The Sun.
London, England, 1838-08-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 10, 1838.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. AUGUST 9.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
Papers were presented from the Poor-law Commissioners,
by Mr. Parker, and from the Trinity House Corporation.
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET gave notice that he
would, on Monday, present the Report on the Cirencester
Hundred Court Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL remarked that he did not think the
House would sit on Monday.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented apetition from Sir G. Steven,
complaining of the trade now carried on in Hill Coolies.
On the motion of the HON. and LEARNED MEMBER, the Mi-

nutes of the proceedings had before the last Dublin Election
Committee were ordered to be printed.
Captain AL SAGER presented a petition from some indi-
viduals in East Surrey complaining of the system under which
Beer Shops were now licensed.
Sir E. CODRINGTON presented a petition from Captain
James Wilson, praying to be heard at the bar of the House in
favour of the claim of Mr. Rowland Milner to be restored to
the rank of Lieutenant in the Royal Navy.
POST-OFFICE.

Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from Commercial
Travellers, complaining of the present high rate of postage,
and stating that they would send 60,000,000 of letters
a-year that did not now pass through the Post-office, if a
moderate rate of postage was adopted.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member then gave notice that he should, early next
Session, move for a Committee to inquire into the system of
conducting the Scotch Law Courts. He should also move
for a Select Committee to inquire into the management of
the Post-office; and would introduce a 13111 to improve ton-
veyancing in Scotland, as recommended by the Lord Ad-
vocate and Lord Conyngham.
LOTTERIES.

Captain PECHELL gave notice that in consequence
of what was taking place throughout the country, he would
early next session bring in a Bill to repeal the 6th and 7th
of William IV., fur the purpose of putting down the practice
of advertising foreign lotteries.
CORPORATE PROPERTY (IRELAND).
Lord MORPETH brought up the Report of the Commit-
tee on the Corporate Property (Ireland) Bill.
The Private Bills Deposit Bill was reported.
The following Bills were read a third time, and passed :
The Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill ; the Exchequer
Bill.: (11,044,5501.) Bill ; the Exchequer Bills (Public Works)
Bill ; the Four-and-a-Half per Cent. Duties Bill ; the Slave
Trade Treaties Bill ; the County Treasurers' (Ireland) Bill ;
the Coal Trade (London) Bill, the Church Building Acts
Amendments Bill, the Duchy of Cornwall (Tin Duties) Bill,
and the Corporate Property (Ireland) Bill.
On the motion of the LORD ADVOCATE, the Lords'
Amendments to the Courts of Session (Scotland) Bill were
agreed to.
Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT presented a petition from
Stockport, against idolatrous worship in India.
Lord EBRINGTON moved for a return of the Bills sent
up to the House of Lords, which had been agreed to or re-
jected during the present Session.
Sir R. INGLIS thought the return should be laid on the
table in the next Session of Pdrliament.—Agreed to.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL the considera-
tion of the Lords' amendments to the Public Records Bill was
postponed till to-morrow (this day)
SPIRIT LICENSES (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. O'CONNELL moved to bring up the Report on this
Bill, which had stood on the paper yesterday, but which he
nas by accident prevented from moving.
Mr. SHAW and Col. PE RC EVA L objected to the motion
on the ground of irregularity.
Captain PECHE LL thought the Bill ought to be consi-
dered in the light of a dropped Order.—(The feeling of the
House was entirely in favour of bringing up the Report.)
The SPEAKER said, the Ili:age was not to receive the re-
port until the next day ; but it was for the liou,A! to say what
e,..urse ought to be adopted under pre,ient eireinistances.
Mr. O'CONNELL then moved that the Report be
brought up.
Mr. SHAW strongly objected to the motion.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, Wien the num-
bers were—

For bringing up the Report
Against it

-20

Majority
The Roport was accordingly brought up.
CONFERENCE WITH THE LORDS.

The CuANrcELLon of the EXCHEQUER, with other Members,
proceeded to minage the conference with their Lordships on
the Benefices Pluralities Bill.
On their return,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
that the managers for the Commons had left the Bill, with the
Commons' reasons, in their Lordship? hands.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (IRELAND) BILL.
Messengers from the Lords brought up the Public Works
Bill, and the Bill for the more eircetual Recovery of Fines;
end requested a Conference with this House on the subject of
the Municipal Corporation (Ireland) Bill.
A Conference was accordingly directed, when Lord Mon
PET II and several Members immediately proceeded to the
Committee Room, No. 5.

Lard llortrurn and ethers appeared at the bar, and stated
that they had had a conference with the Lords, which was
managed on their part by the Earl of Shaftesbury, who
reported that their Lordships had taken into consideration
the reasons of that House for not agreeing to the amendments
of the Lx/rtin in ill, Irish Corporation Bill—that they adhered
to some of the amendments—had agreed to others, and had
made amendments upon others to which they desired the con-
currence of that House.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the reasons given
by the Lords were read by the Clerk.
On the reading of the last amendment,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the House might gather
from what had been read the general purport of the amend-
ments made and insisted on by their Lordships. It appeared
that they had so far agreed to the amendments of that House
as not to insist upon that provision which they had made re-
specting charitable trusts, further than that the present trustees
should continue until October, 1840. It appeared also that
they had not insisted upon the retention of the other trusts.
There were, besides, other amendments introduced by them
which they now relinquished.—( Hear.) But with respect to
the principal clause, that regulating the franchise, they wished
to retain that exactly in the same form as they had sent it
before down to that House.—( Hear.) He (Lord J. Russell)
thought that question alone of such importance, that, seeing
no hope of inducing the Lords to recede from the franchise
they had themselves proposed, and not being disposed himself
to go any further in the way of concession—( Cheers from the
Ministerial Members)—and having made many important con-
cessions already—(Ministerial cheers)—he had no other course
than to abstain from carrying the controversy any fur-
ther with the House of Lords, and to postpone the
Bill to another Session of Parliament.—( Repeated Minis-
terial cheering.) The Lords gave, as one of their rea-
sons for differing from the amendments made in the Com-
mons that it was not desirable to adopt a new franchise differ-
ing from that which was already known and in practice.
Now he (Lord J. Russell) thought the adoption of the fran-
chise laid down in the Reform Bill was the most wholesome
as well as the most constitutional one which Parliament could
adopt. The Lords stated that they were precluded from
adopting the English franchise, because it was inapplicable to
the state of Ireland, giving no other reason for the opinion
which they formed. This circumstance, however, would
render it advisable to take the subject into consideration in
another Session of Parliament, and to ascertain whether the
mode which the Lords conceived was novel and unparliamen-
tary could not be avoided, and some other course adopted
which would be sanctioned by Parliamentary forms. This
was a question, however, into which he did not at present
propose to enter, and he merely alluded to it in consequence
of the reasons of the Lords which the House had just
heard read. He would not, however, at present enter
into further particulars with respect to the Bill. If,
indeed, there appeared to be any chance of agree-
ment between that House and the House of Lords as
_

regarded the franchise, there were points of difference on
which it would be prudent for Ministers to give way ; but as
their Lordships insisted on adhering to their franchise, any
further attempt at arrangements were out of the question.—
(Ministerial cheers.) Considering, then, that the Lords re-
quired a higher rate of franchise than was known in England,
and seeing, for his part, no reason why such should be insisted
on, it appeared to him that if Parliament passed this measure
it would be considered in Ireland that the distinctions which
had been alleged to exist between the two countries, when the
Bill was discussed on a former occasion, were still taken for
granted, and that that was the reason why so high a franchise
was retained in the Irish Bill. The measure, as it at present
stood, would, he felt satisfied, prove unpalatable to the
great mass of those towns in Ireland to which it was proposed
to extend Corporations ; and, instead of being considered by
them as a boon, would be looked upon only with suspicion
and distrust.—( Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances he
felt that he could adopt no other course than to move the
further consideration of the Bill that day three months.—
( Ministerial cheers.) He was sorry to be compelled to make
this motion : but seeing that all legislation was hopeless
during the present Session, he felt he had no other resource;
he, however, had the gratification to think that the discussions
which had taken place this year would not prove altogether
fruitless. They had got rid of some of the objections which
had previously been made to the measure. In the first place,
they had got rid of the objection to making the Corporations
elective in Ireland ; and, in the second place, the Lords and
Commons had agreed upon many of the provisions of the Bill.
Under these circumstsnces he was induced to hope t'iat
iri
any future legislation upon the subject the two Houses of Par.
liament would not differ so widely upon the disputed points as
they had hitherto done.
-Mr. SHAM' could not help expressing his extreme surprise
at the course which the Noble Lord had thought proper to
adopt. He did not expect in so thin a House, and upon so
short a notice, to have a proposition male for so summary a
rejection of the measure. No time had been given for a con-
sideration of the reasons which the Lords had so elaborately
drawn up for adhering to their amendments. Scarcely was the
House apprised of the conference when, without an opportn-
„ity of knowing. or time for consilering
m the reasons why
the Lords ci:nred from that Houss, they were czlled uooa
in the most summary mliiner to r,j,.ct the Mit. The
Nob!e Lord, in mahing• this proposition, must be content
to take upon himself the whole te,ponAibilitv for the c:mse-
quenees.—(lAughtcr from the Ministeiial benches.)
Members might kugh, but he woul,i ask, were not all the
concessions made from that (the Opp riiti.m) side of the
! louse ?--( Cries of "Oh ") yes,
t' otyrlt the Nob''‘ o--I 1 • he would repeat it, and
„ /a. npc..en so much of conces-
siol:s which he had made, it was only throw;nf, dust in the
eyes of tile Irish Foofle. Upon one other Irish queslicn,

indeed, the Noble Lord had made concessions, and he (Mr.
Shaw) did not blame him for so doing; for in doing so the
Noble Lord had only followed the course which his duty and
the interests of the country required ; but with respect to the
Irish municipal question, so far front concession being made
by Ministers, all the important ones had been made by those
on his (Mr. Shaw's) side of the House, and made, too, at a
great expense of feeling and opinion, not only by the leading
persons in this country who were opposed to the present Go-
vernment, but more especially by the same class in Ireland,
who found it exceedingly difficult to procure a general assent
to the concessions which it was proposed to make..---(Hear.)
The Noble Lord had spoken of a 5/. franchise, but he should
not have forgotten that he himself proposed a 10/. franchise
in his own Bill of 1836. This was all that he (Mr. Shaw) and
those who concurred with him contended. for. If, as the
Noble Lord bad said, the difference between them was so tri-
fling, why did he not give way, and not oppose those who
found the only obstacle to the Bill in that point, and in that
point only T— (Cheers.) They required that there should he
nothing but a bona fide 101. franchise, and in making the rate-
paying clause they adopted the best test of that. In Dublin a
valuation and taxation under the Police Act had taken place,
and he had no doubt but that the valuation thus made would
be found to be taken at more than the real value. This had
been tried by appeals, and the appeals confirmed his opinion.
As the Noble Lord had taken the responsibility of throwing out
the measure, lie (Mr. Shaw) would not, at so late a period of
the Session, divide the House. For his own part he still was
of opinion that it would be better to do away altogether with
Corporations in Ireland, and have their funds administered by
Commissioners. There never had been any strong feeling on
this subject in Ireland, except inasmuch as it had been con-
nected with other exciting topics, but that incidental feeling
was now rapidly subsiding. He did not altogether regret the
postponement of the measure, because, in his opinion, the de-
tails were not sufficiently considered. It was made too much
a question of party contest to have local arrangements taken
sufficiently into account. He (Mr. Shaw) protested against
the course taken by the Noble Lord, not so much with re-
spect to the proposition which he made as to the summary
manner in which the amendments of the other House were
dealt with. He regretted that the Noble Lord refused to
accept the large concessions which had been made by that
(the Opposition) side of the House, and he would conclude by
again entering his protest against the unceremonious manner
in which reasons that had been so carefully drawn up by
the House of Lords had been treated.
After a few words of explanation from Lord J. RUSSELL,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
two objections had been made by the Right Honourable and
Learned Gentleman opposite. geThe first was that the House
had been taken by surprise. Now the Right Hon. Gentle-
man should remember that the course taken was the same
which had been taken in 1836. and it was, therefore, not right
to taunt Government with having adopted it. No other course
could by possibility have been anticipated, for if it had there
certainly would have been a greater attendance of Members
at the other side of the House. lie could not suppose that
the Right Honourable Gentleman was serious in expressing
surprise at the adoption of the course which had bsen pursued
in 1836. So much for the Right Hon. Gentleman's formal ob-
jectien. With respect to the Right Hon. Gentleman's substan-
tial objection to the course pursued, he (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) begged leave to say that the object of the Bill
was to afford content to the people of Ireland, and in his opi-
nien it was much better to postpone the further consideration
cf the question than, under the colour of bringing in a Bill for
the avowed purpose of bringing content, to press forward a
measure which would have a directly contrary efface It would
be an insult to the House, rind it would be an insult to the
country, if Ministers should press forward this Bill, fce!ieg, as
they did, that it was not calculated to produce content in Ire-
land. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that Government
were responsible for withdrawing this measure. Now, if Go-
vernment, under the colour of Reform, brought forward a
measure which really WAS not a me. vae of Reform, they weeld
indeed be deeply respensible, and the motives of their conduct,
together with the good faith of their proceeding, might be
fairly called in question. Ile did not undervalue the advan-
tage of that House preserving a good understanding with the
other House of Parliament, but he felt assured that in the
course of time they would be able to procure a better Bill for
Ireland. There appeared to be no objection to the principle
of the Bill, and the difference as to details would, he felt as-
sured, be hereafter adjusted. The Right Hon. Gentleman
accused Ministers of a disposition to leave the question open
as a bone of future contention. To that imputation they
might have been liable bad they continued to persiat in the s'.
franchise, but, yielding upon that point, they were not fairly
liable to the charge. The Right Hon. Gentleman had him-
self admitted that the difference between them was but a slight
one, and when Ministers-had made so large a concession upon
the point of the pecuniary qualification, surely the Lords were
wrong in persisting in a provision which opened the way to all
kinds of false swearing and tampering with the surveyors. If
it were only on this account alone, he should prefer the fran-
chise established by the original Bill. With respect to the
late valuation in Dublin, upon which the Right Hon. Gentle-
man had laid so much stress, it should be remembered that it
was a valuation taken upon a quite different standard than that
proposed by the Lords' amendments. If the Right Hon.
Gentleman could show that an equally fair velution could
take place by making the poor-rate the standard of value, his
argument would hold good. By these grants. therefore, he
thought a postponement of the measure was the best course
which Government could adopt. It would lead to a better ad-
justment of the measure finally, by showing that Ministers had
made every reasonable and just concessiosi that could be made
without departing from the. principle of the Bill.
Sir R. INGLIS said he hoped, if the measure wore to Le
brought forward in another session, that more consideration
would be taken of the time of the House; -and, as Acts of Par-
liament had been entered as read which never had been read,
he hoped that speeches would be considered spoken which
never would be made.—(Laughter.)
Mr. O'CO N NELL, as representing the capital of Ireland,
begged leave respectfully to thank her Majesty's Ministers
for the course they had adopted on this occasion. He thanked
them for the unceremonious manner in which they got rid
of the Lords' amendments to the Bill, and if there was any
course which could be considered more unceremonious he
would have been happy to see it adopted. The Bill thus
amended was an insult to the people of Ireland, and it was
clearly intended that it should be such.—(" Hear, hear,"
from the Lish Radical Members.) He could not help ad-
miring the gravity with which the Right lion. Gentleman op-
posite (Mr. Shaw) spoke of the concessions which had been
made on the other side, and the manner in which he would

lead the House to suppose that he was the instigator of
those concessions. That was not the particular merit attri-
buted to the Right Hon. Gentleman by his friends in the
old municipal bodies. What concessions—concessions for-
sooth 1 The people of Ireland only sought their just rights,
and he, on their part, treated with ineffable coistempt any ar-
gument or assertion which went to say that they were not en-
titled to the same rights and privileges as the people of
England or the people of Scotland—(Radical cheers)—and
it was nothing less than robbery, downright robbery, to
withhold them. Let them disguise it as they might he cared
not, but those who refused to the people of Ireland their just
rights were the greatest enemies the Crown had, and did
more than any others to sever the people of Ireland from their
allegiance to the throne. They were the Repealers in rea-
lity, for the Union was but a parchment, and which never
could bo lasting if an equality of rights were not granted to
Ireland with the other parts of the empire. They talked of
concession on tithes. He was one of those who had advocated the
putting or contriving to put a million of money into the pockets
of the tithe owners, but he now bitterly regretted that he had
done so ; and if, as he believed, the measure with respect to
tithes would coma down again to that House with its most im-
portant clause altered, be hoped the Ministers would serve the
Tithe Bill in tile same way in which they disposed of the pre-
seat measure. He agreed with the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman that the present Municipal Bill did contain a clause
creating a fictitious franchise, but when the Bill came again
before the House he would take care t o correct the error. If
the Right Hon. Gentleman suggested such a clause next year
—for he hoped no such clause would be introduced into the
Ministerial Bill—he would certainly oppose it. The clause
which he alluded to was the continuance of the power of
creating fictitious freemen. He hoped to find introduced,
next session, a Bill with a franchise similar to that in Eng-
land; and if that was not found extensive enough, Ireland
would have no reason to complain, as she would be placed on
-the same footing as the people of England. The Right Hon.
Gentleman said the people of Ireland were not sensitive
upon the subject. To be sure---they had so many other crying
evils, that they could not be peculiarly emphatic upon this
point. They had tithes, and other grievances ; but he would
not allow it to be said that Irishmen were not sensitive on the
municipal question, for base indeed would they be if they were
not so. The present corporations in Ireland were a mere
mockery. They were institutions with which the people had no
sympathy, and were given up and abandoned even by their own
friends. He hoped by the delay to get a much better Bill.
The people of Ireland would accept of a Bill similar to the
English one. They sought for no more, and would be con-
tent with no less.

Mr. D'ISI2. AE LI complained that the Session had now
been of nine months' duration, and yet but little progress had
been made in the public business of the country. The reason
given for the length of the Sessions lately was the attention
which Government was obliged to give to Irish measures.
They brought forward questions which were not called for by
the necessities of the country, but mooted merely for the pie--
pose of keeping a party in power and making trials of strength.
Notwithstanding the length of time that Parliament had been
sitting, they were now about to separate, leaving Ireland in a
state of smouldering insurrection.—( Hear, hear.) The No'ile
Lord, as one of the last Ministerial acts of the Session,, had
just pronounced the funeral oration of his own favourite mea-
sure. Was this tile result of their nine months' labour, the
usual period of gestation ?—( Fleur, hear, and laughter.) The
Noble Lord had only produced an abortion, or, at least, was
about to strangle his own offspring. What answer would Mem-
bers give to their constituents when asked what business had
been done during the Session ? The Noble Lord had not been
able, even with his strange allies, to carry out to a conclusion
the melancholy farce which the Session presented. Parliament
was .bout to prorogue, leaving Ireland in the same state of
smouldering insurrection as it was when they opened. They
had emancipated tite.Catholies,. and. they coerced thorn—

they excharm•ed a miser able mino ity tj adopt a treasonable
m•4j(rity—they denounced the
_Honourable and Learned

. _
Gentlem,:n oppoiit, and then otired Itiai the hiOrest legal
°file, in the country, in refusing which he conquered and
triumphed over them. Coul I they thick of going on in the
sane manner ye it after year ? If he would only sly, in the
lanuwage of the and Learned Member for Dublin—and
in followirg that lion. and Lertr,:ecl Member he of course
could not violate the privileges of the House—that the course
of poliey which Ministers pursued was a most profligate one.
Sir H. VIVIAN s:rid, in answer to the question of what

they could say to their constitmnits, that, for his part, Owe
by whom he w:;s to that House were most a,,zious to sec
justice done to Ireland, and they would say the Bill met the
fate it merited.

Mr. A. YATES said the conduct of the Lords with re-
spect to this fill was an insnit to the people of Ireland, %lb°
would never be content until they had local self-goverun'icnt•
He hoped a better measure would be introduced next session.
The Bill was then ordered to be read that day three months'On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the Bill, as re-
turned by the Lords, was ordered to be printed.
Captain WOOD gave notice that he would on the next
meeting move for an alteration of the duties on pears, apple,
grapes, and other foreign fruit.
The House adjourned at a Quarter to Seven o'Clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, .Auausr 9.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Woolsack a
few minutes before Five o'Clock.
Mr. BERNAL and others from the Commons appeared at the
Bar, and presented the Royal Exchange Rebuilding Bill, the
Court of Session (Scotland) Bill, and several other Bills with
the Lords' amendments agreed to ; also the Exchequer
Bills (11,014,550?.) Bill, the Exchequer Bills (Public
Works) Bill, the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster
Bill, the Slave-trade Treaties Bill, the Four-and-a-Half per
Cent. Bill, Corporate Property (Ireland) Bill, the Canso"
(Tin Duties) Bill, and some other Bills, to which they de-
sired the concurrence of their Lordships.
CONFERENCE WITH THE COMMONS.
Messengers from the Commons appeared at the Bar, air.
demanded a conference with their Lordships on the amen
meets made in the Benefices Pluralities Bill.—Agreed to.
The Bank of Ireland Repayment Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from thess
Guardians of the Poor of Croydon in favour of the Poor-law
Bill, and in favour of the Rating of Small Tenements Bill.
The following Peers were thee appointed to manage tre
Coeference with the Commons, and proceeded to Committee
Room, No. 5, for that purpose :—The Duke of Richmond,
the Earl of Effingham, the Bishop of Hereford, Lord Sondes'
Lord Rayleigh, Lord Bexley, and Lord Strafford,
Oa their return, the Duke of RICHMOND acquainted the
House that they had been to the Conference, which was n''d
reanagad on the part of the Commons by Lord J. Russell at
n,
others, and that the Commons had left their reasons for •s,
agreeing with certain amendments made by their Lordships.
The reasons were ordered to be taken into consideration';
morrow.
The Earl of El ADDINGTON moved that the amendment;
made by the Commons to the Schools (Scotland) Bill he
agreed to, as the amendments were very judicious.
Viscount STRANG FO RD gave notice that on MendaY it!
should call the attention of their Lordships to the pretests
striae of their commercial relations with South America.
Lord LYNDHURST gave notice that early next Se's'?
he should bring in a Bill relative to the Custody of Infell'b
similar to that .hick had been rejectad a few nights ago.
Lord BROUGHAM observed that there were several mdse
objectionable clauses in that Bill. As he was on his legs
begged to ask the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonlis
whether the Government had received a copy of any ordiasurs:
or proclamation relative to the persons who had been CO
nected with the rebellion in Upper Canada ?
Lord G L ENE LG, we understood, replied in the negative'
CONFERENCE WITH THE COMMONS.
ebe
The following Peers were then appointed to manage "ds,
Conference with the Commons, on the subject of the amen..,
metes made to the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill'. os
The Earl of Shaftesbury, the Earl of Hawarden, a
flood, Bislion of Hereford, Lord Sondes, Lord Redesdale,e
Lord
CANADA GOVERNMENT ACT DECLARATO
BILL.
Lori BRO UG HAM, in rising to move the Order of the
I)ay for the second reading of the above Bill, said that ;Jo
c'l),:to, or t.:they the incidental conversation, which had t 8
piece in this House on this matter, sufficiently evinced the e
citemeut which existed here, and he believed elsewhere, elf,
this subject, and the deep importance of the subject itschis
He felt it to be his bounden though painful duty to bring t
matter before their Lordships in consequence of the ISso,
which he had also felt it his duty to take in resisting, darlitra
all its stages the passing of the Canada Coercion Bill. ,se
Clough his opinions- upon this measure still remained the gafili,
—although anything- which Lad happened since, and, ahevet4-
the matters which he was now about to consider, had str,e sit
theeed rather than weakened those opinions—and althougd "Oe
the intermediate time which he had given to reflection 'lir., a
the practical effect of this measure had confirmed hire,ed
conviction as hostile against it as he ever entertained,oce
led bins to wish more earnestly than ever that n°, this:
measure had ever been adopted by the Legislature 0' that
country--yet, having entered his protest against
measure, he begge to say that he now wee!t to
teat
dismiss altogether hid feelings of hostility against his
measure, avowing, that he thought he should best dischar:es
a
duty as a Member of Parliament, as a good subject, and t of
patriotic citizen of this empire, by avoiding all retrosrefsteel
the past, anclehe ample grounds of difference which e'''sues
beta can himaelf. and many of their Lordships upon thiscoula
ject, and proceeding at once to consider hots the Ivy ere-
now best be aecomplished and carried into successful o.l),cif
Lion. Parliament, in its wisdom, had deemed it absolsn io
necessary, under the state of circumstances ex sty
Canada—for nething short of an absolute case of nee of
could justify such an Act—to suspend the Constitution
Canada. Why? Because so universal and wide-sresassse
feeling of discontent existed in those provinces, and beu'aisa
the Legislative Ai,cretnbly representing the people s°,iiie
turbed and partially disaffected, so conveyed and kept 'O. 0
that feeling of discontent, that it was felt that, as loMeths
the Constitution remained as it then was, so long aso it
Legislative Assembly was allowed to meet, there was loaf
were a focus of resistance and disaffection in the ee se-
which would for ever be blowing up the flames into °Pen o•
hellion, and preclude all hope of allaying the existing the
the
pular discontent. That was the conviction, that we soli
feeling, in which this measure took its rise ; and, with asibeel,
of meeting the circumstances of the case he had so deseistipg
e
*whilst the measure itself extinguished the then
rs of
Constitution of these provinces, it provided ample Pevrdethesl
Government to supply this inevitable deficiency, an
powers were entrusted to the Governor-General and s' f this
now resident at. Quebec. Now, looking at the whole 00e
proceeding, he would venture to say that there was %stf°.
thing more self-evident—the Bill itself was entitled an 004
the " temporary Government of Canada," and giving P..tsae
of an extraordinary nature, limited, however, actor see
with that title to a fixed period, namely, the year joie'
there was no one thing more self-evident, he would wad ibis
than that in passing that measure the Parliament 400
country 'coked forward to the restoration of the Constoseett
of the Canadas, and of the ordinary powers of Goverpecr
with the ordinary restrictions upon the power of the tab'
the, as soon as peace and quiet should be restored there'to take
as pointed by the very words of this Bill, was expected
self'
place in the year 1840. Now, this being admitted 114 is oes
evident from the very title of the Bill, did there not fel° fest°
corollary as self-evident, as he had taken the liberty tesd the
the above proposition itself to be, namely, that it behovrt:casose
Government created during this interval for the perfetaelisb;
of the temporary provisions necessary for the re-es ath
ment of the Constitution of Canada—that it beho"eaosil
hands to which these extraordinary powers were t° the
this interval confided always to look forward o 0
)d
1840, when its temporary arbitrary powergl°o
.0
chase, and the old Constitution of the provinces oa.e,
e 0
resume its place, and so administering the authorl •
which it was endowed as to give a chance, nay more, hotevao
a great, and an evident probability, and, as far agar I 840
effairs could be so, an absolute certainty, that in the iebotes6cor
a hearty reconcilement should once more take Peelto: w
the provinces and the parent.state ? Now, to the
•Itta".so/ae se
this end two rules of conduct appeared to hire t°,iog
ily ,
evidently necessary. The first and most important y'
wards this object was manifestly this, to execute as ;Pant
and as parsimoniously as possible the extraordinary Pity
vested in the temporary Government under the ant: waeti
Parliament. It was intended by the Bill to seisPlY. the
a supreme power, which the Bill itself in the first ins"' of `, s
suspended, in consideration of the absolute exigency t eali
case ; and this supreme power, which he would no, even
dictatorship, because he wished to .avoid every leessnor
gesture, every expression, which could possibly "
o to
hostility or warmth, was accordingly conferred ';'P r
Governor- General who was sent out to these provinees.ordilp,
could be no doubt, however, that these powers, eitrave et to
as they were, were intended to be, and ought to l'aosea,tioe
exercised as sparingly as just to enable the Govereall'it
carry itself on, and no more; arid that every Par soggso,
which reason, moderation, and good temper COn'
oalcl
should have been adopted to conciliate, as far a 5 apPesrbe
the public feeling to what must at first sight have 01 ser
an arbitrary proceeding-, and to regain the affections eetito
people as speedily as possible. He would not II; of ef'
upon the question of the probability, or, indeesslSont Ib°
advantages or disadvanges, of an eventual sePaeee olr
fected without incurring a rancorous wound, h to oil
colony and the pareat state, although he beggeooesste
serve that he still entertained the same opinion the 'Ol,
oint as When he last addressed their Lordships he 0
ject. The case was now different, however, all
d ~iei°icb
now abaut to speak, not according to Isis one riot'
policy, but according to tho policy of Parliaine,oseecod
was to strengthen and render ,ermanents the "s $ g
between this country and its colonies ; for, as gif:011!
subject, and
.a patriotic Citizen, he felt bounui to r:hic"
his own opinion to that of the Legislature, nnus,h r, "c.')."l
with it how the empire could best be held togu`„,eare;
could only be in iris opinion by means and Inc" fle.soss
ciliated to reconcile the affections of the poopleou yePot,
it therefore, to be absolutely incumbent uP3 :tee° hod°
ennuited with extraordinary powers of Oever- 'tY 04'
asbuhtti
thet all extraordinary and needless acts of autlorati st gtferit,
be altogether avoided ; and, secondly, that the e° Pa tbt;
tplei, o uasm
pclaer e
os::.(e)rusi d
„dare 110
equally convinced of' the truth of, that even
Bill ; aed, the third place., it wan a
ex( d its ample limits a kecon,,s
ildioctrettio, exceed t by
soa
actineose °toe
powers of this 13111, and taking the most scrupLl)l,u.,i the 'iv" to'
se:ccectsunc should.-it uttennal tpoo"'s.uvaexsretsc'oguttievseutifilliiebciyit.iitighthis.bl3uatill'tilhialiin'a4;l3:l:tjeliceirrailt:ii
a meneee with ar extreme caution, and as grfej:e r;l.,gee'ti
to the hassle ular ciscurnstances of the case, and !we in e-or'.
sheik, in as e mstitutional a spirit as it was poi's' t
po,ro
Lea peen: sin themselves uacorufitutional. If t ylilie 10;
1"g is•!4icnt In.td leen git ea nod xcrcised,pat
• to he it, tirec aecution of that :sewer whit
as it ,then
eessity of the case did not require-41e t only
o'vtodif,g tPlofo
safer and more prudent, in tat, pails so'r tie,
tas
rivaii )tile h
li
r teocoo".
tny chn,aighut c.otenc;

jog
Al"
, all,

!Dr.
I Ull
4)00
:,, a

1,;11,1
itleh
this
thlt

tlAt
-e bis
°

1,0 promulge, they should take extreme care indeed to fol-
low the spirit, and even the form of British legislation, in
order that, as necessity compelled Parliament to arm them
with unconstitutional legislative powers, they should exe-
cute the unconstitutional but necessary powers in as consti-
tutional a frame, and manner, and spirit as possible. The
ioo(irbsi zuoantio whom they entrusted those powers ought to be
b
and resolute. ; but he ought also to maturely consider
c
e perils with which he had to grapple, and he ought more-
over to be aware and to feel that discretion and prudence in
ul(etin those perils and in the exercise of those powers were
fully more,
and certainly at least as necessary in accomplish-
ing the object he had in view—pluriton audacice quoad
ca-
pirnda pericula, plurium consilii ipso inter pericula.—( Hear,
hear.) When he came to consider how far these maxims had.
been followed, how far these canons of policy had been obeyed,
how far those sound and 'moderate principles of common jus-
tice had appeared in the conduct of the Canadian Council,
he
was compelled to say that it was the very contrary. If he
Thad said to their Lordships at the time this Canadian Bill
was passing, " Do you mean to suspend the Constitution,
and to arm a dictator with the power of confiscating any
individual's property, of seizing his person, of condemning him
unheard, of passing Bills of pains and penalties of his own
mere motion, and, with the assistance of his council, of pro-
mulging egainst whom he chose, and for what he pleased, at
any moment Acts of attainder?" if he had said " Do you mean
in this Lill, not only to make the Governor of Canada the su-
preme law-giver, with his council, but a judge civil and cri-
minal in every man's case, as to his property, his limb,
his liberty, and his life, a supreme criminal judge without
appeal: and that he, the same person, with the assistance
01 his council, should execute ,the criminal law as
well as the civil in all cases which the prerogative
of the crown, his master or mistress, whom he re-
presents, has always and in all times delegated to the
sworn judges?" should he not be told at once, and by every
man who had supported the Bill on the policy in which it had
originated, whether sitting on that or on the other side of the
Flouse, that lie was putting an extravagant gloss upon the Bill,
that he was arguing upon the letter against the spirit, and that
no man living would ever have dreamt of conferring such
powers ?—( Hear, hear.) But to make it more clear, else-
where, in the other House of Parliament, that no such un-
halite.? power had Leen given, a great lawyer, the worthy suc-
cessor in his ( Lord Brougham's) mind, of the Romillys, the
Pigots, the Erskines, the Gibbses, and the Ellenbouroughs
of past times, he meant the late Solicitor-General, his Hon.
and Learned Friend Sir William Follett, not being satisfied
with what had satisfied them, inserted words to which their
Lordships' attention had more than once been called by him,
a proviso expressly declaring that no law or ordinance of
the Governor in Council should be passed which should re-
peal or suspend or alter any Act of the British Perna-
ment.—( Hear.) If then he had stated, supposing this clause
formed parcel of the Bill originally, or if his Noble and
Learned Friend ( Lord Lyndhurst) had stated, after the
precautions that had been taken to exclude such measures,
Tight not the Governor, notwithstanding they had tied him
from altering, suspending, or repealing Acts of the Bri-
tish Parliament !generally, might lie not in a particular case
pass by them, and issue an ordinance in the teeth of them, to
"able a party to do what the Act of Parliament prohibited,
and to compel a party to suffer that from which those Acts
protected him, and which were so formed for the express pur-
Pose of prcteciing- him, would not the answer have been that it
was monstrous, outrageous, ridiculous to suppose such a thing ?
When they tied no the hands of the Governor in Council from
altering the law made for the protection of all, should they
allow him to evade that protection, by making a law for the
oppression of an individual ? The law being to protect A, B, C,
and all other subjects, and being framed for that protection,
and the Governor bring presented from repealing that law,
Should the Governor he allowed to do exactly the very thing
the law prohibited ? Should he be allowed to destroy
A, 8, add C, by removing them from the protection of the
general law ? Flo need not state what the answer would have
heart- But, supposing- those who were hostile to the measure—
:and Ile himself was one—had said, Why, not only will the
Governor be passing Bills of attainder, netwithstanding all
these grecautions—not only till he be flying in the face of
al: the most snered and best establi,hed laws that guard the
purify and jutice of the adeiinigr eioa of the criminal juris-
prude.‘ce by which the statute of the 14th Geo. 111. in
express terms was made parcel of the law of Lower Canada,
both as reogards treason and all other crimes—not only will be
do that, bun' I am eraid, as you make him absolute, he will
condemn pecplc who have never been tried; not only will he
pass BIN(); pains and penalties, privilegium odiosum, as civi-
lians call it ; not only will he pass Bills of attainder, acts
which in any country are resorted to only in cases of absolute
and overruling- necessity, which justifies itself, however atro-
,elons the matter it may compel you to do—not only will he
have recourse to Bills of pains and penalties and Acts of at-
t:iiiider, but he will not even pursue the ordinary course in all
Bills of attainder—have the confession of the party, or enable
the party to come and appear and oppose them, or appoint a
certain day, if the party has absconded, before which, if he
dues not appear, lie shall be taken to have confessed and be
Inade subject to tile penalty of the Act. Supposing I had
said he will pass a Bill declaring a number of individuals, not
in the country, who have never confessed, who were never
tried, against whom no indictment has been laid, who were not
within the country at all since the Act in question—that he
will pass a Bill condemning them all to death if they come
within the country—persons who were never tried, having
-confessed nothing, there being no plea and no hearing, having
'an notice of such Bill served upon them, or any copy of notice
asking them whether they meant to come back, and giving
die
a day on which to appear and take their trial—supposing
ne (Lord Brougham) had said that, what would be the
answer ? Why, that he was putting a case which nothing
but the most disorderly imagination could suggest; that he
was supposing a case to happen which nothing but a distortion
of the understanding, arising from hostility to the measure,
and incurable prejudice, could for a moment have made
lion harbour. That he was sure would be the answer which
e should obtain, and he was now about to show to their
Lordships that every one of these impossibilities had actually
appened. He would pass by the statement of the Earl of
I.3igrimm in his letter, in which he stated that the ringleaders
bad eon induced to plead guilty, because whoever read the
Whole passage would perceive that he was using an ordinary
loose f„..npf expression which meant pleading guilty, and he
Would ref:sr to another point, which stood upon very different
1ig:1.741s- In the first place the Earl of Durham said that these
confiss.sed. Now he was bound in justice to say that
Wolfred Nelson and the other persons, by their friends in
America and in this country, peremptorily denied their
Pleading guilty or confessing ; they said that a paper was
handed to them for their signature, which contained acon-
fession of their guilt, but they respectfully declined to sign
the paper; that no objection was made to their confessing
having been guilty of resistance to the Government, but they
Positively denied that they had traitorously, or even sedi-
tiously, or rebelliously resisted the Government. He ad-
e2ltftted that those persons were willing to go to the Bermudas,
Fitt there was a reason why he could' understand this. The
2,1117 law which had been introduced into Canada by Sir
-Kobel-a Peel, and which had been found to work admirably,
was only- a temporary Act; it was experimental, and it ex-
pined iii 1 f 534, when a new Bill was introduced. Then came
an the unfortunate dissensions between the two Houses of As-
sembly, wh en the Upper House flung out the Jury Bill be-
cause the Lower House flung out the Taxes Bill. There was
therefore nose no jury trial according to Sir Robert Peel's
Bill, but they reverted to the old jury system, which gave
the sheriff, who was removable at the pleasure of the Go-
vernor, the power of selecting the jury, so that Nelson and
the others and here he must say that he was informed that
Nelson was a respectable man, and one who had the confi-
dence of his fellow-countrymen (but, however, that might be
i-ao or not), but if he were ever so bad a man and ever so
uilty his (Lord Brougham's) observations would apply just
S. z much as if he was the most respectable man in the world,
be csause it was always against men of less pure character that ;w-
-hit) ni acts were directed, thus entrenching themselves in the
nett ral feelings of men when they wished to overstep the
bone, Is of law—that was a reason why these persons
Should prefer going to Bermuda, they being aware, as they
now au `nutted, that they could not be detained there a mo-
ment; t hat as soon as they were three miles from the shore,
nere th c jurisdiction of the Admiral began, they might
'log an ac tion against the Captain for false imprisonment
4rheheii7a r ahem on board ; that the first ship they hailed
Ight to go on board of, and go to this country, or
bac,y k li
to Cal lade i! they wished. But they did not plead
guiity, or tn, e any confession. If taley were disposed to
plead
guilty .11acy won. de go before court and jury, and
eourtn;
Plead the gig e g.c guilty. They were not taken before any
oatinvvdelivi ~,eginaelarother question suggested itself. It was said
that in Canada could be found to convict these
•
persons upon owe! confession. Why, in such a case the
.ItlrY would 1, ‘e
nothing .
to do. If they were of sound mind
they must e, l'aveica them for pleading guilty ; there would be
fo .1! the jury to 'lila and consequently they must
I_4" been conVieted.. If, therefore,
those persons had been
Z.Posed to plead guilty, they would do what was done every
at the I Dld Bailey, they would tai.ce them before a jury,
have their I ilea entered upon the record, and sentence passed
11/j a Matter of course, and Government might by negotia-
'on corer iilte that sentence to transportation by making
terms
g wi';:la the parties. for them to agree to go to the Bar-
(n. a.ny other colony. The Earl of Durham said that
wontld riot send them to a penal colony. Was it
Ttain that the Bermudas was not a penal colony ?
It I,v,as a penal colony ; there wee forced work there.
si--Cl"eara shear, hear.) But this was perfectly immaterial ;
or Wisetlact• it was a penal colony or not did not affect his
atgu went, He bad already stated that it was his deliberate
cPW.lan that the proceedings that had taken place were illegal
under the tern's of the Act as it stood, and all that be had to
do in this Bill -was to state that there were doubts, for every
-awyer must agree in saying that to doubt whether a thing
Was right or wrong was sufficient to induce them to pass a
declaratory Act, uoless, indeed, some one were to get up and
slay that they were All of them clearly in the wrong, and that
there was no doubt bat they were wrong. What he had stated
referred to the first branch of the case, and that was by far
the most inconsiderable. What would be said of that part
of the ordinance' which condemned all those men who were
snot in the province, who bad not only never been tried, but
faith whom no communication had taken place, who did not
lenow that the ordinance existed, who had no notice of the
`ttention in order that they might oppose it—those men who
ha i never confessed, but who positively denied, many of them,
allea-peipation in last winter's revolt—men who did not con-
fesg
aeon like Nelson, that they admitted th fact, but des
wore:ice, but men who denied both thee fact and the
itired tla •„gg geguld he said of a ,reposition
ereee a— so inomtious,
fact, necessary
that t, ed the on:, to pass an Act of at-
tai'hiler vas
t,.hc setting foot eeross the Canedien fionder, al-
g „lie- was untried, unpe,elsecuted, unheard, ignorant
of Ae, and wit;giut notice of the At, and without a
day bein'el,. egged on efiglch they might appea: and stand their
. az ea,

trial even according to the bad jury law of Canada.—( Hear,
hear.) But all this had been done. This was the case be-
fore their Lordships. In the highest Court of Judicature in
the world, in the highest Court of British justice, where the
hair of a man's head could not be touched without full boar-
ing, open investigation, and fair trial, he need no: ask whether
such proceedings ought, to be condemned ? But it was said
that the Earl of Durham and his Council, who were on the
spot, knew better than they here could what steps it was most
fitting to take. True they were upon the spot, and for that
reason he and his Council would best know how to execute the
law, and for that they bad given powers, but they gave lio
power to pass Bills of attaindereagainst absent men ; he had
no power to pass them at all, but it was clearly illegal to pass
them against absent men without notice ; it was a violation of
the power given, admitting for a minute, although he altoge-
ther denied it, that the power was given to pass Bills of at-
tainder, that such had been the case as regarded M. Pa-
pineau and fourteen others. With respect to Bills of attainder,
although they were only justified by. necessity, yet they had
been se frequent as to have estabhshed a kind of practice
which was consistent with justice and common sense. Lord
Chief Justice Cumming, in his excellent Treatise, said,
that in bad times where a person was in the country, he
might have been condemned without an appearance, but
where a person was absent, the course was to fix a day, so
as to enable him, if he chose, to make his defence. In the
times of the Plantagenets, the Tudors, the Stuarts, and even
in their own times this was the uniform practice. This was the
case in the time of Edward 11., in 1322, in Despencer'a case ;
and in the case of Sir John Rmick, by the Bth of William 111.
The very title of the Bill in the case of Fenwick and the other
persons implicated in the assassination plot contained the
words "unless they render themselves to justice upon a cer-
tain day, four months from the date of the passing of this
Act." Again, in the first of George I. there was an Act to
attaint James Duke of Ormond, unless he rendered himself
on a certain day named, and that was six months from the
date of the passing of the Act. And what said that illus-
trious and eminent lawyer Lord Ellenborough on a similar
occasion, upon a celebrated case that was heard before
him ? Sir Vicary Gibbs, on that occasion, stated that the
law was that that Court (the Court of King's Bench)
was bound by a foreign judgment ; he produced the foreign
judgment, showed the Seal of the Court, and proved the
Seal to be genuine and the handwriting of the Judge.
What was Lord Ellenborough's celebrated answer? He said
he did not deny that to be the law, but he said that
all power must be exercised rationally—all laws had re-
ference to right reason; and although lie admitted what
was stated to be the law, and that the power of a foreign
Court was supreme in its own dominions, yet the law of Eng-
land was binding upon him and the Jury, and he could not
traverse it. It appeared to him not only not to be consistent
with reason and justice, hut contrary to the. first principles of
reason and justice, that either in a civil or criminal
proceeding a man should be condemned without being heard.
—( Hear, hear.) The question before the Court was whether,
is the absence of a person of the name of Buchanan, nailing a
notice on the Court doors was sufficient. Mr. Buchanan was
no more in the island of Tobago than M. Papineau and the
other fourteen were in Lower Canada. But if it were so
vicious, so contrary to all reason and justice, that any man
should, in his absence, and unheard, and unnotified, be con-
demned even in a civil cause, how much more ia a criminal
Court, and and upon a capital felony, was it contrary to all
the principles of reason and justice. But again, had each of
these cases been made the subject of deliberate and separate
legislation? Were the circumstances of each inquired into?
The answer would be, of course. lie would show that the
very reverse was the fact. In the first place there were two
gross misnomers, than which there could be no greater
evidence of the inconsiderate speed and the want of due
deliberation with which those proceedings were accom-
panied. For instance, in the list of the parties ac-
cused one was called by the name of Edmund Burke
O'Calleghae, whereas, as he was informed, his real name
was Edmund Baiiev O'Callaghan. F this man had been
indicted under a false name lie could net have been con-
victed. Another person was named in the ordinance John
Regan, whereas he was named after one of the greatest law-
yers in this or any other country, namely, Jeremy Bentham,
and his name, therefore, was Jeremy Bentham Regan.
With regard to another of the parties, Louis Perot, it was to
be observed that he did not go away after the outbreak.
At the time it occurred he was in the United States, on
the business of his house of trade, and was absent on that
business, and remained so, because his brother, in a scuffle
unconnected with this affair altogether, was killed by a
musket shot. He did not abscond then, as the preamble—
which was the ground of the whole measure—stated, after
warrants charging him w ith high treason were issued against
him. True, be did not go back ; but was it the same thing
on which to ground a Bill of attainder, whether he absconded
or whether he did not return from his lawful occupation in
the United States to his lawful occupation in Quebec ? As
he before said, the ground of the proceedings against these
parties was, that there were warrants of high treason against
them, and that they absconded. Now, as regarded Mr. Wright,
there was no charge of high treason against him, but a
warrant of sedition, which was a misdemeanour, punishable
wily by fine and imprisonment. Nevertheless, the decree
against him was death. It was to be hoped that Mr. Wright
had not suffered the penalty pronounced againSt him. He put
it to their Lordships with ail respect, would they, if they had
known that, under colour of this Act, these things would
have been done—would they—lie was confident they would
not, for their consent to passing it was wrung from them by
the representations made to them of the necessity of the case
—would they have set their hands to the Act if they had been
told that such enormities were to be committed under it, and
were understood by its legal authors to be its true intent and
meaning? He answered for the Peers of England, and an-
swered, No.—(Cheers.) Their Lordships had now answered
for themselves. They were incapable of sanctioning such an
Act as this. They never would have consented to such a
construction being put upon it. Those who were lawyers
knew it would not bear such an interpretation, and those who
did not belong to the legal profession by the light of their
common sense were guided to the same conclusion. But he
threw altogether out of view this consideration as immate-
rial to the passing of this Bill. If this Act did not bear the
construction he put upon it, if he was not right in his inter-
pretation of the law, nor those legal persons whom be had
consulted on the subject, and who entirely concurred with him,
nevertheless they must pass this Bill, to declare what the
proper construction of the law was. If, on the other hand—
for the dilemma was perfect—he was right in his law, if an
improper construction had been put upon the Act by the Go-
vernment of Canada, then, past all question, this Bill must be
passed, because doubts were entertained on the subject here.
The only question was, whether they were in error on the
other side of the water, as he said they were, or whether the
error was here. The Noble and Learned Lord then pro-
ceeded, in a very low tone of voice, to refer to the provisions
in his Bill which related to the indemnity. He could not un-
dertake to indemnify for all that had been done. There might
have been other breaches of the law for which he should be
very loth at once, and not knowing what they were, to give
an indemnity. He thought an indemnity ought to be given as
regarded the nine persons said to be sent to the Bermudas ;
and he had framed this Bill accordingly—( Ilear)—but (as we
understood) he would not grant an indemnity to those who
had done so strange a thing as to condemn to death
persons who bad not had the benefit of any form of trial
whatever, nor in such an extraordinary case as the condem-
nation of a person for high treason who had been guilty of
only a misdemeanor. It was admitted by the Government
that illegal things had been done to a certain extent.
He differed with them greatly as to the extent, and he also
differed with them materially as to the construction to be
put upon the Act. That a Declaratory Act and an Indem-
nity Bill were necessary was quite clear. How far the indem-
nity and how far the declaration were to be carried was an-
other question. He had felt it his duty to search for prece-
dents, and he had found one which completely met this case—
he should be sorry to say that this was any parallel to it in its
features of gross and culpsble error, but he was speaking of
the principle. The Noble and Learned Lord then referred
to a Bill which had been drawn up by Lord Mansfield, which
was the subject of great discussion. It was an embargo. case.
It stated that the acts in question were not justified by law,
but ought to be by Act of Parliament. He proposed a
similar preamble to his Bill. He had heard with astonish-
ment this argument used against the course he proposed—
that their Lordships did not wish knity to be shown to those
individuals who were named in the ordinances as the objects
of it, and that was the reason why they opposed the vigour
which the Government had shown beyond the law. He did
net think that in the whole course of his political life he
had observed any misrepresentation more gross or extravagant
than this. It was not the lenity shown to Dr. W. Nelson
and his late associates that he complained of, but he did
complain that they were not sentenced according to law, and
• that they were sent to the Bermudas, when the law did not
authorise their being sent beyond Canada. But what became
of this talk of lenity, and mercy, and kindness, and forbear-
ance with regard to M. Papineau and his fourteen asso-
ciates ? —and that was the gravamen of his charge. Was it
mercy to them, was it lenity, kindness, or forbearance, to
condemn them to death without first giving them a hear-
ing—to pass a Bill of attainder against them, they being
ignorant of the intention to pass it ? Was it mercy to allow
them not one of those safeguards granted to traitors in the
worst of times under the Plantagencts, the Stuarts, or the
Tudors ? Was it mercy, or kindness, or forbearance to con-
demn them unheard. and even ignorant that their case was
under consideration? A more extravagant, a more outra-
geous mis-statement of the whole question at issue never
was ventured in any argument by any persons, whatever the
degree of heat occasioned by the conflict of controversy.
Every one knew that the law of England held men to be
innocent till they were pronounced to be, guilty. He gave
the benefit of that just maxim of jurisprudence to M. l'a-
pintau and his associates. • Till they were tried he had a
right to assume they were not guilty ; and even if they
proceeded by legislation instead of trying them—if they
prosecuted by att under instead of by triel by jury, it
was in that case only right that the privilege should be
theirs of • being considered not guilty, unless by that
Act of attainder they were afforded the cespertunity of
corning home, and on a certain day surrendering themselves to
be tried.--( Hear, hear, hear.) Every one of these persons
was absent from Canada at the time of these proceedings, and
they were bound by the law of England to assume that they
would hs.ve returned if a day had been fixed for their doing so,
as be law there ought to have been. Such was the case or had
to make out against these oolinauces, and wash was the ease he
had to submit to their Lordships in favour of this Bill. Arbi-
trary power, said the Noble asel Learned Lori in cot:du:don,
has been temporarily placed in the hands of the Governor of
this province, not, however, to exasperate the rople, but to
save them from the effects of their own violence, and to pro-
tect the innocent from the art:; and practices of the desigiting
and taahlknt, It wii to enable the Government, l 7 having,

a strong hand, to protect with it the peace of the Canadians ;
" but, above all things, to enable you to look f award to that
day when with joy you as well as they—and you who made
the Act ought to feel the joy more than themselves—it was
with a view to that happy day, when after the restoration of
peace and security to the colony, you will be enabled to give
back the Constitution, and cement more strongly than ever the
connection between the two countries. Then I do implore
your Lordships to act on the present occasion in the way best
calculated to bring that happy restoration about, and to preserve
and strengthen the connection between these Provinces and the
parent State."—( Loud cheers.)
Lord GLENELG entirely concurred with the closincs
words of his Noble and Learned Friend, that the powers of the
late Act were given to protect the innocent and peaceable
inhabitants of the colony, and to save the guilty from the
consequences of their own violence. He agreed with his
Noble Friend, also, as to the general principles on which he
stated the Act ought to be carried into effect. He fully ad-
mitted that when such large powers were given they ought
to be exercised with great discretion, and as sparingly as
possible. The Act itself provided that the powers it conferred
were not in any degree to be exercised beyend what the
exigency of the case required. The whole question at issue
turned on the propriety of the proceedings which had been
the subject of so much animadversion, and on the exigency
that gave rise to them. That was really the practical ques-
tion before them. His Noble and Learned Friend argued
against the ordinances of the Canadian Government that
they were irregular, that they were illegal, that the Governor
had no right to issue such ordinances ; he argued fur-
ther, that in issuing them he contravened the intention of
Parliament in passing the Act, and that there were various
circumstances connected with these measures which aggra-
vated their injustice and illegality. His Noble and Learned
Friend had stated much for which they had the authority of
Isis Noble Friend alone; to that authority he (Lord
Glenelg) was disposed to pay due respect, but he could not
allow it to be infallible or peremptory in a case like this
which was now under discussion. In allusion to the
first class of offences, his Noble and Learned Friend
had said that he did not believe the individuals had
confessed themselves guilty. No doubt his Noble and
Learned Friend was persuaded that such was the case, but he
must be allowed to observe that this was an assumption at
variance with the ordinances, in which it was. proclaimed
that they had acknowledged and confessed themselves
guilty. His Noble and Learned Friend said he had his in-
formation on authority, and doubtless he believed it correct ' •
but lie ( Lord Glenelg) claimed for the Government of Canada
net to be condemned on an authority known to the Noble
Lord alone, and in complete contradiction to the words of the
ordinance. With respect to another of the ordinances, his
Noble and Learned Friend had quoted several names in proof
of the incorrect manner in which these documents were

framed. His Noble and Learned Friend said, when last he
touched on this question, he was not able to express more
than his belief that a proper degree of care bad not been ex-
ercised; but he could now supply the deficiency, having it
in his power to state that several of the names were not ac-
curately given. He (Lord Glenelg) was not in a condi-
tion to contradict that declaration ; but ho felt himself
called on to express his hope that their Lordships would not
allow a mere declaration of that description to weigh with
them in estimating the merits of the Government. His
Noble and Learned Friend had denounced the ordinances with
great force and eloquence a violation of the law both of
Canada and England ; but what was the practical con-
clusion to which he arrived at the close of his violently con-
demnatory harangue? If the ordinances were, as he de-
scribed them, acts of gross injustice, whet was the natural
conclusion to which their Lordships would arrive ? Was it
to bring in a Bill which distinctly stated that they were
for the service of the public ? After hearing the severe
denunciations in which his Noble and Learned Friend
indulged in the course of his speech against the Government
of Canada for issuing such ordinances, might it nut be expected
that the disposition of their Lordships would be so far from
,ipproving them as to say, " Let us not tolerate them for a
element ; let them not disgrace British justice, British
honour, and British law ; let us declare that they shall no
longer offend—that they shall no longer insult the country ?"
What, however, said his Noble Friend in this Bill ? In the
second clause were these words, " which ordinances cannot be
justified by law, but are so much for the service of the public,
that they ought to be justified by an Act of Parliament."—
( Hear.) Why, what a declaration was that, after such strong
denunciations as the Noble and Learned Lord had indulged
in I The Noble and Learned Lord had said they might make
e hat alterations they pleased in Committee, but was that
the proper way of dealing with so important a matter ? The
great question was whether these ordinances ware justified or
iwtoetr
ebyb
et
fhoer
ce
crx iogi
ne
gn cy o
intof
ct hoemcnalsiet ,t
eaen ha
,d
would
d g
theyecr
l red ev
etrhsa he
et
theirty
decision when they came there ? Taking his Noble and
Learned Friend's view that the law was doubtful, let them
look at the position of Lord Durham, who found himself
called on to take some step on his own responsibility. What
did he do ? He took the course which the public service re-
quired, and those who most affected his measures felt themselves
compelled to vote in Parliament that those measures, so ille-
gally adopted, were "measures taken for the service or the
public, and though not justified by law, were such as ought to Le
justified by Parliament." He felt that he might rest the neces-
sity of the measures of his Noble Friend on this very declaration in
the Bill of the Noble andLearnedLord ; he felt that he could not
be called on to prove that they were required by the exigency
of the case, because they had the testimony of the Noble and
Learned Lord himself to that important fact. He would now
advert to the question of indemnity. It was not usual, he
believed, to pass encase-es of indemnity till the matters to
which they referred had been brought to a close.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) It was not usual to grant an indemnity
for a current transaction. But this Bill contained what he
must describe us an unexampled proposition ; it provided
indemnity for the continued exercise of an illegal act; and
here was an act which was illegal, and the authors of which
were liable to certain penalties, but it declared not only that
they should be indemnified against those which they had al-
ready incurred, but also against those to which they would
otherwise be liable hereafter. This was surely a new species
of legislation. He believed it quite unexampled in the history
of legislation to pass an Indemnity Act which was to operate
prospectively. The general purport and scope of this Bill
were that certain doubts were entertained its to the illegality
of the proceedings of the Government of Canada. Tee 3",
doubts having been entertained, it was proposed to pass a '
de-
claratory Act, saving those doubts ; and at the same time to
pass a measure of indemnity for the protection of tee parties
who had acted on the doubtful construction. Of course the
necessity of legislation or, the subject turned on the weight
that was to be attached to the doubts entertained as to the ille-
gality of the proceeding of the Canadian Governmsenlise
,•Now,
mil very great submission to the learned authorities that had
been referred to, lie could not agree to that proposition of
his Noble and Learned Friend, contained in the first
section of this Bill, which stated those doubts to exist ;
and thereupon proceed to enact as did. the u
clauses.—( Hear, hear.) He had already stated with reguent.
spect
to one part of the ordinance, that he admitted its in-
validity. He alluded to the extension of the uperation of the
Act to the Bermudas ; there could be no doubt but that was
an error. But on that subject he begged to say, that in his
opinion the better course to pursue would be fur tho Govern-
ment to writo to the Governor of the Bermudas, informing
hint that the parties who had been sent there were free—( A
laugh from the Opposition)—that they were not then subject
to the restrictions which the Act imposed. That he consi-
dered the preferable course. With reference to the legality
of the other Acts of the Government, and the necessity for a
measure of indemnity, he had some further observati ens to
offer to their Lordships. By the Canadian Act, the Gover-
nor was invested with the same powers of legislation as
the Legislature of Canada possessed previous to the passing of
that Act, with certain exceptions, which he would not now
stop to advert to. The legislative powers of the Canadian
Legislature were as ample as those of any of our Colonial Le-
gi datures. His Noble and Learned Friend had argued, with
reference to the Act of 1774, that by that Act the criminal
law of this country was transferred to Canada, and conse-
quently, it was not competent to the Colonial Legislature to
make any change in that law ; but he (Lord Glenelg) begged
to say, in the first place, and without fear of contradiction, it was
clear that when they spoke of the transfer of the erirninal law of
England to a colony, it could not be meant that the law of Eng-
land should be applied to such colony in the exact st ate in which
it existed in this country, no change being made in it to
adapt it to the peculiarities, to the habits, feelings, and cus-
toms and institutions of a state of society differing materially
from our own. In fact, when the criminal law of England
had been transferred to our colonies it had always been sub-
ject to certain modifications such as the peculiar circumstances
of those colonies required. He need aot name the colonies;
the rule had been observed in all ; indeed it was obvious that
no other principle could have been adopted, for in some very
heavy punishments were considered necessary for offences
which in others people might be deterred front committineg
by punishments comparatively light. The Act of 1774 tela?ch
transferred the criminal law of England to Canada, provid
for changes that might be necessary at different times ant
under different circumstances. lie contended, then, that
Colonial Legislature of Canada was empowered to make
thete ordinances by the Act of 1774, and the present: Go-
vernor of Canada being invested with the power wh.idnanees
pre-
viously belonged to the Colonial Legislature, the di
lic
nevelt clew,
cAocutl dt
on%ovth
ibc ch
hoenNsviadse. r er de
fei w
ere, ,psaur
bti
jceuelta, r w ocr'
Lieu-
tt oe
nsaunctl-i
Ga lot,eer ar
nt ioort: soar: led
by arid with the consent of the
oammnei an
from time to time determine and cause to be declared 711
nd"dmeern-
itns
Ca sh i
et hi. efoGr ot
ce r
tai ti)rar.e,.
finned
manner here ifter described." This provisien was eon
by the Act of 1791.
The Earl of DEVON read the lath section.
•h section
Lord GLENELG said that the object of the ,
Legislative Couned
_st,he
was to provide that no punishment should be
nnpoisle“,on
any ordinances of the existing local government e)
of
three months' imprisonment and fine without the consent
her Majesty in Council.—( Hear, hear.) le could not be de-
nied, however, that the exigencies of the present oceast.l
were such as to justify a departure from such a regulation
as this. It was perfectly competent for the Governor-G`ines
ral of the Canadas in Council to exercise a discretion as to
the measte es which the necessity of the case
require.. The Noble arid Learned Lord had referred to the
proviso in the Canada Bill, which -• •t .d the Governor-
p.
General from " • '• rel.ea ing,, suspending, or altering, an)
vision of any Act of the Impel ial Parliament of Greet
13..itain, or of any Act of the Legislature cf Lover Canada,
stste to their Lordships what the history of thie
are nue; conoituted, repealing or altering any such Act of
the Imperiel - Legend to
pa pl.
opts,
ja? roe
,d,r
jt
so,
re (Lord Glenelg) Legg
en I what the intention of its author, Sir William Foile.tl,
was in introducing it into the Bill, as far as he ( Lord 31`-
nelg) had bees, able, upon very good audierity, to ascertain

what that history and what that intention was. It origi-
nated in this way :—During the discussion of this question
in the other House Government was asked by some Members
on the opposite benches whether they meant that the Bill
should authorise the Governor in Council to alter the Act of
1791, or any Act relating to tenures; to this question Go-
vernment replied, that they had no such intention, but
they thought that the period would be so short that
the Governor and Council would not interfere with the
subject at all. Upon which it was observed, that as there
was no such intention, the clearest and best way would be
to insert a proviso on the subject in the Bill, so as to remove
all possible doubts. It was clear, from the terms of the
proviso, that it was intended to have a limited operation.
The Act of 1791 gave the local Legislature the power of
varying or repealing the law respecting Clergy reserves.
There was an Act of the Imperial Parliament, of 1824 or
1825, which gave the local Legislature the power to alter
the Tenures Act, and there was an Act of the local Legisla-
ture which did alter the Tenures Act ; and it appeared to him
( Lord Glenelg) very apparent, from the terms of the pro-
vision itself, that it was simply intended that these Acts
should not come within the power of the Governor in
Council. He (Lord Glenelg) could see no grounds for
doubting the legality of these ordinances with reference to
this proviso. The Noble and Learned Lord had considerably
narrowed his ground towards the latter part of his speech :
he set out with asserting that under this proviso it was im-
possible for the Governor of Canada to interfere with any
Acts passed by the Legislature of either country but he afe
terwards limited himself to protesting against the Governor
making any new laws relating to privilegia to particular in-
dividuals.—( Hear, hear.) Did the Noble and Learned Lord
forget that the Governor in Council had full power to suspend
the Habeas Corpus Act, that he might invent new forms of
treason? Surely, then, it was absurd to say that he was nor
competent to apply himself to the punishment of particular
offenders.—( Hear.) He could see no grounds for such argu-
ments. It appeared to him that the whole matter came to
this, that this was not meant as a declaratory Act, but as an Act
to restrain the powers given to the Governor General of Canada
by the former Act—( Hear)—that was, in fact, a new law, pro-
posed on this supposition that the Governor of Canada had
larger powers than he ought to possess ; and this would bring
under consideration the whole question as to the powers with
which that functionary had been invested. It certainly did
appear to him (Lord Glenelg) very extraordinary that after
giving Lord Durham the large powers rendered necessary
by the peculiar and perilous circumstances under which he
went to preside over the province, any attempt should be
made to narrow his powers, or abridge his capabilities for
usefulness. ( Hear, hear, hear.) It was essen-
tial to the welfare of Canada, and the interest of this
country, that no such attempt should be sanctioned by Par-
liament.—( Hear, hear.) The province, it was true, was now
happily in a state of tranquillity; but there still existed in it
the elements of agitation.—( Hear, hear.) There were in it
many persons ready to seize the first favourable moment for
poisoning the minds of the Canadian people, and to delude
them once more into acts of rebellion.—( Hear, hear.) There
were persons there who were ready to avail themselves of any
opportunity for counteracting the efforts of the Governor
General ; and itovas essential to take care that the efforts of
such persons should not have a chance of success. Whatever
Noble Lords might think of Lord Durham's laws and ordi-
nances in themselves, no person could doubt as to the necessity
there existed for excluding the offenders who had been referred
to from the province, and of preventing their return; and, in
his decided opinion, the Government there would have grossly
failed in its duty had it not taken steps for this purpose.—
( Hear, hear.) The presence of these persons in Canada
would be highly detrimental to its welfare. He felt it due
to the safety of Canada, and to the best interests of the Crown,
in reference to that province, to resist the proposed Bill.
The Earl of RIPON thought the Noble and Learned Lord
had fully justified the Bill which he called for. As to that
part of the Act which it was allowed was not consistent with
law, he did not see how the Governor-General, and those who
acted with him, could escape the penalties they had subjected
themselves to, without a Bill of indemnity.—( Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord seemed to think the difficulty as to the de-
portation of the parties to the Bermudas might easily be got
over, by just telling the Governor of that Colony to let them
go away again, which appeared to him ( Lord Ripon) a most
extraordinary notion. Either the parties were legally sent
there, or they were illegally sent there ' • and if they were ille-
gally sent there, the difficulty in which the deporting party
was involved did not appear to him to be so very lightly got
rid of.--( Hear, hear.) The Crown had the power of disallow-
ing any Colonial Act within two years after its passing; here
was an Act confessedly inconsistent with law, and which
could not be carried into effect ; and as the Crown could not
disallow any such Act in part, the most effectual mode of
proceeding in this case would be for the Crown to disallow
the Act without any further delay.---( Hear, hear.) Steps
ought immediately to be taken to obviate the inconveniences
arising from such absurd and extravagant ordinances.—( Hear. )
The LORD CHANCELLOR said there could be no
doubt as to the fact that these ordinances could not legally
operate beyond the limits of the province. The point was as
to their legality within those limits. The Bill now proposed
proceeded on the supposition of a doubt as to whether the
Act, as it stood, did or did not authorize the proceedings
which had taken place in the province, and the Acts of
attainder which bad been made. It seemed to him that
there could be no well-founded doubt on the matter.—( Hear,
hear.) The proceedings which had been resorted to had
precedents in all countries where occasions of similar neces-
sity had arisen.—( Hear, hear.) Whether the nature of each
case was such as to Justify the course which had been
adopted by the Governor-General—whether he bad taken
care to make sufficient inquiry in every instance prior to
taking active measures against the parties, there was no
information to enable their Lordships to decide, nor had
Government at present any means of giving that informa-
tion.—( Hear, hear.) He (the Lord Chancellor) would,
therefore, abstain from entering upon this topic, and proceed
to that part of the subject which it was practicable to dis-
cuss. Whether or not the existing Government in Canada,
appointed under the Act passed this Session, had exercised
their legislative powers discreetly, it was perfectly clear that
under that Act they had full power to make occasional and
temporary local Acts affecting individuals or classes of indi-
viduals.—( Hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord had assumed
that this point was doubtful in the Imperial Act of tbis Ses-
sion. Now, that Act, in so many words, recited that it shall
be lawful, after proclamation made, for the Governor of the
Lower province of Canada in Council to make such laws or
ordinances for the peace, welfare, and good government of the
said province, as the Legislature of Lower Canada, as now
constituted, is empowered to make; and that all laws or ordi-
nances so made, subject to the provisions hereinafter contained
for disallowance thereof by her Majesty, and for receiving cer-
tain laws or ordinances for the signification of her Majesty's
oessure therein, shall have the like force and effect as laws
passed before the passing of this Act by the Legislative Coun-
cil and Assembly of the said province of Lower Canada, and
assented to by her Majesty." This clause clearly gave
to the new Governor in Council the (same powers which
the Legislature of the province formerly exercised, and
there could be no doubt that this Legislature had
full power to pass any Acts it deemed fitting, under the
Act of 1791, and had the clause stopped here there could
not have been a moment's question on this point. When the
Noble Lord cited the Act of 1774, reference was made to the
fifteenth section of that Act, which directed that " none of
the said ordinances shall have the power of imposing any
uhiseseent beyond three months' imprisonment," but this
tad reference only to ordinances made by the Governor in
Council up to the period when a Representative Assembly was
riven to the province, which took place in 1791, after which
tine the Legislature of the province had exercised full legisla-
tive power until the Act passed which invested the present
Goaernor-General with the powers formerly enjoyed by that
Legislature. Did the clause contain no other words than he
(tile Lord Chancellor) had recited, there would have been no
g=ounds for even raising att argument upon the subject of the
l ent of the Governor-General's power to make such laws as
he thought fit. There was, however, this proviso :—" That it
shell r ot be lawful for any such law or ordinance to impose any
new tax, duty., rate, or impost, or to alter the law in the pro-
ince respecong the constitution or composition of the Legis-
vlative Assembly thereo , or respectine the right of any per-
son to vote at the election of Members of the said Assembly, or
respecting the qualdieetion of such Members ; nor shall it' be
lawful by any such law to repeal, suspend, or alter any pro-
vision of any Act of the Imperial Parliament of Great Bri-
tain, or of any Act of the Legislature of Lower Canada, as
now constituted, repealing or altering any such Act of
the Imperial Parliament." The Noble Lord had already
stated for what purpose this proviso had been introduced.
The object for which these words were introduced was
obvious, and he could have hardly ;believed that they could
be misconceived. If it were not as he had described, it
would be giving the Government of Lower Canada power to
alter anything connected with the criminal law of that coun-
try, andiby another part of the Bill it would be restraining the
exercise of such power. Tee words referred to in the proviso
had no such restraining power as was contended by his Noble
and Learned Friend. The declaratory Bill of his Noble and
Learned Friend would leave, however, the whole difficulties of
the case untouched, for he had proposed to enact that they
should not make any haves or ordinances touching individuals,
but at the same time proposed that the power should be conti-
nued as regarded the multitude. This Bill left the doubts which
it was alleged existed exactly where they were. He concluded
that there was no doubt as to the construction of the Act ;
and, therefore, that there was no necessity to pass a de-
cleratory Bill. The second clause of the Bill of his Noble
and Learned Friend was of the most extraordinary nature,
and after declaring that certain acts of the Governor of Ca-
nada were illegal, it went on to make them legal, and to al.
low such proceedings to take place for the future. It would
be most extraordinary for Parliament to declare that these
acts were illegal, and then to say that the Governor of Ca-
nada or any person under him might coatinuc to act upon
them. The proposed indemnity, therefore, was for what was
clearly considered an excess of power, and it was proposrd at
the same time to continue this CICCES of power. He would
then ask did Noble Lords really feel that there were serious
doubts as to the construction of these Acts, and as to the
Power in the hands of the Governor of Canada to pass Acts
of attainder. If this power was to be taken from tied Noble
Earl, they would leave his Government less than was pos-
sessed by the Govern rent of the Upper Province, from which
it was not thought 'recess try to take away the Legislative As -
5:111,b1Y. The Governor of Canada, however, who was placed
ii•, the situation of the Legislature, was not to have this power,
notwithstanding the difileulty of the situation in which he was
Pbcial and the daneers in which that colony was involved.
He was sure, therefore, they would not take this power away
from the Noble Earl, which was essential to all Government,
amid, above all, to one in the situation of Cana la.
Lord LYN DHUR ST felt anxious to address a
.few obser-
vations to their Lordships on the question before tnean

was ready to admit that the Noble Earl at the head of the
Government of Canada, whom be was•proud to call his friend,
I had acted throughout these transactions with the best passible
motives and intentions. lf, however, there was anything
illegal in the conduct of that Noble Earl, even though he
(Earl Durham) himself might not be aware of it, surely they
were bound to interfere to protect him from the consequences
of such illegal acts. Their Lordships, as the guardians of
the laws of the country, were in a special manner bound to
interfere for his protection. If their Lordships were satin.
fled that there was anything illegal in the ordinances is-
sued by the Earl of Durham, as Governor of Canada, he
deemed it quite clear that their Lordships ought at once
interfere and put a stop to the mischief; to prevent its
being carried further. They had been told by the Noble
Lord opposite (Lord Glenelg), towards the close of his
speech, that the question they had to consider divided itself
into two parts, and each of these parts demanded a distinct
consideration. The first part of the question related to those
parties who were stated to have confessed their guilt, and who
had been transported to Bermuda. The other part of the
question related to those who were absent from the province,
and against whom, notwithstanding judgment had been pro-
nounced, and who were to be deemed liable to the punishment
of death in case they returned to the province. With respect
to the first part, the Noble Lord opposite admitted that the Go-
vernor of Canada, and his Council had been guilty of an illegal
act in transporting these parties to Bermuda, but, that with
respect to the second part, he considered the proceedings per-
fectly legal and justifiable, more particularly recollecting
against whom this judgment had issued. All this had
been stated on a former night, and the illegality of the proceed-
ings taken by the Governor in Council appeared to be alto-
gether admitted. It was admitted that the ordinances issued by
the Noble Earl were illegal. It was also admitted that the No.
ble Earl had assumed an authority not conferred upon him by
the Act of Parliament', under which he held his powers. It i
was admitted, and could not be denied, that these per- I '
sons had been placed under restraint contrary to law; that i
they were illegally detained in custody; that they were held '
as prisoners, and kept in restraint contrary to the law of the
land. He must say that though the Governor had a right to
go as far as the law admitted hint to go, yet he had no right to
go beyond the law. He could not conceive, when they ad-
mitted that the power was vested in the Crown by the Consti-
tution to disallow these acts, he could not conceive why they
should not interfere to disallow these acts. It was their duty
to interfere. Unless he beard a distinct assurance from the
Noble Lord opposite that what had been ilegally done would
be disallowed, he should feel it to be his duty to vote for the
Bill of the Noble and Learned Lord.--( Hear, hear.) Why
a Bill of indemnity should be introduced bad been much
disputed. The Bill before their Lordships had been made
the subject of much cavil, and sonic of the phrases which
it contained bad been objected to. But if the Bill con-
tained any phrases that were found to be objectionable, surely,
when the Bill came to be discussed in Committee, those
phrases might be altered or excluded from the Bill. He was
sure, however, that these grounds of objection were untenable,
and that no such phrases would be found in the Bill. He had
seen the precedent from which the clauses of the present Bill
had been taken. The Bill which formed that precedent had
been framed by one of the first lawyers that had ever presided
in any of the Courts of this country.—( Hear, hear.) But
surely the necessity of passing this. Bill could not be doubted,
unless the Government would give a pledge that they would
take measures to disallow what. bad been done. Just let them
consider in what a st,te they would leave the Governor of
Canada, as well as all those who bad carried his orders into
execeeion. and acted in virtue of his authority. The Noble
Earl would be subject to have proceedings instituted against
him for the violation of the law. He would be subjact to
suits against him, civil as well as criminal. The persons
acting under his authority, even though guilth as of any in.
tention to violate the law, would, nevertheless, be equally
liable to have suits, civil and criminal, instituted against them
for acts done in violation of the law. When those indi.

victuals who had been transported under tile authority of
this ordinance got to Bermuda, they might be advised to
sue out a writ of habeas cerpus, and have the opinion of
a competent judicial tribunal pronounced upon the legality
or illegality of the proceedings by which they had bLen
SO sent there. If on the hearing of the question their
detention should be pronounced illegal, and they should
be discharged, what would be their first acts on their dis-
charge? Would not their first' acts be to institute proceed-
ings against those persons by whom they had been kept in
constraint in the Hand of Bermuda? Would they not com-
mence actions against each and every one of those persons
who had acted under an illegal authority, and would not they
endeavour as eagerly as they could to bring those actions to a
conclusion before the passing of that Bill of indemnity, which
the Noble Lord opposite had told their Lordships that even-
ing it was the intention of the Government to introduce in
the next Session of Parliament.—( A laugh.) Why, the very
Admiral might be liable to have proceedings taken against
him. He believed, indeed, that Sir C. Paget had not interfered
,further than to place these parties on board the ship that was
to convey them to Bermuda; but if that officer, acting upon
the orders of the Noble Earl, should proceed from hie station,
and go with these prisoners to Bermuda, he would be liable to
have civil and criminal proceedings carried on against him, un-
less they passed a Bill of indemnity. They were bound to pass
the whole of the Bill before tlie House, unlcssthc Government
were prepared to act upon the recommendation that had been
given them on a former evening, as well as on the present oc-
casion, and to pledge themselves that these ordinances should
be disallowed. Now, what was the whole cause of the evil?

lie (Lord Lyndhurst) could trace the entire of the evil to the
plain cause—that the Noble Earl had acted contrary to the
spirit of the Act, and without the ail and advice of a corn-
pezent Council. The Act which hal conferred extraordinary
powers upon the Noble Earl had provided against any abuse
of those powers, by providing that the Noble Earl should act
with the aid and concurrence of a Council. What was the

intention of their Lordships and of the Parliament in provid-
ing that the Noble Earl should have the assistance of a
Council ? Was not their intention this, that such Council
should be constituted of five discreet, p,udent, and rave per-
sons, acquainted with the laws, and who would be ;hie so to
advise the Noble Earl as to reconcile and confine his conduct
to a strict conformity with the laws and constitution of this
country ?—( Hear, hear.) He asked their Lordships, when they
passed that law, did they not assume that the Noble Earl would
be assisted by such a substantial Council as that which he had
ventured just now to describe? But did the Noble Earl ap_
point a Council of this description? No such thing. This
appointment of a Council was altogether illusory. It con-
sisted of an Admiral, of a few military officers, and of one in-
dividual belonging to the profession of the law, but who had
never been known to have had any extensive practice in that
profession. In fact, be might, safely say that, with the ex-
caption of the Admiral, all the persons who constituted this
Council were dependents on the Noble Earl. The reason
why their Lordships and the Parliament had provided for the
establishment of a Council was, in order that it might advise,
and, if necessary, controul the conduct of the Noble Earl, in
whose hands Parliament bad placed extraordinary powers.
Now, did their Lordships or anybody else suppose that the
Council which the Noble Earl had• summoned to his assist-
ance would do any such thing ?—( Hear, hear.) Did any
one suppose that they could give that adsice to the Noble
Earl which would enable him to keep his conduct in strict
conformity with the law, cr that they could controul his acts ?
So far as concerned that experience and that acquaintance
with constitutional law so necessary to enable his Lordship to
be properly advised, lie repeated that the appointments made
by the Noble Earl were altogether illusory. This was not the
intention when the Act was passed. It was to this cause—to
the establishment of such a Council as this—that was to be
traced the criginal cause of the evil and the promulgation
of such ordinances as these, and the violation of the law which
had taken place. He agreed with the Noble and Learned
Lord in the opinions he had expressed respecting any doubts
that existed as to the meaning of this Act of Parliament ; and
whatever doubts did exist, he agreed they ought to be cleared
up. By the 14th of Geo. 111., to which reference had been
already made, the criminal law of this country was, by an Act
of Parliament of Great Britain, transferred to the colony of
Lower Canada. The terms in which this transfer was made
were of a marked character, for it was expressed in the Act by
which our criminal code had been extended to Canada, that it
had been to extended in order to give the Canadians the bene-
fit of a lenient and just system of law. That transfer was to be
acted on, not merely in carrying these laws into effect in their
spirit and their principle, but also in the farms of proceeding. It
was provided that no. other rule of law was to be acted upon
but that which the Act of the Parliament of Great Britain had

declared should be the future law of the colony. But it was also
provided that the Governor and the Legislative Council as it
then existed might from time to time, so far as they found it
expedient to alter and modify that law, to suit it to the cir-
cumstances of the colony. Another Act was passed in 1791,
confirming- the former Act, so that it was plain that, by an
Act of the British Parliament, the criminal law of Great Bri-
tain, with all and each of its provisions and forms, was in-
troduced into the laws of Canada. It was clear, so far as de-
pended upon the Parliament of Great Britain, that the crimi-
nal law of this country had been transferred to Canada.
The law with respect to high treason was part of that
law, and it was quite clear that by the operation of the
1411 and 31st of George 111. the law of high treason had
been introduced into Canada. The Legislature of Canada
were confirmed in the power to alter and amend the criminal
law, but they never intefered to alter the law with respect to
high treason. '1 any never interfered to alter the law as it
stood when it was transferred to, and confirmed in, Canada
by the authority of these two Acts of Parliament. The
powers which were postesscd by the Legislature of Canada
before the introduction of the Act lately pased by Parlia-
ment were by that Act continned to Lord Durham, with the
important restricti es which had been alluded to in the course
of the debate, aed which had been introduced into the Bill
v.hen it was ill the other House of Parliament by a Learned
Fread of his ( Lord Lyndhurst). He had lately had a cor •
respondence upon the subject with his Learned Friend ( Sir
iliatn Follatt), and Le as,u:td him ( Lord Lyndhurst) that
in proposing that restriction he never intended that it
should oparate in the manner asserted by the Noble Lord
opposite, as well as by the NoLle and Learned Lord upon
the Woolsack ; hut it was intended to restrict the Noble
is from any fundamental interference with the criminal
law. What was there unreasonable in introducing such
a restriction in the case of a person who for two years was to
exercise obsolete pawcr? Was there anything unreascmable
in rostricting him from interfering or attempting any altera-
tion of the criminal law ? Why, the Noble Earl had not only
interfered with the law, but he had introduced what the Noble
and Learned Lord opposite had justly described to be a new
law of treason. The ordinance published by the Noble Earl
declared, that particular individuals against whom warrants
had been i,e,ued, haying absconied and not surrendered them-
selves to justice, that if they should at any time hereaftcr ap-
pear is the province they should be deemed guilty of high
treason, and should surfer the tenalty of death. So that

they were to be tried, not for the high treason which they ha d
committed before leaving the province, but for co eing aga
into the province. Why this was a new kind of treason., and
was inconsistent with the enactments of the 146 and 31st
George 111., by which the English law of treason had been
introduced into Canada. Now, he would ask:their Lordships
whether these ordinances did not go to the full extent of al-
tering the 14th and 31st of Geo. 111., and the system which
had been established by these Acts ? Now, let him suppose
that, instead of confining his alteration of the law to these
casee, the Noble Earl had attempted a general alteration of
the law of high treason, and had introduced, instead of the
existing law, an entirely new system ; if the Noble Earl did this,
would any one attempt to say that this was not an alteration of
the 14th and 31st of George 111., by which the criminal law,
including the law of high treason, was established in Canada.
The effect of an alteration of any part would be the alteration
of the entire law. He (Lord Lyndhurst) had reason to believe
that the learned individual alluded to, in the restriction which
he proposed, had intended that the alteration should not be
confined within the limits stated by the Noble Lord opposite,
but was intended to be restrictive so far as the suspension
of Trial by Jury, and also so far as the suspension of the
Habeas Corpus Act. He asked their Lordships at the time
gttliiiiitngp theyotwo ierl7iosinsf e d(
passing
seh
sei
nEßgai
Earl
ordinances
od fid i
p r ey
ba
omsf psapunocds t
he
aha t
his
t fie
vntehd oe
officer
f f wye ee
as rr es
this ?—( Hear, hear.) Ho was sure that no such power was
ever intended to be given. lie would again ask their
Lordships, did they ever intend when they passed this Act
to give a power to the Governor of Canada and his five mi-
litary assistants to banish persons for life—without trial__
without notice of the charges against them—without bringing
forward any evidence to prove the guilt of the accused,and
without giving them any opportunity to be heard in their de-
fence ?—( Hear, hear.) Not one of these persons had been
tried—not one of them had been beard in his defence—not
one of them had been granted an opportunity of being heard.
But yet, notwithstanding all this, these parties were by an
ordinance of the Noble Earl to be banished for life, and if
any of them should hereafter return to the province, they
should be arraigned: for that offence and suffer the punish-
ment of death. Here then were persons by an ordinance of
the Governor of Canada, aided by his five Councillors, con-
demned to be banished for life, without any charge whatever
having been made against them in a Court of Justice—with-
out ever having been arraigned, or having any notice given
of any charge to which they would be afforded an opportunity
of answering—they were to be banished for life, and subject to
the penalty of death in case they returned.—(Hear, hear.)
Did their Lordships ever hear of the exercise of powers
so eatensive as those ?—( Hear, he.tr.) So this was to be
the fate of that system which, when it was conferred upon
Canada by the 140.] of George 111. had been depictured its
the terms he (Lord Lyndhurst) had already quoted as a
mild and lenient system of law. Did their Lordships mean
by the Act which they had passed to give to the Governor
in Council a power and authority to introduce a new descrip-
tion cf treason ?—( Hear, hear.) Now, what was the state
of the law respecting treason in this country? When an alle-
gation of treason was made against an individual a warrant
was issued against him ; if the party absconded, did the law
then declare h m to be guilty of treason ? No such thing.
The law gave the party an opportunity to be tried, and
to answer the charges against him. If the party did not
return did the law adjudge him to suffer the punishment of
death ? No such thing; the party was allowed a certain time,
during which lie might come and surrender himself to justice,
and answer the charges made against him. There was
netliing like the Noble Earl's law to be found in this coun-
try. The instance of the 17th of George the Second was
not analogous to the law of treason introduced by the Noble
Earl. That Act (17th Gco. II.) was directed against the
s nis of the Pretender, and it declared that if any of them,
lauded in Oda ccuntry he should be deemed guilty of high
treason. That power expired at the death of these indivi-
viduals, and he trusted that their Lordship:; would never sane-
thm the placing a power of this kind in the hands of any indi-
llesr, Lear.) The Noble and Learned Lord on the
Wool.aack had said that a power of altering the law resided in
the Legislature in Upper Canada, where there was less dis-
talt brume and less occasion for the c:cercise of such a power
than in Lower Canada. The Noble and Leaaned Lord put
a true construction upon the intention of the Act. The ob-
ject was not to seed the Noble Earl out to Canada to make
laws, but to make inquiries and to collect information as to
what system might be most usefully adopted in framing a
future Cover-ill-neat for anada. It was found necessary to
suspeed the Legislature of that province during the period
limited by the Act, and the Noble Earl's duty was understood
to be, whilst administering, the Government of the
province, also to make inquiries, on the result of which
Parlianaent should be guided in the adoption of some system
for the future Government of Canada. Let him now call
the [attention of their Lordships to the new law of attainder
which Lord Durham had introduced. But how was the
power ofattainder exercised it, this country ? His Noble and.
Learned Friend had referred to cases in tehich attaindere had
been resorted to. Ile would refer to the case of Henry St.
John Viscount Bolingbroke. He was only attainted unless
on a c‘ rtain day, and within a certain specified time he ap-
peared to answer the charges made against him. An oppor-
tunity was given him to prove his innocence if he was innocent,
but he was net attainted if he came into the country ; but
in case he persisted in remaining out of the country. His.
Noble Friend had also alluded to the case of the Duke oC
Ormond, but there was no instance in which a considerable
space of time had not been given to the party to appear, to
make his defei.ce against the charge brought forward against
him. it was not coining Lott) the country that constituted the
attainder, hut, on the contrary, the peaty was given time to
come into the country, aid meet the charges against him on
which the Bill of attainder was founded. Amongst the reasons
for the differeece that had occurred in that House at the time
of the attainder of Lord Bolingbroke, it was complained
that the time given to Henry St. John Viscount Boling-
broke to answer the charges against him wars not as exten-
sive as was consistent with the principles of justice. A war-
rant had issued against Lotd Bolingbroke upon a charge
cf high treason. He did not appear, and the Bill of attainder
was issued. He was adj'idgcd guilty of high treason, not for
coming into the country, but in case he persisted in refusing to
come forward to defend himself against the charges of trea-
son alleged against him. But what was the case in Canada?
These parties are banished for life without a trial, and they
arc told that if they return they shall be tried, not for the
treason they have 'already committed, but for the new treason
of returning into the country, Why, this was a monstrous
course of proceeding.—( Hear, hear.) What did the COMMOII
law say ? Why this, if a man commit a felony, and abscond—
nothing was done until a bill of indictment had been found
against him-_a capias was then issued, and he was taken.
hut if he could not then be taken, a certain time was given,
nine months, to enable him to appear to answer the charge
against him. If he appeared within the nine months he was
then to answer the charge, not of coming into the country, but
the charge originally urged against him. These proceedings,
which had taken place under the sanction of the Governor of
Canada, were inconsistent with every principle of justice and
law. Ne notice was given to these parties--no opportunity
was given them to answer the charges against them. In
conclusion, unless he received an assurance from the Noble
Lord opposite that he would advise the Crown to disallow
those ordinances, he ( Lord Lyndhurst) would feel it his duty
to the Crown and to the country to give his rote in support of
the motion of his Noble and Learned Friend.— (Hear, hear.)
Viscount MELBOURNE, who was very indistinctly heard
in the gallery, said that he had no doubt that it was a regard far
justice and an anxiety to maintain the law, as well as to main,
tain the honour of this country in her relation with those pro-
vinces, that induced the Noble and Learned Lord to bring for-
ward this question, and to argue it with the zeal and ability
which he had displayed. It was impossible not to feel that
this was a quastion of very great importance, considering the
precarious situation in which those provinces were placed.
It was impossible to doubt that an impression would be pro-
duced by this debate which might tend materially to affect the
peace of the country and the integrity of the empire. In fact
it would not be going too far to state that the peace of the
world might even be affected by it. The Noble and Learned
Lord, on a former occasion, had remarked upon an expression
of his (Viscount Melbourne's), in which he had stated that
the circumstances which induced them to depart from the Con-
stitution of the country, and to invest in a single man the
whole legislative power of that country, should induce them
to consider with great care and caution how they interfered.
unnecessarily with the exercise of those powers so conferred.
It was e: most serious consideration to entrust those enor-
mous powers to any individual ; but they had been, however,
entrusted to the Noble Earl by a great niajority.of their Lord-
ships, and whilst a great approbation of that individual had
been expressed by many, no censure of his appointment bad
proceeded from any of their Lordships. lie did not think it
became them by bringing forward discussions of this kind to
invalidate what they had already doraa. He thought, when
they entausteil such large powers us these to r ny
that they ought likewise to accompany them wich their confi-
dence. To do anything calculated to thwart or embarrass the
exercise o: those powers was acting in a dangerous spirit. It.
was not acting in the way that was worthy of a high and ge-
nerous nubility, but rather of a low and truculent democracy-
( Laughter and ironical cheers)—or rather of an ungenerous
aristocracy, endeatourieg to weaken the influence of chose
whom they employed. Considering the circumstances under
widen the Noble Earl had exercised those powers, and con-
sidering the cat, aordinary nature of those circumstances, they
ought to be very careful and cautious how they took any step
which :night most seriously affect the interests and welfare of
this country, The Noble and Learned Lord opposite had
made some observations respecting the mode in which the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government of Canada had
constituted his Council. But their Lordships ought to recol-
lect that they gave to that Noble Earl the power of naming.
that Council. It was very possible that when he arrived 171
that country such was the state cf party feeling, that he
though t it better to asaocirte no person.; of either paray in the
Colony with his Council. Ile might have very justey thought
that if be excluded ail parties he would obecrslikerly-ontoe
give more satisfaction than by admitting
men of different opinions, he would on
,ese ensured
b.
party or the other. If he had constitutedbr:tileiatC'o' uioi,c_itlako!
itzts, the conduct of that Caunstl. Nero could, no
doubt that the Noble Earl acted wisely and prudently
that respect. There was no -..rouht that the course which he
Lei pursued had produced satisfaction amongst those whom
he bad been sent to novern, and that satiafa.ction would be se-
riously interrupte:, seb.wi they found the conduct which had
questioneaty L e
bee,; pursued,ararodsovtelirenmNeollidte
oLfort;l;ebyNtolibilse cio,:uai:iltr;vv.ouldUtun-
enil-aaass. d by the course taken on the present occasion aed
'Pit utility very much impaired. Ile ( Viscauet Nleibourre)
had ter hesitance) in stating it its l.is opinion, that it would be
better to address tile Crown to censure and recall at once:
that Noble Earl, than to weaken and esebarass his Gc,vero-
meat, and impair his authority, mid thus contribute tQ the

aessed, considering the state of Canada, was more necessary
to the person entrusted with the government of that country
than the power of adopting extraordinary measures should
such a course be required. If extraordinary measures had
been resorted to, he supposed they had been called for, and,
looking at any country under circumstances similar to those
which prevailed in Canada, he thought if extraordinary mea-
sures were resorted to that everybody must know the reason
why such a line of conduct had been adopted. Now he called on
their Lordships to recollect what the state of Canada was when his
Noble Friend arrived in that country. It was true that Sir J.
Colborne had released some of the prisoners, but still the pri-
sons were full of persons charged with committing crimes dur-
ing the last rebellion. The period was a critical one, and
under the circumstances, and for the purpose of satisfying the
. feelings of the whole country, he supposed his Noble Friend,
not wishing to press the law in its utmost severity, had resorted
to the measure which the Noble and Learned Lord had alluded
to. The account given by the Noble and Learned Lord was
not that certain classes of persons had been released by an ordi-
nance issued by the Governor-General without having
pleaded guilty. He (Lord Melbourne) apprehended that,
technically speaking, they had not been called on to plead, that
they had not pleaded guilty ; but then they did that which
was tantamount, for they confessed, and it was on that confes-
sion that the measures referred to had been taken with
respect to them—measures for which there was a prece-
dent in former times, similar in nature and circumstances,
and also similar in character. Unquestionably, as regarded
these persons, who had absconded to avoid proceedings, and
against whom only warrants had issued, they stood in a very
different situation. Ile would not state, with reference to
them, there was any precedent for a similar proceeding,
though a day had not been given.—( [fear, hear.) It was
impossilde to believe that their keeping out of the way was
accidental. They must be aware of the fact that prosecutions
were to be instituted against them, because, in an ordinance
jawed by Sir John Colborne it was expressly stated that in-
dictments were to be preferred against them, and notice was
given tai them to come in and surrender. Having omitted to
come forward, and not being acquainted with the course in-
tended to he pursued with regard to them, placed them in a
very diffesent point of view; but ae to whether the line• of
conduct adopted by his Noble Fiiend was wi=e or not, was a
mt;er which their Lordships could not probably determine
tiedl they knew what the reason was which had led his Noble
F.icnd to take the st.:ps which he had resorted to. If their
Lordships thought they were legislating under ordinary cir-
cumstances for a country in a regular state like one of
the counties of this country—for a country in which what
took place was not likely to be attended with evil consequences,
wry then indeed they might proceed strictly according to
all the rules of law. But was this the case ? Let them
look at the present state and situation of Canada. Let them
consider the relation of that country, not only as regarded
this country, but the c( wary in its neighbourhood, and by
vrtsiels it was boundsd, and then let them ask themselves whe-
ther, in legislating for that part of tic wcrld, it did not
belt. v.' them to proceed with caution, end have full informa- •
tier! before they caste to any decision nhich might prevent re-
conciliation, or have an iejurious iefluence on the minds of the
Caned:an people. He ad a great respect no doubt for the
prosiots of the law, The Noble and Learned Lord might
thiek idin very innetant of matte's ef law ; but licwever thet
',eight be, lie was reedy to maietain that notwithstanding a
rose might pi sseaa the Lriglet st taleinseand the mod enlergeel
mind, there was sttli i t the profeseioa of the late a sninettieg
which !ssria:ed io fetter tie utiderAftediwv in 1-11.:014 Nays.—( A
laugh.) He thoeght if they did that which, without le-
tending it, would have the effect of encouraging those
wins were hcstile to this country, that it would be little
(-Desolation to them. when the mischief was done, to think
that they hal adhered to aides of law, and toted up to the
spirit of special pleeding. That wss his feeling en the
subject, and he therefore thcugl:t they ought not to be fet-
ter° I ce tied down in their preceediegs by rules of law,
vile s, the tossh they nsight be al very well in England, could
have no spplicarion in a country in the position is which
Ce:ad, was placed It wee, s flee the observations which
had been made, need.ess fez' him to say that he should impose
the second readii:g of a Bill, the seeend clause of which went
the htegth of depriving the Geverticr-Ger (Tat af Canada of
potters which hr ought to posses; and net knowing hew that
power had been ewes ciaed, er whether, in sending those parties
to Bermuda, es stated in :he erdinence, it had been in any
way sacred:Ai, it did not appear to him at pet sent that the
introduction of any Bill cf. indemnity was neecasary. When
hi' considered that the morel .zif. et of such a proceeding would
be peecisely the samens the. Gorerrtent, as throwing
everethieg in Canada loose, be could not be a party to a
-measure width be leg:lvied r.s unauthorised, and the more
especially as he believed that it would he ieoperative arch
witheut curet. The Noble Lord, in coeculsion, moved that
the Bill be read a second time that day six ritoetlis.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said—After whet has
passed I hope your Lordships will allow me to say a fete words
on this sunieen and I assure, ycu they sha'i be very few ;soloed.
My Lords, the Noble Vi.,couet t as, as usual. taken advantage
of the support which we have given to him on former occa-
sions, and thought Koper to turn round on this side of the
House and reproach us for the consequences of measures pro-
duced by his own party, or rather his own Administration.—
( Hear.) What, my Lords, has the Noble Viscount told us
Why be has told us that we did net object to the appointment
of Lord Durham—that we did riot object to the powers con-
fided to Lord Durham—and, moreover, he says, " Oh, you
urged us (referring to me particularly) to send cut a large
force, to have a strong body of military in the North American
provinces." Such advice I admit, my Lords, I did give, and
I bad to repeat it until I well nigh fatigued not only myself
but your Lordships, and the Noble Viscount himself._
—( Hear, hear.) But why, my Lords, did I not object to
the powers which were confided to Lord Durham ? See-
ing the difficulties in which the Government were involved
—seeing that this country (Lower Canada) was in a state
of rebellion—and seeing that the Government had confi-
dence in another plan—l considered that it was not my duty
to excite opposition to any measure which they might deem
it necessary to adopt, and therefore it was that I took up all
that they recommended. Possibly I was wrong in this.—
( Hear.) My Lords, it appears now that I was wrong—
(Cheers)—but in the line of conduct I considered it my duty
to adopt I would not follow the example of those who, though
convinced of the necessity in a country involved in war of
supplying the means of carrying on that war, had yet op-
posed the granting of those means. I say, my Lords, that I
would not oppose granting to an absent person the means
necessary for carrying on the Government of a country un-
der the circumstances in which Canada was placed, when I
knew that he was aiding to administer the powers with
which he was invested to the best of his abilities.
(Cheers.) No, my Lords, I would not do that ; but, on the
contrary, I would give the Government all fair support in
adopting those measures which they may think necessary for
pacifying a country which may be in a state of war or rebel-
lion, as was the case in the instance of Canada. I ha ye never
seen this House—l have never seen Parliament do the con-
trary.—( Hear.) With respect to what the Noble Lord op-
posite has said as to the criminality of us on this side of the
House not opposing the appointment of Lord Durham, I
must beg to remind the Noble Lord that Lord Durham was
appointed under an Act of Parliament which gave her Ma-
jesty the power of appointing a Council in Lower Canada.—
( Hear, hear.) But did the Noble Lord give Lord Durham
instructions as to what description of Council that Noble Earl
was to appoint ?—( Hear, hear.) Did the Government say to
Lord Durham "We wish you would appoint to the Council
this or that man ?''—( Hear, hear.) And what did that
Noble Earl do ? Lord Durham went out to Canada, and
one of the first things he did was to appoint his own
Aides-dc-Camp members of his Council—( Hear, hear, hear)
—and now the Noble Baron opposite comes down to this House
and tells us that we are responsible for what has taken place.—
(Hear, hear.) But I must be allowed to tell the Noble Lord
that it is lie and not this side of the House that is responsible.—
( Cheers ) I believe there is no one man in your Lordships'
House who has made so few observations on this subject as I
have, except on any occasion when I have found it absolutely
necessary to do so in order to elucidate some particular part of
the question when under discussion.—( Hear, hear.) But, my
Lords, let me ask, are these things which arc going on in
Canada to be carried on as they arc, and under an Act of
Parliament, too, which was passed no later than this present
Session ?—( Hear, hear.) Are measures like these to be
adopted and carried into execution—illegally, as has been
shown by the Noble and Learned Lord, and imprudently, as
are all seem to admit ?—( Hear, beer.) I ask are measures
like these which have been taken in Canada to be carried into
execution, and is Parliament to sit here and SP e them and to
be supposed to take no notice whatever of such proceedings ?
Loud cheers.) But, my Lords, as it is wished to throw
upon us the responsibility for the consequences of these
measures, I now come to that part of the question which that
circumstance renders an important one. We are told there is
one part of these measures that is absolutely illegal—and all
seem to concur in the illegality of it—viz., that part of the or-
dinances which relates to the island of Bermuda.—(Hear.)
The Noble Lords who have spoken have all s:ated it to be ille-
• gal ; but are we to be held responsible for an illegal ot dinance ?
Not a bit !—( Cheers and laughter.) The Noble Earl ( Durham)
js responsible, in the first instance, and the Noble Lord onpo-
site (Glenelg) and the Governaseidt in the next. —( Herr, hear.)
•e, in Lords, that it is impressthle to do without that part
of,she Dill of the
Noble and Learned Lord which goes to in-
demnify ao'ic sae, have sectioned this part of the ordinance,
e
justice to these who are carrying on the
PS it IS 0111'. common
Hear, hear.) With respect to the other
law in Canada---( particular, relating to persons
par's of the den-': ‘Ttlia,t,.
Noble Lord now attempts to haspute to
not yet in custody,
blt.e4tfor it, saying that he still vote
us, and calls us blatrod:
at toftl e subject. That il
agaiast the Bill, at I alt or ti
legality has been coramltted tIS-A and other points is as clear
as possible to the mind of any man ;fist can read the prince.
.7 of the z rlncilles of
pies of law. and that understandsanythm, -
justice.—( Cheers. I My Lords. it i; imposeitAd. this coun-
try can endure that men shall
-^ Vine I
be banished
.b..teout. triele
lam astonished at these crdis ances, Liit, at the saw— ,
elo nut s'y that what I wart is a chwatory Act. Let the
INC:blo Lord Olselscurne) any that he will take measures to ss t
tnatt..-ra right in Canada, and to pit things in that country on
'R a fair, &tear, anti intelligible fuo:ing—( Hear, hear)—and
-se—se House tail: not be desirous to push this questien ferther than
's necessary.— ( Hear, hear, and eh ) I lag your L2rd-
•.f hips' pirdon fur trespassieg s* long upon your patience. I
ate only to add that; when i on fesspea secesions, brave