The Sun.
London, England, 1854-08-04 00:00:00

PRIVATE BUSINESS,

The Lords' amendments to the Great Western, Shrews-
bury, and Birmingham, and Shrewsbury and Chester
Railway Companies Amalgamation Bill were considered
and agreed to.
The following estate bills were read a third time and
passed :—Bourne's (Nlowbrick Partition) Estate ; Brad-
ford Glebe Lands and Vicarage Trust Estate ; Lord
Petre's Estate.

LEGIBLVrIVt COUNCIL (CANADA.) BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of this
bill,

Mr. F. PEEL explained its object to be to enable the
Canadian Legislature to change the constitution
ofthe
Legislative Council or Upper House, and to repeal cer-
tain portions "of the Canadian Act of Union of 1840.
No less than four-fifths of the General
Assembly of
Canada had carried an address in favour of this change;
but the Legislative Council itself had protested against
that address. The bill proposed to enable the
Legislature of Canada to alter the fundamental basis if
they so thought fit ; it did not specify what the change
should be, but it simply gave the Legislature of the
colony power to alter the constitution of the Legislative
Council by making it elective or otherwise if they should
so think fit. Lord Elgin; the Governor of the colony,
had given an opinion decidedly favourable, and seeing
that the Imperial Parliament had already conferred a
similar power upon the CiPe of Good Hope and other '
colonies, the house ought to have no difficulty in adopt-
ing this measure. In fact, Canada was the only British
colony of any importance which had not the power of
reforming its own.constitution. But it might be said that
Parliament having, by the act of 1840, conferred a dis-
tinct constitution upon the colony, i, would be acting
against precedent to give the Legislature of the colony
power to change that constitution. But really that
could not be so, because .in the case of the Australian
colonies, Parliament gave them a specific constitution,
consisting of- an Assembly and a Legi-lative Council,
partly elective and partly nominated by the governor
while in the same act which conferred that constitution it
enabled the legislature of the colony, if it so thought fit,
to
impro-
bable or amend its constitution. It was not impro-
e that the immediate effect of this bill would be the
conversion
apurelyaelective body, and it might be argued that such
change would weaken the authority of the Crown ;
but he entertained no such apprehensions because if the
constitution of the council was so changed as to secure
ofo h
for it the confidence
people, it naturally followed
that it would becomepre mtt. oree conservative in its character
present. than it was at Hitherto it had too often hap-
pened that the General Assembly had been at variance
with the LegislativeCoun indeed on one occasion it re-
fused tovote the supplies because the Legislative Council
which was nominatedbythis bill would remove that
governor would not consent
thebodies, without
to become elective ; but theebtwo
lower house, since all
want of harmony between the
the
we diening the authority
would still
money measures connected with the country
have to originate in thc`general assembly.
Sir J. PAKINGTON obj o the tkktedit bill upon two
distinct grounds. In the first place, he
secondly,
:tteed. to it
because in his opinion it was a bill which lea
on the part of the Imperial Legislature, institutikened,
an extremely democratic character; and °nB of
be
objected to it on account of the manner in which the
bill had been brought under the consideration of the
Government. It professed to be an enabling bill, but
in point of fact it was nothing of the kind, because it
proposed absolutely to confer upon the Canadian Legis.
lature authority to adopt a most democratic form of go.
vernment, which it had already agreed to, and which it
was ready to put in force directly this bill became law.
Under those circumstances, it was by far too important
a measure to be proceeded with at this period, of the
session, when there was scarcely ``a house present.
Five weeks ago it came down from the Lords, and it
had remained on the table ever since, without any pro-
gress being made with it. Ministers were greatly to
blame for permitting this delay. But, in addition to the
advanced period of the session, there was another reason
why they should put off this bill till a future year, when
there might be a better opportunity of considering its
provisions in a full house, and that was the intelligence
which had reached this country as to the course the
legislature of Canada proposed to take with regard to
the Clergy Reserves. He would, for the sake of form,
move as an amendment, that the second reading be taken
this day three months,
though he should not press it to
a division, because in the present state of the house,
when there were scarcely forty members in attendance, it
would be a farce to-suppo its decision would represent
the opinion of the Commons.House7e
Mr. ADDERLEYientirely
dissented from the views
taken by the right hon. barohe
measure was as much necessary. Land insisted that the
securing
htLd the loyalty
as the freedom and prosperity of awas 0
new measure, because it had frequently
therelt
could be
no doubt that it was based upon sound principles he
gave it his most cordial support.
Mr. HUME expressed his great satisfaction that the

time had arrived when Canada was to be entrusted with
the management of her own affairs.
Sir G. GREY said the real question for the house to
consider was, whether there was any valid reason why
Canada, which had advanced in intelligence, wealth, and
aptness self-government should be entrusted with Li, e
same power of regulating their constitution, which was
enjoyed by almost every other colony. He believed
this measure instead of weakening the attachment
of the people of Canada to the British Crown would
have the effect of cementing the connection between the
colony and the mother country, and he therefore did
not share in the gloomy apprehensions which the right
hon. baronet seemed to entertain.
Mr. V. SMITH warmly supported the bill, and con-
tended that for the sake of the colony itself the right
hon. baronet should have abstained from opposing the
second reading if he had not sufficient influence over his
own party to induce them to attend and throw it out if
they disapproved of it.
Lord J. RUSSELL having been the Minister who
introduced the bill of 1840, thought it incumbent upon
him to state that he gave his hearty support to this bill.
Whether the Canadas would make a wise use of it re-
mained to be seen, but he had no hesitation in declaring,
that they, like the other colonies, ought to have the op-
portunity of trying the experiment of improving their
own constitution. They were the best judges of what
would be for their own benefit, and he was quite willing
to give them the power of exercising that judgment
since they bad earnestly asked for it.
Mr. HENLEY was surprised to hear that the only
reason the noble lord could urge for supporting the bill
was, that the colony wished for it, while his implying a
doubt as to whether the colony would make good use of
the measure was not calculated to give this country a
prospect that the bill would prove successful. Both the
house and the colony had great reason to complain that
a measure-of that magnitude and importance should be
brought forward on the 4th of August, in an empty
house.
Mr. SCOTT moved that the debate be adjourned.
After a brief conversation the motion was agreed to,
and the debate was adjourned until the evening sitting.