The Sun.
London, England, 1838-12-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The despatches from Sir J. Colborne, published in the
Time: of yesterday, were satisfactory on more grounds than
one. They not merely recorded the defeat and dispersion
of the French rebels wherever they had attacked the loyal
subjects of her Majesty, but ascertained the willingness
and ability of the latter to maintain the dominion of the
laws and of public order by their own unaided exertions,
without the active interposition of a single regiment of the
Royal troops. It had been sedulously insisted on that the
proceedings in Parliament (and from invidious motives the
House of Lords was generally put forward as chief culprit
on the occasion) were such as to offend the whole body
of British-born colonists, to inspire them with hostility
to the sway of the mother country, and to render
them less worthy of reliance for opposition to
a pirate invasion from the United States. The
conduct of this brave portion of our countrymen
gave the lie at once to the libel circulated against
themselves, and to that of which the Imperial Parliament
bad been the subject. Sir J. Colborne, in his report to
GGovernment, does ample justice to their resolute and pa-
triotic devotion. But it had, by a curious spirit of enter-
prise in the vocation of party slander, been also alleged by
the Ministerial prints that the House of Lords and the
Tories, by their bill of indemnity, conveying cen-
sure upon Lord Durham, actually produced this second
insurrection of the French Canadians. We/ had already
in repeated articles exposed the impudent inconsistency of
snch a charge, as if, when the whole question was one be-
tween the principles contended for by the British colo-
nists on one side, and the French separatists on the
other, the same measures could, for the same rea-
sons, have created resentment in both. But there
were were other and more specific grounds on which
we maintained the absurd and malignant false-
hood of such an accusation. We remarked that the rebel-
lion recently broken out had not been the work of an hour,
or resulted from any sudden impulse of popular excitement,
for that all the accounts received from North America dur.
ing thelast four months, had borne witness to the activeand
incessant preparatives for another insurrection, the French
Canadians not having been so signally defeated, or so se-
verely punished for the former one, as to deter them from
repeating the experiment. The despatches of Sir John
Colborne have set this question happily at rest. The gallant
Captain-General of the Canadas tells her Majesty's Minis-
ters, in totidemverbis, that the leaders of the revolt had been
actively employed in organizing this second attempt to esta-
blish a republic in Canada since June! and that a secret
oath, which has been so extensively administered to the habi-
fans was taken by a large portion of the disaffected in July
and August." Well, then, how stand' the facts, and how
the argument upon them! The Bill of Indemnity, say the
Downing-street Journals, declaring the illegality of Lord
Durham's ordinance, has been the cause of this rebellion,
which rebellion, we are assured on the unquestionable au-
thority of Sir John Colborne, was in active preparation
during the month of June. But it so happens that the very
first mention made in Parliament of the illegal ordinance
of Lord Durham was by Lord Brougham in the House of
Lords on Monday, the 30th of .July, when he gave notice
of a motion on the subject. The Bill was introduced to
the House of Commons, and read a first and second time
on Monday, the 13th of August. And by whom intro-
duced ?—why, by that rancorous and revengeful Tory,
Lord John Pussell ! And on whose motion read a first time
and a second ?--Ort that ofLordJohn Russell. And on whose
motion committed the very day after ?—on that of Lord
John Russell. And on whose motion, ay, and at whose
earnest remonstrance, against all opposition from his friends,
read a third time and passed ?—why, on that of Lord John
Russell! Such was the Bill which has been made a stand-
ing topic of virulence and scurrility against the Conserva-
tives of both Houses, in one of which Houses the Minis-
ters had a sure majority whenever they chose to call fur it ;
—a bill not passed by the Crown until the 16th of
August, yet charged against those who voted for it,
amongst whom were the Queen's Ministers themselves, as
the cause of a rebellion whieh was prepared in the month
of June preceding, and cemented by oaths administered to
the Canadians during the months of July and August !
while the Act of Parliament, alleged as the originating
cause of these June, July, and August rebellious machina-
tions, could not by possibility have been known in North
America much before the end of September ! Are we not,
then, justified in considering this fresh specimen of mean-
ness in the Queen's Ministers and their creatures as pretty
fairly disposed of ? There is one other question to be
settled, and for our parts we shall look 'on with more
curiosity than anxiety to see how Lords Melbourne,
Glenelg, &c., work out their own deliverance from it—
namely, that suggested by Lord Durham's Devonport
announcement, that he will make disclosures of some
astounding import to Parliament and to the people of
England in justification of his own measures towards the
Canadians. We say that it is a matter calculated to move
curiosity rather than more serious feelings ; because, if
there be connexion or conclusiveness in Lord Durham's lan-
guage, these questions " relate to himself," and concern
merely the Noble Lord's own proper exculpation. That
they may contain proofs of Ministerial meanness towards
an ab'sent officer of the Crown would once perhaps have
stirred the higher emotions of Englishmen, as affecting in
no small degree the honour of the country, and the fame
of public functionaries. But, alas! the Ministers, and the
nation too, have grown callous to all such exposures.—
Times.

The New York Courier and Inquirer of November 14, I
contains the following paragraph :
~ We understand that the individuals transported from
Canada to Bermuda, by order of Lord Durham, and recently
. liberated in pursuance of the decision of the British Parlia-
ment, have arrived in this city, and that their very first step
has been to announce to a meeting of sympathisers held last
evening at the Richmond-bill House their intention to join the
predatory hordes now disturbing the peace of our frontier.
Verily 1 the British Government will complain with a bad
grace of the infatuation which leads American citizens to take
part with the disorganisers, while their own conduct presents
such an instance of fatuity as it does in regard to the men in
question."
The turn which events had,taken before the day of this
meeting will probably damp the ardour of the sympathisers.
Had the rebels, however, been successful in their first at-
tempts, so as to encourage the disaffected to rise in places
remote from the theatre to which the insurrection has been
confined, the return of the individuals from Bermuda at this
time might have added greatly to the mischief. We presume
that they comprise the great body of the men who would have
the confidence of the rebels as leaders. An attempt has been
made to justify the proceedings of the House of Lords, on
the ground that Sir John Colborne having declared the
leaders of the revolt to have been actively employed in or-
ganizing the second attempt to establish a republic in
Canada since June, and that a secret oath was taken by a
very large portion of the disaffected in July and August,
the proceedings of the House of Lords could not possibly
have caused the insurrection. We have ourselves, on the
faith of correspondents on whom we know we could rely,
stated weeks ago the existence of combinations for pur-
poses of insurrection, and corresponding organizations, in
the United States. But a hundred circumstances may
prevent those who form these plans from attempt-
ing to carry them into execution. Who does not per-
ceive that the agitated state of Canada consequent
on the receipt of the intelligence of the proceed-
ings in Parliament was calculated to act on both
th races ? The British, who had looked forward
with confidence to such an improvement in the laws and
institutions of the colony, as would gradually make it a fit
residence for Britons, began to indulge in the most gloomy
anticipations, while the French Canadians deemed the mo-
ment favourable for the realization of their schemes. The
British were divided between their hatred to the French
Canadians and their contempt for the House of Lords,
and this contempt had in a short time done much to de-
stroy in the British Canadians the wish to preserve the
connection with this country. It was impossible that all
this should not afford encouragement to the leaders of he
French Canadians. We do not say positively that anyam
measures which could have been adopted by Lord Durham
would have had the effect of preventing another trial of
strength between the parties ; but while this is a matter
involved in doubt, there can be no doubt that the proceed-
ings of the House of Lords had a tendency to encourage
the French to attempt another insurrection.--. 4. if •
ortune
Chronicle.
The Ministerial Journals are sadly perplexed by the
the contents of Sir John Colborne's despatch. And who
can wonder at this ? Sir John demolishes at a single blow
as effectually even as the most loyal of her Majesty's sub-
jects could wish him to demolish the rebel faction in Ca-
nada, the single topic of accusation which the abettors of
that faction in great Britain have had to produce, in re-
ference to Canada, against the most loyal of her Majesty's
s H
abjects, the Conservative majority of
.the House of
Lords. The charge against the Conservative Peers, upon
which all the organs of the Ministerial faction
have been
d
harping since August last, is, that they defeated Lord
Durluzm's policy in Canada, which but for them would
have boon successful. Lord Durham even has been
base and s'jlly enough, both in Canada and since
his recent lan:ling in England to lend his sanction
to this malignant And absurd drivelling. Whatever
blame there was in what the Legislature did upon
the occasion in question, is imputable to Ministers
only, who ought to have known and stated the
danger of the proposed step, instead of adopting
it in the Lords, as they did, and carrying it through the
Commons, in which assembly their majority, such As jt is,
' -
• .•P4elip4siserve the gravest censure, cannot be denied, because
'.l' • kt i Vglikesxlould not defend their Lord High Commissioner,
~,..,. , -.4 ,--K \. •
! . - -‘,.. tly with their duty to the country, they ought ini-
fr",-: .....,...14:r:;•Ny to have recalled him ; and if they could not
mot
dt-44a.:,...q7 ~,,. •:—.0,-,it. e.-..

effectually protect him from the severe reprimand of the
indemnity on account of their own weakness in Parliament 1
merely, they ought themselves immediately to have re-
signed. Sir John Colborne's despatch, however, is corn-
pletely decisive of every matter in dispute. It shows
that the measure proposed and carried in the House of
Lords could not have defeated Lord Durham's po-
licy in Canada, inasmuch as that policy was defeated
and proved to be utterly worthless and abortive,
within two months of his Lordship's arrival in the
colony, and severe.? months before anything could
have been known there of the Parliamentary mea-
sure. " But the fact," says the honest Globe, "on which
the Post relies as conclusive in favour of the inno-
cence of its patrons in the Upper House of all blame in
the matter, to us appears to warrant very different infe-
rences. So then ! the Lords were debating while rebellion
was organising—the Lords were splitting hairs about the
legality of bloodless precautions, while scenes were rehears-
ing, which, if encouraged to actual performance, would
suspend all law in the province but the stern one of arms !"
No ; honest Globe! The Lords were debating for the
preservation of the principles of law, having evidence be-
fore them that the Alinisterial High Commissioner and
Governor-General of Canada bad set the principles of law
at defiance, arid, unacquainted with the fact which now first
transpires in Great Britain, a fact which would have af-
forded, had it been known, a new justificatiou to their
course, that the policy of the law-despising satrap of
Downing.street bad already proved as deplorably
unsuccessful as it was flagrantly illegal. "No
doubt," we quote Sir John Colborne, " now exists
that the leaders of this revolt have been actively
employed in organising this second attempt to establish a
republic in Canada since June, and that a secret oath,
which has been extensively administered to the habitans,
was taken by a large portion of the disaffected in July and
and August." This is so overpowering that the Journals
which generally support Ministers, but which have, never-
theless, that kind of inconvenient desire to maintain a repu-
tation for honesty and truth, that disqualifies them from
the first place in Ministerial favour, do not attempt to re•
sist its force. The Globe must sink with shame and con-
fusion, if the sense of shame be not entirely lost
to it, under the severe rebuke unconsciously adminis-
tered to it by its less servile and more honourable
and candid fellow-labourers of the Ministerial press. We
find the following in the Courier of last night :
" We have it upon the authority of Sir John Colborne,
as a fact about which there is no doubt in his own mind, that
the leaders of the new revolt have been actively employed in
organizing this second attempt to establish a Republic in
Canada since June, and that a secret oath, which has been so
extensively administered to the habitans, was taken by a large
portion of the disaffected in July and August. After this, it
certainly requires no violent exertion of that rare faculty
among party-men, candour, to admit that the Tory majority
in the House of Lords, who adopted Lord Brougham's ma-
licious measure in the latter-mentioned month, are perfectly
innocent of the charge of having provoked the revolutionists
to a second revolt. The Tory Lords have been authors of
sufficient evil 'in their day, without imparting to them ima-
ginary mischiefs. We shall not be suspected of any partiality
for them or their proceedings when we rejoice to find them
thus completely innocent of having instigated the Canadians
to rebellion. Our gratification has other grounds. We are
glad they are not implicated ; because, if they were, the
Ministers who admitted the fatal necessity of the Bill, and the
Liberal majority in the House of Commons who sanctioned
that Ministerial resolution without even the show of a
division, must be implicated too, and thus come in for a full
share of reprobation and censure. We should have been
sorry to find that the mistakes of our own party had been at-
tended with so weighty a calamity, by way of moral."
And The Sun, also a Ministerial Paper, manifests at
least an equal regard for integrity and truth, as the follow-
ing passages will show :
" The simultaneous rising of ruch immense masses of the
population, and the loss of ' several valuable officers and
loyal subjects,' reported by the Lieutenant-General to have
fallen' in establishing the supremacy of British authority,
sufficiently show that the seeds of this rebellion were sown at
a date anterior to the passing of the Durham Ordinances In-
demnity Act—notwithstanding the very grave and oft-repeated
statements of two of our Ministerial Contemporaries to the
contrary. The Indemnity Act as passed on the 17th of Au-
gust, consequently its purport could not be known to the
disaffected in the Canadas before the middle of September at
the very earliest. It will be remembered, too, that it passed
both Houses in the course of a few sittings, with the express
understanding on the part of several of its supporters and op.
ponents that it was desirable that it should be either
passed or rejected before the arrival in the Canadas
of the debates upon it—in order to prevent anv agitation
of the question in the provinces. Now, Sir 'John Col-
borne says in his official despatch, No doubt now exists that
the leaders of this revolt have been actively employed in or-
ganising this second attempt to establish a Republic in Ca-
nada since June, and that the secret oath which has been so
extensively administered to the habitans, was taken by a large
portion of the disaffected in July and August.' Either this
statement of Sir John Colborne is utterly groundless, or the
Indemnity Act has contributed in so slight a degree to the
prpsent outbreak, that only the tools of faction can persevere
in fastening upon any section of the House of Lords the entire
blame of the recurrence of such an enormity. * * •
We are no admirers of the policy pursued by the House of
Lords since the passing of the Reform Bill ; but we will not,
on that account, lend ourselves to the dishonesty of making
any section of that House responsible for the consequences
of Acts now proved to be not less attributable to a series of
blunders on the part of the Government than to the united
opposition of the Ultras, Tory and Radical."
This is certainly creditable, by comparison with the im-
pudent disregard to sense and truth manifested by the re-
gular Ministerial hack.—Morning Post.