng-
land should know, clearly and distinctly should understand,
that the Noble Lord proposes to do that to the Canadians
which would make every man of English blood a rebel, to pre-
vent which our ancestors fought—to prevent which we would
fight, if necessary. Ido not believe that the English people
will stand such conduct from the Noble Lord, nor will they
give him the means of enforcing his resolutions. The feelings
with regard to Ireland of Hon. Gentlemen will, .1 doubt not,
cause them to coalesce with Ministers and their minions—
they would willingly have made conquest of Canada for a
precedent to their proposed re-conquest of Ireland—they will
unite, undoubtedly, with those pseudo-Liberals in this vile
crusade against the liberties of freemen. Worthy allies,
the foes of freedom and its falsest friends, they will
carry these resolutions. Then I expect—for I reason upon
the supposition that the Canadians will act like Englishmen
—I then expect the Canadians will attempt to cast off our
yoke. The people of England will say they act rightly, and
will, I trust, prevent their representatives from giving the
Noble Lord the means of attempting to put the Canadians
down. If he make the attempt he will fail. Look at Texas.
The fate of the Mexicans should be a warning to this coun-
try. For these reasons I contend the House ought not to
entertain the question—first, because we are not constitu-
tionally entitled to judge the conduct of the House of Assem-
bly, for it is not responsible to us, but to its constituents;
secondly, because we are not constitutionally entitled to inter-
fere with the control of the House of Assembly over the public
purse; and lastly, such an attempt must lead, under the most
favourable circumstances, to a separation of the two countries
—under unfavourable circumstances, to a dreadful civil war.
Colonel Thompson and Mr. Roebuck then rose together ;
there were loud cries for Mr. Roebuck, but the Hon. Gentle-
man gave way to
Colonel THOMPSON, who could not avoid recommending
his Majesty's Government to adopt on this occasion the advice
of the Scriptures, and to " agree with their adversaries
quickly," because after all be had heard, he had not found one
reason advanced on either side to show why the people of Eng-
land should support the Government in a struggle with the
Canadas. On the "contrary, he had been struck with some
strong reasons why their wishes should be exactly opposite to
the wishes of the Government. " If we could but lose Canada,
what should we gain in a commercial way ?—( Hear.) Would
not every man in England who lives in a house gain a substan-
tial sum which he might add to the amount of his enjoyments ?
Is not Canada kept as a breeding pen or a warren to which to.
send that part of the population which is not allowed to live at
home ? Do not our young couples marry with a certainty that
they are to breed for exportation ?—(Laughter,) Will the

people of England think it worth their while to straggle for
the maintenance of that system ?—( Hear.) We are told also
that we are to struggle for the present Legislative Council
lest there should be an elective one. Why, what do we
want ourselves but an elective Legislative Council ?_( Hear,
hear.) Is not that one of the objects which the hearts of a
vast majority of the people of England are visibly at this mo-
ment fixed upon ?—( Loud cries of " Hear !" and " No !")
Is this to be our recruiting cockade against Canada—' Don't
let Canada have an elective Legislative Council, for if you do
there will be an elective Council here ?' This is what is pro-
posed to us. I certainly think that the rt as ins for an elective
Legislative Council for Canada are stronger than they are for
one in this country—( Hear, hear)—strong as they may be with
us. There is a sort of reverence among the people for a House
of Lords, and justly so to a certain extent. Voltaire once said
to an old lady—( Laughter)—that he had said in five minutes
more good of the Creator of the world than she had ever
thought of him in all her life. Now, let me see if I may not
say the same with respect to the House of Lords. The House
of Lords contains the descendants of men who once possessed
substantial power, co-equal with that of the empire, and
even superior to it. It still maintains much of that rever-
ence which the people of former days entertained for it ;
but does anything of that kind exist in Canada? Is there any-
thing there but a mock House of Lords? The principle
acted upon seemed to be, that wherever the people attempted
to govern themselves these efforts were made to check them.
Such was the nature of the struggle going on in Canada,
and how long it would continue he could not say ; but history
told them that generally the people eventually succeeded.
He thought the question in the present case was, whether
they would drive the people of Canada to say that the only
issue to which they could bring the contest was the separation
of the two countries.—( Hear. )
Mr. ROEBUCK—A few nights since, in the very place I
_ _

now stand, I found myself advocating, in conjunciiOn with
his Majesty's Ministers, justice to Ireland. I did so, and I
would fain have hoped that they did so, not in obedience to
any pressing exigency, not for the sake of present expe-
diency, but in accordance with great, lasting, and universal
principles of legislation—( Hear, hear)—with those prin-
ciples which teach us that if we desire the people to be well
governed we must allow them to govern themselves. This
hope, however, has been raised only to be disappointed ; a
week has not passed before my illusion has been destroyed,
and I am compelled to see that we in vain desire such con-
duct from men in office amongst us, for they have neither
the capacity nor the courage to be consistent.—( Cheers. )
We have now before us a case in all its leading, all its
important, particulars parallel to that of Ireland. -We have the
same difficulties to overcome, the same prejudices to face, and
yet I now find new and very different principles invoked, a
very different ' conduct pursued. " England," said the Noble
Lord a few nights since, "has justice because she is inhabited
by Englishmen, Scotland because inhabited by Scotchmen."
Let me finish his sentence —" Canada has justice,denied her,
because inhabited by Canadians."—( Hear.) The same neces-
sity does not press upon the Government, in the case of
Canada, as now bears them down with regard to Ireland.
They render justice upon compulsion ; and, not dreading any
pressure from without to force them to be just to a distant
colony, they follow their usual habit, the natural bent of their
inclinations, and refuse justice to Canada. I appeal, however,
from the decision of the Government to the people of Eng-
land. I appeal to the people of Ireland—to the Hon.
Member for Kilkenny and his friends in this House I also
appeal. \Ve have fought their battle, the battle of Ireland,
manfully, and without flinching. That fight still rages ! If
we are to hope for success, we must prove, by our steady
love and pursuit of justice, that we deserve it. If we desire
justice for Ireland, we must show ourselves ready to grant
it to a suffering colony. We must prove ourselves above the
paltry prejudices of national hostility. If we seek justice
for Irishmen, who are our subjects, we must not deny it to
Canadians, who are our subjects also. The cause of Canada
and Ireland are the same—it is the cause of self-government
and religious liberty—it is the cause of the suffering many
who resist the overbearing insolence of a " miserable ni:mopo-
lizing minority." I call then upon all those who have fought
the good fight for our suffering fellow-citizens across the II ish
Channel, to extend the range of their benevolence, and prove
that if our dominion reaches beyond the broad Atlantic, so
also does our justice, and that our desire for good Govern-
ment is co-extensive with our empire.— ( Hear, hear.) Canada
and Ireland have both been conquered by England ; the ma-
jority of the people in both countries are of the Roman Catho-
lic persuasion ; and in both countries a small minority, who
call themselves English, have hitherto domineered over and
insulted ate people at large, whom they always stigmatize as
foreigneis and aliens. By the power of England this mono-
polizing minority has been supported in botli countries. I
o ill now, with the permission of the House, lay the case of
Canada before them. The House must bear in mind that the
present discussion relates solely to Lower Canada. The case
of the Upper province is a separate matter that must hereafter
occupy our attention. In 1791 the then province of Quebec
seas divided into two separate colonies, the one called Upper
the other Lower Canada. Lower Canada was then, as now,
chiefly innabited by persons descended from French proprie-
tors, and was governed, as respected civil law, according to
the customs of Paris. By 31 Geo. 111., c. 31. a Constitu-
tion was granted to Lower Canada in form something simi-
lar to our own, in substance widely different. The Govern-
ment was tripartite-1. There was a governor, representing
not the King, but in reality, being the mere lieutenant of.
the colonial minister. Not, indeed, responsible to the peo-
ple, but wholly subject to the ministry at home: in nothing
did he resemble the King in England. He was merely the
Lieutenant of the Colonial Minister.—( Hear.) I did not
mean Lord Glenelg ; but I mean certain parties who inhabit
a certain office in Downing-street ; and I doubt not there
is a certain person sitting in that gallery who is the real
Colonial Minister.—( Hear and Laughter.) 2. There was
a Legislative Council, called the Upper House ; but in no-
thing else resembling the House of Lords, having no wealth,
no estates, and chosen for life, chiefly from among the official
ranks. They thus constitute a faction, having no natural
ties or influence in the country ; and, thirdly and lastly, there
was created a House of Assembly, which really represents
the whole population. Such was the Constitution. I will
now proceed to detail the consequences of creating it. Some
years after the Constitution I have just described was granted to
the Canadians, they became fully sensible of the value of the
gift, and determined to use it to the purposes for which it
was intended. This determination quickly brought out the
latent errors that had been committed in the construction of
their Government. The sinister interests of the Legislative
Council were at once brought to light, as well as the mis-
chievous power which the Constitution gave of successfully
promoting them. The House of Assembly desired to relieve
the mother country from all unnecessary burdens, and sought
to take charge of their own peculiar concerns. To this end,
in 1810, they demanded permission to provide for their own
civil expenditure. The House of Commons may not know
that within, the life time of most of its members, there were
committed acts by the English rulers of Canada very similar
to those which this House had.% bear in the reign of Charles
the First. For the demand of the House of Assembly, three
of its members were sent to gaol by Sir James Craig, and
were eventually contemptuously turned out of prison, without
trial or explanation. It may be demanded of me why this
outrage was committed. The answer to the question is the key
to all the future discontents and disputes, and explains the pre-
sent condition Of the province. The official people of Canada
dreaded responsibility to the House of Assembly. They, there-
fore, at the outset, thus violently opposed the demands which
they clearly saw necessarily brought with them this disagree-
able condition. The great expenditure of England, and the
pressing difficulties of our position during the great struggle
with Napoleon, at length compelled the Colonial Government
to accept the offer of the Canadian representatives ;- but the
official tribe did not lose their fear of responsibility, and
therefore determined to lessen the evil they could not
wholly avoid. Three several plans to this end were devised,
and these three plans are at this moment in full force, and
are about to be carried partially into effect by the Noble Lord.
—( Loud cheers.) The one was first to demand that the
moneys to pay the expenses of the government should be voted
in one sum, in what was once termed en bloc, leaving the dis-
triLution of the several salaries and items in the Executive
Government. To this demand the House of Assembly
would not accede, and now was shown the real cha-
racter of the Legislative Council. That body determined
to receive no Appropriation Bill unless the money were
voted en blue. A disgraceful fight was maintained on this
point by the official party, aided by the Colonial Minister, and
using the Legislative Council as their weapon of attack and
defence. The justice of the Assembly's demands, however,
eventually prevailed, and the civil expenses were allowed to
be voted by items.—( Hear.) The next scheme after this
failure was somewhat more artfully concocted. It was de-
termined to demand a permanent Civil List—One for the life
of the Sovereign. This was also:resisted : and the House of
Assembly was vein successful. It was then proposed to
have a Civil List for a term of years. To this again the House
of Assembly has repeatedly refused to accede, and their deter-
mination on this head is now as firm as ever. rho third scheme
to wh:eim I have alluded had the same end in view, viz., to
escape from the 'disagreeable responsibility to the House of
Assembly which threatened the official party. The scheme
consisted in separating the revenues of the provinces into two
distinct classes, and withdrawing one class wholly from the
control of the Assembly. The House of Assembly saw through
this scheme also, and again wisely determined to bring, every
portion of the revenue derived from the people of the province
under their own control. The struggle of the two parties was,
cn these two points, carried on between the representatives of
the people, strong to defend the public interests, and to make
the public servants responsible ; and by the official tribe endea-
vouring to fight off this painful scrutiny, and to maintain their
long-enjoyed and pleasant freedom from any check or control.
Let this House bear in mind that they are now called upon to
decide which of these two parties have justice en their side.—
(Loud cheers.) In carrying out their determination to make
public officers responsible, the House of ,Assembly demanded
to see the accounts of the Receiver-General of the province.
Honourable Members will hardly believe that these accounts
were for a long series of years steadily refused. At length,
however, the House was determined to bring the question to
issue, and they refused supplies. This proceeding forced the
Governor-General, Lord Dalhousie, to draw, spite of himself,
upon the Receiver-General, who was then found to be a de-
faulter to the amount of 100,0001. I now entreat the House
to remark upon the peculiar points of thiS case. Here was a
public servant refusing to show his accounts. Who supported
him in his contumacy? The Executive or Legislative Coun-
cils, the official party—brother officials—with the Governor at
their head. And in what did they support him ? In hiding
his bankruptcy—in robbing the public. Let me inform the
House that this debt was amounting to 150,0001.: principal
and interest are still unpaid.—( Hear, bear ) So far as re-
gards one of these immaculate gentlemen, time official people
of Lower Canada. This struggle respecting the Receiver..
General continuing, and the House refusing to furnish any