The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-16 00:00:00

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (CANADA) BILL.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE moved the second read-
ing of this bill. He said that towards the close of last
session he received a memorial from the Legislative
Council of Canada in favour of bringing the constitution
of that colony more in accordance with public feel-
ing in the colony ; and at the, commencement of
the present year he received a further memorial
suggesting a form of bill by which the Council might be
changed from a nominative to an elected body. It then
became his duty to consider how the bbject of the memo-
rialists could be best carried into effect, and it occurred to
him that there were three modes—first, adopting the draft
sent from Canada'; secondly, inviting the Parliament of
Canada to. send home a bill prepared and passed by
themselves, which would require to be sanctioned by an
act of the English Parliament ; and, idly, by repealing
these provisions in the Act of -"Ilion with Canada, which
prevented the Legislative Council legislating for itself.
The noble duke then pointed out the objections which he
entertained to the first two courses, and intimated that
it was his intention to adopt the third, and to delegate to
the Canadian Parliament the right of legislating in regard
to its constitution, subject of course to the confirmation of
the Crown—in short, simply to remove. the hin-
drances which now existed to local legislation.
(Hear, hear.) This was the only object of the
present bill, and it was entirely in accordance with the
soundest principles of colonial legislation. The bill
would remove useless and inconvenient restrictions,
which had given the colony a just ground of
complaint, and he hoped their lordships would agree to
the second reading.
Earl DES ART thought the bill would give a dan-
gerous power to the Legislative Council, and expressed
a hope that so important a measure would be postponed,
in order to enable Earl Derby and other peers on his
side of the house to express their opinions upon it.
After some observations from Lord WHARNOLIFFE,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought we had gone so
far in concession to Canada that the question now was,
whether we ought not to sever the connexion between
that colony and the mother country entirely, and thus
get rid of a responsibility from which very little ad-
vantage was derived in time of peace, while great harm
might arise from it in the event of war. He thought it
incumbent on the Government to ascertain the opinion
of leading personages in the colony on this question with
as little delay as possible.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE expressed his astonish-
ment that any one in Lord Ellenborough's position
should have expressed doctrines which were as unpa-
latable to the colonists as they were to their lordships'
house. For his own part, he would never belong to a
Government which was a party to the separation of the
colonies from the mother country, for he regarded such
a step as hostile to the best interests of the colonies, and
as an offence against the Sovereignty of the Crown.
After some further discussion, in which Lords Malmes-
bury, Brougham, and Harnowby took part,
The Duke of NEWCASTLE replied that the bill was
simply an enabling bill, and there was nothing in it to
prevent the local Legislature from so constituting the
Upper Chamber as that it should have an existence
either permanent (the members sitting during life), or
for a definite number of years.
The bill was then read a second time.
HIGH TREASON (IRELAND) BILL.
VACCINATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
EXCISE DUTIES BILL.
This bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.