The Sun.
London, England, 1838-08-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. AUGUST 14.

The SPEAKER took his seat at the table shortly before four
o'clock, when the House was summoned to the House of Lords
to hear the Royal Assent given to various Bills (for which see
Lords' Report).
Mr. PARKER appeared at the bar, with a return from the
Poor-law Commissioners.

The Marquis of DOURO presented a petition from Nor-
wich for the repeal of fire insurance duty, and for a reduction
of the Post-office duties.

Captain GORDON presented a petition from the clergy
of Weymouth in favour of the Established Church in Upper
Canada. . .

---
Lord STANLEY presented a petition against idolatry in

India.

Mr. LEADER presented a petition from certain parties
connected with railroads in Ireland complaining of injustice,
which they alleged had been done to them by the Railway
Commission.

Mr. HAVES presented a petition from a Dissenting Mi-
nister, and other persons at Walcot, complaining that one of
the paupers in the workhouse had been kept from partaking
of the Lord's Supper. A request lied been made to the Guar-
dians on the subject, and they stated that she should go and
return in a manner satisfactory to them. Mader these cir-
cumstances they hoped that some additional liberty would be
given to Dissenters to attend their respective places of worship.
_ _ _

On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, the Lords'
amendments to the Ecclesiastical Appointments Suspension
Bill were agreed to.

POSTAGE.

Mr. WALLACE gave notice, that in accordance with
the recommendation of the Committee on Postage,
he should, in the next Session, move for leave to
bring in a Bill to the following effect:—That the postage on
all letters on stamped paper, not exceeding half an ounce in
weight, should be two pence ; and that the postage on all
letters on stamped paper, not exceeding half an ounce, and
conveyed not more than fifteen miles, should be one penny.
CANADA.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day for the
House going into Committee on the Canada Indemnity Bill.
On the question that the SPEAKER do leave the Chair,
The NOBLE LORD said he felt it his duty now to address
the House, not only with respect to that Bill, but also with
respect to certain comments made on the general ordinances
from which it had emanated. He could not but advert to the
question ash ed him yesterday, by the Hon. Member for West-
minster, of whether it was his intention to propose any amend-
ments to the present Bill, or whether he should propose it
as it stood for the adoption of the House. At the time
when the Hon. Gentleman had asked him he was not aware
whether there might not have been some additional words in-
troduced in the Bill in the House of Lords, from the time it
had been printed by order of that House. Having since seen
the Bill, he could now state to the Hon. Gentleman that it
was his intention to propose to the House, and he did it very
reluctantly, that they should assent to the Bill without any
amendments.—( Hear, hear.) He repeated that he made that
proposition with reluctance, because he felt that if they had
been at any other period of the Session—if the House had not
been utterly exhausted by the labours of that protracted Ses-
sion, and that the attendance had not been so much reduced in
number, that it was impossible to expect such an expres •
sion of the opinion of that House as would carry due
weight with regard to a large measure of such importance,
he certainly should have thought after the comments
that had been made, and the doubts that had been expressed,
that it would have been proper to have introduced into the
Bill some other and additional clause, in order to make clear
what was the intention of the Legislature with regard to the
affairs of Canada. It had been thought in the other House
of Parliament that it would be proper to propose a
Bill of indemnity with regard to certain parts of an
ordinance passed by the Earl of Durham and the special
Council of Canada, indemnifying certain persons wile had acted
under that ordinance, with respect to sending certain prisoners
to Bermuda, or keeping them in restraint in that island. It
bad likewise been the decision of the House of Lords that they
would not proceed any further than to give that indemnity_
that clauses having been proposed is the original Bill, and
subsequently in Committee, containing a declaration on time
part of Parliament with respect to the meaning of the Act, it
was thought better to pass by that subject altogether, and at
the present period of the Session not to raise any new
question that might be introduced by a declaration either one
way or the other, with respect to certain parts of the Bill
passed relative to Lower Canada. Such having been the
decision of the House of Lords, and such being now
their position ia that ilmse, he felt that it would be fruit-
less for him to minces our to cut sin a declaration or opi-
nion on the part of that ineuse, which would be es-
teemed or entitled to the weight of nay declaration or
decision obtained in the ca; her part of the Session. He felt
undoubtedly that in declining to propose any such clauses after
what bad been said, the reap insibility of the Government et
home, and ere Governor- General, who had to admi-
nister the affairs of Canada, whether it was the Earl
of Durnam, or any one else, was exceedingly increas d.
He felt, that locking at the advantages and disadvantages, that
it was better to incur that increased responsibility, than to make
fruitless attempts to obtain more clear and decisive dPclara..
lions ot Parliamentary opinion. What he proposed, therefore,
o as, that the House of Lords having decided on their opinion,
and, as he understood front his Learned Friend the At-
torrey -General, in conformity with his opinion, that so much
of the ordinance of Lord Durham, as related to the keeping
of persons restrained in Bermuda, could not be justified in law,
it was necessary, if Parliament wished to avoid evil conse-
quences, that indemnity should be granted be Parliament with
respect to that part of the ordinances; he thought that such
a 13;11 having come from the House of Lords, and such being
the opinion of the legal authorities generally, he would not
say all of them, that the House could hardly hesitate, unless
they were disposed to refuse indemnity, in agreeing to the
passing of a Bill of this nature. There was another
question to which he was obliged to call the atten-
tion of the House. He did it not only in consequence of
the public comments, that were notorious, but likewise in con-
sequence ot the fen words teat fell from the Noble Lord the
Member for Lancashire. He was most unnillieg to c tile
attention of the House in any way to the general nature of the
proceedings taken by Lord Durham since he had assumed the
Government. He had asked the House more than once to
fonnear :'rum expressing any opinion upon those proceedings,
until the case, being more fully before them, and until
the progress of Lord Durham's Administration in Canada
icing more fully known, they could act with a better know-
ledge of all the circumstances, and might be enabled to come
to a more sound and ma`ure decision.—( Cheers.) If he
refused that opinion now, it was r o foe the purpose—far from
it—of implying that in that House there had been any
disposition to refuse that which he thought a reason-
able request; on the contrary, he had to express his
grateful thanks to that House for the forbearance they
had shown in the present case, a forbearance that he
attributed not to the regard they entertained for Lord
Durham or the Ministry, but to time higher motive, that they
conceived it was more in accord with the general interests of
the empire to do so. Some observations and a question was
put by the Hon. and Learned Member for Ripon ( Sir E.
Sagden) ; a dealat had occurred to his mind, and he, as in duty
he was bound to do, stated that doubt, but with perfect
calmness, and in a spirit of perfect fairness. But they
could not disguise from themselves that lately there had
been comments made, and sent fourth to the world with regard
to the meaning of the Act passed by this House in the early
part of the Session—comments which affected not only that
part of the ordinance relating to Bermuda, which was out of
the Governor-General's jurisdiction, but nhich affected his au-
thority, or any other person who might be governing in Canada
in her Majesty's name—comments which would deprive the re-
presentative of her Majesty of a civil authority to meet, and
put down sedition and rebellion, which would discourage
those whose duty it was to prevent insurrection, which would
go to call in doubt the whole of those questions which the
Government, and the great majority of that House, . after full
discussion and deliberation, had decided upon the passing of the
Canada Bill. In saying that the Government in tende 1 to govern
Canada according to that Act, he could not refrain from de-
claring what his sense of the Act was. Last night his Noble
Friend (Lord Stanley) had said there might questions arise
with regard to the whsle of the ordinances—wnh regard to the
power which was exercised, and with the interference of the
ordinances with the criminal law. He understood that some
interpreted the Act to mean that certain words introduced
into a proviso, prohibited any interference with, suspension, or
alteration of, or repeal of any part of the criminal law of this
country. That was an interpretation totally at variance with the
whole scope and intention of the Act. There was not a sentence
in the Bill, from the preamble to the last line, to justify such
an interpretation. The meaning of that Act was (he would
not discuss particular words, because he would rather leave it
to persons of legal authority), that, whereas it was impos-
sible to call together any Legislative Assembly in Lower
Canada, and whreas it was impossible to provide for exigen-
cies which might arise, that, therefore, an authority should be
created by Parliament competent to meet those difficulties,
and to provide for those exigencies.—( (Flear.) It might have
s
been proposed, and no doubt'' it.
was a matter
of delibera-
tion whether it should be proposed that by end-
ingsusp
any part of the laws which provided for the
liberty of the subject the danger of conspiracy and revolt
in Canada might be guarded against ; but at the samettime to
create an authority which should be able, in Canada
thee pAroc-t
vide laws necessary for the occasion. Accordingly
contained provisions with respect to certain monies that
were to be issued, and guarded against any increase
of the taxes, and any unfit appropriation of supplies
—the whole of it evidently intending that, with those guards,
the legislative authority was to be exercised by the Governor
and Special Council constituted in Lower Canada. If, on
the contrary, it was to be interpreted by the few words
which said that no Act of the Parliament of Great Bri-
tain, or of the United Kingdom, was to be interfered
with, why it would be impossible for that Legisla-
tive Assembly to be put a stop to, because the Act
of 1791 constituted a Legislative Assembly to grant monies
for the service of the Crown. It would have been impossible
even to provide for any such necessary appropriation to the
wants of the province if it was to be said those words were to
be considered in such a manner that there should be no inter-
ference whateverby the Legislative authority in Canada, in any-
thing contained in any Actof Great Britain or the United King-
dom. But though such an interpretation was, as hen Lord J. Rus-
sell) thought, contrary to the whole purpose and meaning of
the Act, it might be said that such was the intention of Parlia-
ment; and that, in assenting to the Act, it was clearly announced
and thoroughly understood that exceptions were made, by which
it was impossible to suspend any part of the laws provided fur
the liberty of the subject or for criminal trials in Canada.
But was this the 'case ? lie had referred to that,
which was stated both by himself and others on the bringing