The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-01 00:00:00

. ... ' ~ .
,/-
..„.. ,
/.."'"- ;1-
4'..' • 4::)', :i.• . .y , . ' .
...... .
. i.,,,, Ili ,
...--7."/
;.‘;'' ''', -•
' ' ''
' c 1 .. 0r . i F.:7. ---.•:, ,1" T
,k T . t.--.l‘ 17,,,-,:y r T..4r. r, r-,7 r, / . ''," I,' :.0' 1 !' r T ...
• /---X"l4e-('''7
, 0 0.0 f...# i r L .A- , ,-.' t`: '.. .. .. ._, I , i.., r .., „ i ... 1 .:.... fl. 1.. u ... ~. i: . :
.
, 2
:, ,
~ ~ , . : 1'179 • - 'i.
-'l;'..N
' ~... „-- -..... • - '
••- •• r .'' .'l,- •••''' '''..: • ' ~•:.':. I.* ,-';'d . :•iNT,Ifil: ' . '. :' .
, : 5... t ,"0,: F.- ..' c It' • . ,
,-..-', 4. k ;., •
ft .N4/47"
t•
"may , •••
mO,O
./Zit
..(2.',eu..ze•5
, ."'"••
172•Vt4' ic.it
...' :A ft'' ,i,
, ••••7:'.illirit,::-.1„ , ,
~.:. ,
~ --„_. -• t, . A.. se
,f-,,,:d:Z 'i'V *.- .-*..',7/.? ;'C ..
- -,-••••'.74 Cw? ''''''•.o-1,?.-- - ,5,..
• lii' p..,mi..
r o
.1 , ,
,11 `&4,,, ,' ' -\-,- • -. , ..-. ~-, efird -6 ,-,,E,--,, ..,:• v ~,, ~,,, ~.-, s
‘,,A, -4T. "..,,:x .\:,;.,,;', ..... '
~ :-,-. --s----L-
47-r.,..-.. ~, vi .:, . .
~,!(f.. .i'4..;..5, ...,.
...
.1„„..„ \!!,..,. 4 ,),
- ---.-, • '''''ecs .- i , -.
...uss
/ LI
$
1 , !....r,, 1 - ,
' ' -4i..:•:.,,,,:—`,---2. ,f: I -; , ;;''
i
-s%
~i
1
- i''' cL-,... . ..) ,T-,, /44k - ,"4,..? oi-------4' - - --,.'"944a _...,„___17,,..—.., ~41;;,, 4., .. ~,d P:2, -I.r o):t .1-1 A (•-..,15 ", • i 7l- ;.411'''''''>-- '-----N*;,.%
+
v— ' /.' -1tir....7./* --u I Diy, ~,,. .,•.Gar.• ~. i
~....";

whole of the Presbyterian bodies and the Wesleyan Metho-
dists put together. It is impossible that such a settlement
as this should be considered, a final settlement ; and I
again ask on what principle the noble earl intended to pro-
ceed iu order to carry out the statements of Sir John
Pakington ? Would he have taken from the large share
distributingrio
belongingit to
the
dimcashenoftinEg bodiesngland wioftthhattheeovuniewtryof
If he had done lie he would have met with as much opposi-
tion frdm the meitibers of the Church of England as they
new make • and if he had proposed to 'take the fraction of
a shilling he would have been asked by the right reverend
w
prelate, in the words which he used the other night,
whether he dared to commit the sacrilege of taking one
farthing of those funds. (Hear, hear.) The noble earl
of said that the provinces Canada were not entitled to deal
with those funds. Now, it was perfectly clear, from the
wording of the act, that it was the intention of the Legis-
lature to allow the Parliament of Canada to exercise large
powers, not only with respect to the future distribution,
but the future existence of the funds,.hecause it was pro-
vided that the provision should be varied or repealed by
any act of the, local Parliament. It is quite clear that,
er
htif
i;
the passing
ine cg m.
fol
ao
ile
oa f
tPt
°boor
aeia exnteireoc af t
.elh7a dt,hlai,
tntt ebpoyf
we rewe dr:immedia
telyn
eat foa
llti
•plete power over the large=t portion of the funds, which,
y
passed out of their hands. (Hear, hear.) The noble earl,
on the direct question of colonial policy, said it would be
much better to abolish altogether the power of the
enablemain the object
Colonial of the
see existenceretari of that
of England to negative
Crown to negative acts of the colonial Parliament, than
to retain that power, if compelled to use it on principles
which may be adverse tour own. But he forgets that
the
power is not
to
acts concerning domestic affairs which may be passed by
colonial assemblies, but to decide whether those acts do or.
do not affect imperial interests —whether they are or are
not strictly confined to the internal affairs of the colony.
(Hear.) When the present Government came into power
they might have maintained intact the existing system
'without any alteration, or they might have abandoned
the clergy reserves to the power of the colonial Assembly,
leaving them to be dealt with as a question of purely
internal concern. When Sir John Pakington penned his
dispatch, did he consider the state of our Canadian poses- f,
sions ? During the last ten' ears the population of Upper
Canada has advanced at the rate of something like 10,000
a year, or about 101 per tent.
The Earl of DERBY—It has doubled within the last
'ten years.
The Duke of ARGYLL—Was it possible for the Im-
perial Government to have taken on itself the task of redis-
tributing from
_time to time these funds in their proper
-It was impossible to hive carried out such a plan with
portions among the different religious bodies of "%nada?
satisfaction to the country. You must take one course or
the other. You must maintain absolutely the existing
system, or else you must give over to Canada, as a question
of purely internal concern, the distribution of those funds
according to the changes in the population. The noble
earl has intimated that in the divisions which took place,
and which ended by giving a considerable majority in
favour of giving the Canadian Legislature further powers
over the clergy reserves, only a small portion of it consisted
of the members of Upper Canada. But the members from
Lower Canada representing the Roman Catholic interest
would be more disposed to treat with hostility the Protes-
tant endowments in the Western Province. Now, I beg to
direct the attention of the noble earl to the memorial of
the Bishop of Quebec, whom I think the noble earl will
acknowledge to be an authority on this point. At the end
of that memorial the Bishop of Quebec states, that " the
members generally frgm Canada East are understood to
have regarded the question as one proper to Canada West,
on account of the greater stake there existing, and the far
larger proportion of Protestant inhabitants:" So that the
majority of the members from Lower Canada are stated by
the Bishop of Quebec—a great Protestant authority—to
have voted, not as against the interests of the Protestant
clergy, but solely because they thought this a matter more
particularly affecting the people of the Western Province ;
and if this statement of the Bishop of Quebec be true with
respect to the motives which influenced the members from
Lower Canada, and that a change of opinion took plass in
the representative body of Upper Canada, the members
from Lower Canada would support that majority, and not
interfere to disturb the Protestants (-1 Upper Canada in
the endowments they possess. lam confirmed in the im-
pression of the Bishop of Quebec by a portion of the
noble earl's speech. It is perfectly true that a large
part of the property, as it is called, or the endow-
ments of the Roman Catholic Church in Lower Canada,
will be as accessible to the United Parliament of Canada as
the reserves of the exclusively Protestant clergy. But ob-
serve the effect. There will be a great anxiety on the part
of the Roman Catholic members to oppose what the noble
earl calls the secularisation of those reserves, feeling thatthe
result may follow that, if the Protestant reserves are secu-
larised, there possibly may be a great desire to put upon an
altered footing the Roman Catholic Church in Lower Ca-
nada ; and therefore I maintain, if it is the opinion of the
Protestant majority of Upper anacla that those clergy re-
serves shall be preserved intact, and on their present foot-
ing, or re-distributed in certain other proportions, but still
confined to purely religious instruction, it is extremely
probable that, influenced by those motives, they will be
supported in their resistance to the secularisation scheme
by the Roman Catholic representatives of the Lower Pro-
vince. The noble earl, in the commencement of his speech,
said this was not a measure which he should have expected
from certain members of this house: It is true that the
present Government does contain members of the Church
of England, and at least one member of the Church of
Scotland, who are all sincerely attached to the religious
bodies to which they belong ; but it is no shame to us, as
public men, that in connection, and with a great question
of imperial policy, we should feel it is not our duty to act
in this matter as Churchmen only, but rather as statesmen
intrusted with the great responsibility of advising the
Crown on the principles on which the connection between
this country and Canada shallbeLreaintained. I have no
hesitation in sayingf a_mem—her Chu:Mr-of fteot-
land, that be the interests of the Church of Scotland what
they may, they must be represented, and represented only,
by its own representatives in the provinces of Canada ; and
it is not my duty, as a public man, merely because I happen
to be a member of that Church, to act upon my own opinion
as to what its interests may be in the internal affairs of
Canada; but, on the contrary, it is nay clearest duty to
agree in the measure proposed by the Government, being
convinced as I am, that not only with regard to Canada, but
with respect to all the colonies, the principle on which we
must proceed in future is simply this, that in all matters of
purely internal concern—the more if they are questions
which rouse religious feelings and animosities in this coun-
try—in all these questions, be they what they may, of in-
ternal concern, we should allow the colonial legislature to
deal as they think fit, and that the power of the Crown, as
the noble earl suggests, should not be recklessly thrown
away on our colonial empire, but that it should be main-
tained solely with the view of enabling us to judge in re-
gard to each particular act, and simply whether or not
those acts do concern local interests, or are matters of im-
perial concern. (Cheers.)
The Earl of DESART said, it was shown, in a dispatch
which would be laid that -night on the table of the other
house, but which was not sent to the colony owing to the
change of the Government, that his right hon. friend (Sir
J. Pakington) fully acknowledged the justice and propriety
of that principle of constitutional government which gave
to a colonial legislature the exclusive power of dealing with
its own local affairs ; but his right hon. friend said in this
case there was an exception, because it appeared there was
an intention of taking funds which he considered the legis-
lature was bound in good faith to maintain in favour of
certain vested interests. There was a very serious opinion
prevailing in this country, that, in opposing the wishes of
the legislature of Canada, we opposed the unanimous wishes
of the Canadians. He (Lord Desart) did not think that
was so. On the contrary, excluding Lower Canada, which
he maintained he had a right to do, seeing that though
there was a small portion of the reserves in Lower Canada,
the Roman Catholics were in such a large majority, some-
thing like 750,000 to 50,000 members of the Church of
England, it was quite impossible that their members could
represent anything but the Roman Catholic religion, which
was embodied there in a richly-endowed church and a well-
educated priesthood. But in Upper Canada how stood the
fact? He had not had an opportunity of analysing the
figures, but he could state, on the authority of Archdeacon
Bethune, that in the Assembly of Upper Canada there was
only one majority in favour of the abrogation of the settle-
ment of 1840. He (the Earl of Dosart) would say, in con-
clusion' that he thought this was a question in which the
British Government were bound by considerations of good
faith to protect and guarantee a settlement made by them,
on the suggestion of the Canadians themselves, and not
only made, but accepted by the Canadians themselves as a
final settlement.


.

[PRICE SD.


not deceive yourselves by supposing that the object of these
parties is a better distribution of the revenues for the pur-
poses for which they were originally intended--the main-
tenance of the Protestant clergy, the support of the Pro-
testant religion, or the support of any religion whateirer.
The object—the avowed object—of a large portion of those
who are proposing to deal with the question is the secula-
risation of those revenues, and their application to other
than religious purvoses. I know it will be said with regard
to measures of this kind, that if such an attempt were
made the right of the Crown still remains, and the Secre-

tart' of State might interpose the royal veto upon such an
act. I hardly think the noble duke the Secretary for the
Colonial Department will rely upon that argument ; be-
cause the argument of the present Government is, that
with regard to these affairs the colonial legislature is the
best and the only judge. And to give the colonial legisla-
ture the power of dealing with these revenues, and then to
controul them in so dealing, in granting a boon which, if
you would maintain your position, would be a mockery,
and which an attempt to maintain must lead to indescrib-
able discord and confusion. (Hear, hear, hear.) Grant
:that the local legislature have the power f dealing with
,these clergy reserves, I will defy you not to follow up this
principle, and say that the mode in which they deal with
them is a piestion as exclusively within the right of the
colonial legislature as the right of dealing with them at
all, and that from the moment you sacrifice any authority
or control which the Crown and the Parliament possess
you give up the rights and property which the Crown and
Parliament have guaranteed, and are bound to maintain,
and you practically constitute an independent country.
(Hear.) I speak with a full sense of the gravity of the
alternative when I say that if in truth it be the desire of
the people of Canada that they should exercise a wholly in-
dependent power of legislation—that they should in no re-
spect be checked by the authority of the Crown or by the
interposition of Parliament—l say far better admit that
principle frankly, and at once relieve the Muter of thG
•
British Crown from a nominal and often vttr.Y,PAinful;Mr.'
sponsibility—declare openly that over - the legislation of
Canada Parliament exercises no influence, and refuse to go
through the farce, as it will then be, of advising the Crown
by a responsible minister to assent to, or withhold its assent
from, any specific measure that may be passed. Admit the
independence of Canada, and if the colony be still con-
nected by the tie of the Crown with this country, in that
case let it be distinctly understood that the Crown acts
upon the advice, not of the Imperial, but of the colonial
legislature, and that you, stand towards Canada in the
same relation as you stand to Hanover. Ido not say that
such an arrangement would not give me much cause of
regret, but it would be far preferable to that doubtful
position in which you at present stand, affecting to exer-
cise a control which you dare not exercise, and responsible,
or nominally responsible, for the approval of measures
which—whether you approve or whether you do not ap-
prove—whether they be in violation of a plighted faith, in
violation of the guarantee of the Crown, in violation of the
rights of property—you equally hold yourselves bound to
assent, on the general and broad principal that the colo-
nists are the best judges of their own affairs ; and that that
which the Legislature of the colony has acceded to, the
Crown is not justified in forbidding in this country. (Hear,
hear.) In a pecuniary point of view, no doubt the advan-
tages of such a separation would be very great. With
regard to the friendly relations which may still be con-
tinued, I do not despair but that those relations might be
maintained and upheld, and perhaps even improved, by
the absence of a nominal control ; and if the province de-
sires to place itself in that position, I, for one, would not
be the person to withhold the assent of Parliament. But
as long as the province remains a province—so long as the
Minister of the Crown is charged with the vindication of
the rights of British subjects—so long as Parliament re-
serves any portion of colonial legislation in its own hand,
and maintains the rights of British subjects guaranteed by
that legislature—so long, whatever might be the hazard,
I would not be a party to assent to the sacrifice of those
rights, or to allow any interposition with regard to the
rights of property which I would net sanction in this coun-
try—which I would not sanction with regard to the rights
of the Church of Scotland—which I would not sanction
with regard to the rights of the Church of Ireland—which
I would not sanction with regard to the rights of any por-
tion of the community whose rights and whose property
were guaranteed to them under the faith of the Crown by
an authority competent to guarantee them. (Hear.) Do
not flatter yourselves, my lords, that if you pass this bill
you will by so doing avoid future controversy and future
religious discord. You will more probably perpetuate,
and aggravate, and embitter it. First of all, when the colo-
nial legislature should be enabled and empowered to deal
with these clergy reserves, arises the bitter strife between all
the contending parties who seek to appropriate these
reserves each to their own body, and between that larger
body still which seeks to deprive them of all, and to
secularise the whole amount of these revenues. Remem-
ber that this is a question which mainly applies to
the province of Upper Canada. But in Lower Canada
there are very large endowments in land ; there is
a very large property '• • there are very large com-
pulsory payments in aid of the Roman Catholic clergy.
These rights rest on a footing not a whit more
strong than the clergy reserves. (Hear, hear.) The
two noble dukes opposite (the Dukes ofNewcastle and
Argyll) cheer that observation—do they foresee, do they
believe it possible that with the sanction of the Goverment
principle of secularisation once intraticed, the Protestants
of Upper Canada and the Protestant minority of Lower
Canada would be satisfied with the assertion of that prin-
ciple that there shall be no dominant Church as relates to
the Protestant body—that all territorial and other revenues
appropriated to the purposesof the Protestant clergy should
be secularised and converted to other purposes . And do
they believe that that same body of men, with that sanc-
tion on the part of the Legislature and the Government,
will tamely submit to the continued endowment of the
Roman Catholic Church with such enormous revenues, as
the only endowed church, after the British Parliament
shall have sanctioned the confiscation of the onlyprovision
which our ancestors have made for the conservation of Pro-
testant worship in the Protestant portion of the colony !
From that moment arises a bitter feud for the alienation and
confiscation of the provision made for the Roman Catholic
Church in Lower Canada—from that moment all the differ-
ences of race and creed are brought into immediateand hos-
tile conflict. At the present moment the superintending
and controlling authority of Parliament keeps all these ele-
ments in check; but the instant you sanction this new prin-
ciple the differences of religion and race again rise, and you
aggravate, embitter, and perpetuate those differences and
dissensions which, for so long a time, were the bone and
curse of Canada, and the obliteration of which, by one
great act of justice, was the object of the union of the pro-
vinces in 1840. (Hear.) Do not flatter yourselves that by
a dereliction of principle you escape from the difficulties of
asserting the jurisdiction and supremacy of the Crown. Do
not think you will introduce peace into the province. You
will introduce perpetual and increased discord, and when
you have made thisgreat concession you will find yourselves,
step by step, involved in difficulties in which,in vindication
of the rights of property, of the Crown, and of your fellow-
subjects, you are unable to interfere, and one after another
you will be compelled to give the unwilling—l had almost
said the degrading—sanction of the British Legislature to
objects and purposes of which the Legislature, perhaps,
cannot approve. If I refer to this subject strongly it is
because I feel that the honour and dignity of the Crown is
endangered by the bill. I know there may be risk from the
firm but temperate maintenance of the right of the Crown;
but whatever risk there may be, none can be so great to a
British statesman as that of abandoning, for the purpose of
expediency, the claim of principle and of justice, and the
rights of property. (Hear.) And as while I had the
honour of holding office under the Crown, not unaware of
all the temptations to hold a different course, I was prepared
to risk the existence of the Administration upon the mainte-
nance of the rights of property, and so in my place as a peer
in Parliament I cannot refrain from entering my protest
against Parliament being induced to do that which, as a
Minister of the Crown, I never would consent to do. The
noble earl concluded by laying the petitions on the table.
The Duke of ARGYLL--My lords, it is true that in
the course of 1851 a deputation came over from Canada,
representing the' interests of the Established Church in
Scotland, and placed in my hands certain petitions against
a bill at that time in preparation by the noble earl then at
the head of the Colonial-office—a bill similar to that which
has recently been introduced in the other house of Parlia-

-

The Bishop of EXETER, said the noble duke (the Duke
that he had said on a farmer night in reference to this
question. It was flattering to him to be quoted by the
noble duke; but he ventured to hope that the next time
a dt to
the
applied
subjects
bj observations
eno
tgouf such
hhwe h errid.h as a
h
hdadukedodniedhimhimththe
ehohnoonurourto
ofre fsetratt•iangsomhiesth(
:he
iosf
nthote
nrse-idsftorii.brue..taisiontiofbutht eios,
erne-i
Bishop of Exeter's) opinions he would do so correctly, and
not incorrectly. (A laugh.) If any of their lordships had
tohfeArngyobille)
addressed to them on a former occasion on this subject,
their Royal Mistress that she ought to aeq
done him thtreeishchoopuneoacurrtlitat:maeatnthtet:nwillhd
serves. What he said was this—" Will your lordships, twilchrlylwtwnh,eoulteßurid
which is for confiscation ?" It was upon the '
‘e'scesaciriin eagme"easinuresPewakihinehg
point -
not be
fiscation that he said the sacrilege would be '
c of conurred. He
said if property was once given to Almightyin
God it could
recalled again from the sacred
had been given without sacrile purposes for which it
ge. It was to the seculari-
sation of those reserves that he •
that he applied them still,
applied those words, and to
The Duke of ARGYLL begged
reverend prelate if he had to apologise to the right
the occasion to which h .misrepresented what he said on
Argyll's) impression hade had referred. His (the Duke of
late had used the term , been, that the right reverenhthPrka;
(the Duke of Argyll) had stated;s•c.ege" in
the
sense
w
The Bishop
of OXFORD said he felt called upon *.° rv°
utterance to th • • • od upon the
e Opinions which he entertain
subject under their lordships' consideration. He had
the
many years taken a very deep interest in the'welfare of 1/1
colonial Church, and had long been on terms of personal
ilnterco rho
intercourse with the right rev. prelates at resent at _
head of the Church in Canada, and it was with no small
regret that he felt compelled, by a.st.n_recitfhjeums t h 0, reverse
to a conclusion upon the question vewr
elates had arrived. The
of that at which those right ievo.dpr
him
to the conclusion to
first consideration which had 1
the case of the Parliament
which he had come was, thatooinnfwooti
on of the clergy re-
of Canada requiring, not a Imperial Parliament to give
serves, but calling upon the. Iluy.,
with them themselves, he
power of dealing
he
to them the
of justice, in whose way,thought,
perceived a claim • should stand. The Go-
Per
•of mere expediency
no question
country had given,
• or professed to
of this
Go-
vernment
f settling her own internal
give' to Canada a Power ,e. .
tice to admit the claims
affairs, and they were bound in JUS _ . _
ea
rs' to deal with any matter which concerned
of the colonists
their own affairs,
unless it could be shown that it
interest. The noble earl op.
matter of Imperial
was a ma to convince them that' evening
Le d endeavoured
polite had
masterly eloquence which he in so eminent a de-
leth that .
,riss possessed, of the necessity of maintaining-intact those
endowments which formed the subject of that discussion.
He (the Bishopof Oxford) confessed that much as he desired
to come to the same conclusion as that at which the noble
earl bad arrived, he felt bound altogether to dissent from
the views which the noble earl had expressed. The noble
earl had argued that the imperial legislature of 1791 had so
completely dealt with that question that it would be unjust
now to interfere with the settlement which had then been
made. Now the very terms of the act were inconsistent
with such a conclusion. But the noble earl had quoted
the opinions of the judges in favour of his view of the case.
Ho (the Bishop of Oxford) must beg their lorcishins to re'

ment. But it is not true that lin any way expressed my
decided opinion upon the policy involved in that bill.
(Hear, hear.) The petition was brought to me at a late
period of the session, and I thought it extremely improb-
able that a bill could then be introduced. Although I said.
nothing in the house with reference to the subject, certain

_ .
communications took place between me and the noble ear
from which I gathered that no measure would be intro
duced, and I have to-night heard, for the first time, that
any representations of mine had the slightest effect in pro-
curing the delay. But this I will say frankly to the noble
earl, and to the house, that upon the statements made by
the deputation from Canada, my own private feelings were
rather against the measure than in its favour. But had
all the facts been before me at that time, my opinion would
have been different from what it then was. At that time
the Session in Canada was approaching its close, and a new
Parliament was about to proceed to be assembled, and I
thought it was much better not to proceed with such a
measure until the opinion of that new Parliament should
bo expressed. The question has been fairly considered, and
a considerable majority has declared in its favour. (Hear.)
As the measure will come before your lordships at a future
period, and ample time will then be afforded for its discus-
sion, I will not now enter into the whole subject ; but I
wish to make one or two remarks. The noble earl has re-
ferred to the settlement of 1840, as a final and conclusive
settlement of this great subject. But what was the course
taken by Sir John Pakington, the Colonial Secrete
z uhned.er
the noble earl ? In one of his dispatches, in
timated that he was not prepared to proceed
'with the m•
111-
sure proposed by Lord Grey, he said no ground Was left efoa;
any reasonable complaint on account of undue favour
any particular religious denomination, but the to
ment thougt it might possibly be desirable,G"ern-
count of the chapges taking place in the hdaarafrcotenrtooimnf
time to
population, that the distribution of the funds
time should be considered. (Hear, hear.) Now, I wish to
ask on what principle the noble
earl(u eprod in
such distribution of the funds "pose Gear, hear.) Mr. Pr to proceedicer,
a Commissioner of the crown lands, and the originsto
and mover of the resolution of 1850, said that
three-fourths of the people believed the arrangement
was made in injustice and partiality. Do your lordshiPe
suppose that a settlement which three-fourths of the peo
ple of Canada consider unjust can be considered a final
settlement ? (H ' hear.)amount
ear,Although member of the
Church of Scotland, I have no jealousy of anyrigshoWd be
being enjoyed by the Church of England, n
uncha..n.ed.
glad to allow the existing settlement to "It
I find that although the members f
land are hardly more than one-fourth
I the upper province, they get con
) half. And I find
that the It °h
of the population of
the unurch of-ing-
•derably more than one-
sin Catholics enjoy from
for the maintenance of the
the fund originally intended larger share than the
Protestant clergy a consid