The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-15 00:00:00

BRITISH GUIANA.

Lord J. RUSSELL wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Hon. Member for Montrose to press his
amendment with respect to British Guiana,
on the motion for going into Supply to-
morrow? Such a course was unusual, Vbpecially
as it was the intention of the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer to-morrow evening to bring fon% ard his Budget.
He had received only yesterday a long letter from the
Governor of British Guiana, in answer to certain in-
quiries which he made of him before he Lett this
country, and he stated that he had paid
most serious attention to the constitution of the
colony, but as he had not sufficiently matured his opi-
nions, he did not think it proper to give them in an
official shape. He (Lord J. Russell), at the same time,
conceived the views contained in that letter were of
very great importance, but did not think it advisable at
present to lay them before the House. He hoped the
Hon. Gentleman would not proceed with his amend-
ment.

Mr. HUME admitted that it was an unusual circum •
stance to make such an amendment, but he was placed
in an unusual situation, and probably the history of the
British colonies did not record an instance of
anything like that which was now taking place
in British Guiana. There was a dispute between
the constituted authorities and the Colonial-office,
and the Committee to whom the matter was referred had
come to no incision; the consequence was, that all sup-
plies in the colony were stopped, and he was anxious
that the House should et-me to a decision, aye or no,
upon the matter before the packet left on the 16th inst.
He would withdraw his amendment if the Government
would fix a day fur the discussion to come on.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the Government
was called upon to fix a day for the Hon. Member.
BALLINASLOE UNION.

Mr. CONOLLY rose to ask the lion. Baronet the
Secretary for the Hume Department whether he bad
seen a paragraph which appeared in one of the leading
public journals, attributing the horrors of the Balling.-
sloe Union to a Noble Relative of his (Mr. Cunolly's)
own, Lord Clancarty ?
Sir G. GREY said he was happy to state that he had
seen a letter in one of the newspapers of this morning on
the subject of the Ballinasloe Union which spoke in the
highest terms of praise of the conduct of Lord Clan-
carty in reference to the unfortunate state of things in
that union. He (Sir George Grey) could add that he
had never heard Lord Clancarty spoken of but with the
most unqualified respect and esteem.—(Hear, hear.)
BIS I-10PS W EARMOUTH RECTORY.

In answer to a question by Mr. HORSMAINI,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he must reserve, for the
present, stating what proceedings he meant to take
with respect to the rectory of Bishopswearmouth.
The Bishop had mad© certain proposals, which had been
considered in Council, and had been submitted to the
law officers of the Crown. When definitely settled he
would state the result to the House.
RETURNS FRO NI THE BOARD OF TRADE.

Mr. DISRAELI inquired if the Hon. Gentleman the
President of the Board of Trade could explain to him
the mysterious delay that had occurred in printing and
circulating a return which had been moved for eight
days ago?
Mr. LABOUCHERE reminded the Hon. Gentleman
that when returns were laid on the table of the House,
they were beyond the control of the Board of Trade.
He was surprised at the delay, and would make inquiry.
SUPPLY.—BRITISH GUIANA.

Sir R. PEEL appealed to the lion. Member for Mon-
trose to allow Supply to have precedence of his motion
tomorrow night.
Mr. HUME said, by the leave of the House it was his
intention to bring on the motion as it stood on the
paper.

THE ADMISSION OF STRANGERS AND THE
PUBLICATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF

THE HOUSE.

Mr. J. O'CONNELL inquired when the Noble Lord
intended to bring on his motion with respect to the ap-
pointment of a Committee upon this subject, and if the
propriety of rescinding the rules against the publication
of the debates would be referred to it.

Lord J. RUSSELL proposed to bring on the motion
in its regular order as it stood on the paper for to-night.
He meant to refer the question as to the propriety of
rescinding the rules against the publication of the de-
bates to the consideration of the Committee, who would
report upon it.

THE NAVIGATION LAWS.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Navigation-Laws Repeal
Bill had come down from the other House almost in the
shape in which it went up. One very trivial amendment
had been made, and he trusted the House would at once
accede to the Bill as it now stood. The Right Hon.
Gentleman concluded by moving that the amendment be
now considered.

Mr. HERRIES regretted that the House of Lords
had introduced so few amendments into this fatal
measure. Had those changes their Lordships had
made been more extensive, he should have agreed
to them with greater pleasure. He had op-
posed the measure throughout, and he still
retained his objection to it, and though he hoped those
who had introduced it would not soon have cause to re.
gret the proposing of the Bill, he was ♦ery much afraid
that a very short time would prove the apprehension of
its opponents, that it would result in disaster
to the commercial interest of the country, to be well
tounded.—(Hear, hear.)
Captain HARRIS thought it would be better to pro-
vide for the manning of the navy in a bona fide measure
than by the proviso which the Lords had introduced
into this Bill.
Mr. WAWN inquired if it were the intention of Go-
vernment to introduce any measure for the amelioration
of the shipping interest?
Mr. LABOLTCHERE replied that he hoped to lay on
the table of the House a Bill which should be the foun-
dation for a permanent improvement in the condition of
that interest. _ _ _

Mr. HUME remarked, that when this Bill passed an
assurance was given by the Government that such bur-
dens as the timber duties and the marine insurance duties,
which were borne by the shipping interest, and not by
the foreigner, should be abolished. It would, therefore,
have been more satisfactory had the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman given them some hope of the Bill being passed
this session, instead of a promise to lay it on the
table.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. LABOUCHERE was ignorant of any such pledge
baring been given. Lis was ttnX/9118 10 pass the Bill tp

which he had referred at the earliest possible period,
but he was afraid there would nog be time to do so in the
present session.—(Hear.)
The amendments were then considered and agreed to.
STATE OF CANADA.

Mr. GLADSTONE then rose for the purpose of call-
ing attention to the state of Ginad e He thought the
prsent time afforded a good opportunity for doing so.
As Le had placed on the paper simply an intimation that
he would call the attention of the House to an Act
passed by the Canadian Legislature, in reference to giv-
ing indemnity for certain losses sustained during the
rebellion in that country, and as calling attention to that
Act might be construed into an implication et censure
on his part in resp.:ct to it, it might be asked why he
had not proposed a distinct aad ep,cific motion on the sub-
ject. He considered, however, that in adopting that
course, he might have still further excited those preju-
dices which existed on the subject, and he thought it
better simply to call the attention of the House to it.
He did not think that any man in the House was such
a slave to party feeling that he should think that
Parliament should be divided in their opinion on so
important a question as that of colonial legislation,
because what affects one country must consider-.
ably affect the other. He considered that if a-
further step were to be taken on this question to
bring it to an issue, that it should be so taken as not to-
cause any pro- jtolice against any party without due in-•
vestigetion, and to avoid as much as possible any
divi,ion in so important a question. He hoped the'
many miscellaneous questions that had already engaged
the attention of the House were not such as to exhaust•
their patience, because the present was a question that
affected the principles of government and social order..
He did not mean to allude to Lord Elgin but as briefly'
as possible, nor should he in that brief allusion attempt
to give any judgment on that Noble Lord's conduct, not
from his admiration of that Nobleman's distinguished
talent, not because of his personal feelings towards hits.
but because he has all the responsibility on himself,
and had been called upon to do more than he could;
do, when so far apart from the advisers of the Crown-
, He might be wrong, but yet he should say that he drew'
the inference from the words of the Under-Secretorea
for the Foreign Department, who stated that it was
not right to interfere in any legislative measure that
was progressing in the Canadian Legislature until
it had reached its completion.—(Hear, hear.) He was
of opinion that the Governor-General should not have
his character involved until he had sent home to know•
whether the measure proposed would be agreed to or not
by her Majesty's Government; but such to the know-
ledge of that House and the country was not known, for
they had not heard of any dispatches being received
from Canada. He considered, from all that he knewe
that on the whole the office of the Governor-General
could not be discharged adequately and independently,
as he was obliged on most occasions to attend to the
counsel of Government, and when that counsel could not
be immediately obtained he was liable to being charged'
with neglect or carelessness of duty. He thought that
those matters to which he alluded should be left in user
hands of the Imperial Legislature, and that a distinction.
should be drawn between matters that should be sub-
jected to the local legislature and those belonging to the'
Imperial, and that the local legislature should know how far
they should and could act on their own authority. Ile'
did not mean to say how far the Canadian Government
should act on questions of such vital influence as that to,
which he was then alluding; nor did he mean to allude.
to the Montreal riots, nor did he think that it was the
duty of that House to interfere with their local legida-
tune in the case of private Acts, no matter whether just
or unjust, as such only appertained to themselves, ac-
cording to the laws of their constitution, which he con-
sidered to be not only a necessary but a sound maxim•
He recollected that the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell),
when Secretary or State, in a letter to Lord Sydenhatn,
Oct. 14, 1839, stated that it was not safe, in certain
cases, to delegate authority to any officer when the in-
fluence of the Crown or the safety of the people might be
involved. There arese three questions on this subject,
first en Act of Indemnification to all connected with the
rebellion cf 1837 and 1838, and that Act related to those
who bore arms against her Majesty's forces at that time;
the second question was, foreseeing such to be the case,
were they to be iudemnified in a local or imperial leg's'
lature ? And the third question is, if such be the case,
it such a proposition was contemplated by an Act of
Parliament, whether it was consistent or at variance
with the honour of the Crown that those rebels should
be indemnified ?—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the
two first he believed there could be no doubt, and with
respect to the last he believed that it was vtell known
that no Act of Parliament would be just in indemniTair
ing those rebels of Lower Canada in 1837 and 1838. v":
considered that nothing was more just than the measure
proposed iu February, 1845, for indemnifying the Joys
subjects of Canada, as had been frequently done before.
when the churcees, which had been in the possession of
the rehels, bad been necessarily razed, and also in 're'
land in the time of the rebellion, when the Roman ,e
tholic chapels had been destroyed to prevent the rebels
in that country from taking possession of them. If the
present losses alluded to had bet n equally just as those
.
to which he had adverted, he would not offer the slight.
est opposition, but in this case he knew of nothing Ost
was just or equitable. The Right Hon. Gentleman kart'
read the proviso, excluding persons who had been guilty,
of the act of rebellion from right to compensation, sad
proceeded to argue upon it, to the effect that if
the con-
victions had not been legally brought about so, the pro-
viso, the convicted would say, must be regarded as et'
ceptional. Now, if that were so, they might depend
upon it that the question would be raised by the 96 Per'
sens out of the 108 who were convicted, and of wboue
eight pleaded guilty, and were sentenced as transports'
tion. In a petition which had been presented to that
House, in 1839, from an individual in Canada, the Pe:
titioner took occasion to protest against and denounce n'e
illegal, the tribunal of courts-martial, and there wa:
no doubt that if that were so, and they had high 11,.e
thorny that it was so, then it would be said that t,!"d_
convictions under those courts-martial were not valid,
and that if there was an exception to the conviction_
there was an exception to the proviso, which went to elee
elude them from compensation. There was a case
..1';
400 persons who claimed compensation for their guns
lost in an unsuccessful action with her Majesty's tr°°Pto
—(Laughter.) Now the question which he wished aa
raise here was, whether, in the case of those parties vials'
lost their guns in the rebellion, or in the case of anaJe.
other parties who had been engaged in it, compensalf.„
was to be given. With regard to property lost b,f P. 70
ties engaged in the rebellion, it had been said 10
House of Assembly by Mr. Baldwin, that it was never
the intention of the Government or the Legislature that
e
such parties should be compensated. But there ri
great difference of opinion on the subject, and great_i_7o
biguity in the Act. The Right Hun. Gentleman !!`ehe
referred to the opinions of Mr. Jones, a Member 01:0/
Legislative Council, on the subject, and to the analvel,
Lord Elgin, the Lieutenant-Governor, to a memorial
him on the subject, which conveyed the intimation IPri;
it was not his Excellency's intention, in giving his up
lion to the Bill, to imply that persons who had taken
arms against her Majesty's Government should be co. 0
at
pensated. Now he (Mr. Gladstone) was of opinion ttlie
the 'act of a man taking up arms against the laws of l:01
Government was of itself of a character to exclude
from the benefit of the laws. He thought that the Ole.
of Assembly, in the exceptions they had taken in ree,
Lion to those who were guilty of participation in thebeo
hellion, was justified, although there were some wkete as
that the act of mere implication ought not to operate
an exclusion to compensation. He might refer the
anyto an amendment submitted by Mr. Wilson, of t„ er any
vincial Asie mbly, the words of which were hag
person who has been implicated in the rebellion b
be excepted." But that amendment, he was sor dry
ifa.
say, was unfortunately lost. It was said that it was to
cult to distinguish between those who were engage Was
the rebellion and those who were not. Now w"" ose
the course pursued in Ireland in relation to th in
who claimed compensation for their alleged loess,; -
the rebellion in that country It was an aiaaiel
putable fact that every person who then put for"-th
:f
claims to compensation for losses, was put tohis o
in the matter; and the person, he might say, wu"
put himselt forward, brought upon himself the 0008 .5
iequiry and strict scrutiny into his conduct. But it
en
that now said, that an "Amnesty" bad been granted, Ft,
that under that amnesty there were no rebels in Ca'
nada; and it was further said, that the sense 01.4
he
people of Canada was understood to be in favour ct.,i7o
Act for giving compensation. Now, he respected
much as any man could, the sense of the peel:"
tied tbs.-
nada; but he might say that if it even so baPe ,nada had
it were true that the sense of the people of C
been distinctly expressed in favour of this
he could not see that that ouht to lead to a refus.vLt,
inquire into a question like Ibis—a question v.or
ark'
imperial considerations. With respect to the add esev.
that had been presented to Lord Elgin, it was a rewmhore
able fact, that those addresses had scarcely anYbera °I
been agreed to at public meetings; and the Blew og,
the House which he now had the honour of addresimes
measurers,: ,
were very well aware how petitions were semett,e Dot
got up in this country. Now, petitions which vie,eauto
the emanation of Public meetings, were to be P": 60,0
under such circumstances, as the sense only of the Pere re-
whose signatures are appended to them. It was (font
markable fact that there was not a single address „d to
excepted) of the forty pages of addresses presentea.ivg.
Lord Elgin, that had been agreed to in public 113 e Aoge
Now, one of the four addresses voted at public Ineel'hoto
had only 24 signatures appended to it. Were they,,,s is
he would ask, to look at the Government as advocate the
this matter? or rather, were they not to expect ftiote
Government a frank statement of the whole of the
city
of the case? He was informed on indisputable authotio,
that the petitions against the Bill were far more ere
merous than those in favour of it; and those which
coed
against the Bill emanated from public meetings, coi'v reed
by the constituted authorities. He therefore denatileae
to the assertion that the sense of the people of 0100
was in favour of the Bill. A difference of OPooesi
prevailed as to the feelings of the two prev'esaile
but he did not hesitate to say that, "00
the majority of the inhabitants of Lower Cans°6ee
said to be in favour of the addresses, the great b0"00
the people of Upper Canada was against them.
gain
Right Hon. Gentleman said that the statesmanlikerogio
lilies of Lord Metcalfe were only equal to the ke,soeet;
which marked his general conduct under circtonnod to
of the most trying description. He then proceeds of
of
observe on Mr. Daly's two letters of the ',055e0
February and of December in respect to the as
which occurred to parties during the late rebtafet je
Canada. He contended that the last letter was 't lees
accordance with the former; but, at all eventseae tir
clear that the Crown was not at all affected by the the
rangements that had been come to in respect.
_tu j3O I
parties engaged in the rebellion in Lower Cananti'opet
it was said that the Acts of the Legislature 11,1 ,au'asott
Canada granted to persons actually convicted Or *here'
compensation for losses sustained by them during the
bullion. But he denied that this was a fair contra
_ties
of the Acts in question. It was true that certainpnai
to
who had given up their houses to facilitate 10:0-01,
operations had been eorapenntedi

compensation could not be construed into a recognition
of the claims of actual rebels. Mr. Hincks, it was true,
bad stated certain cases of compensation to parties who
bad been rebels. But these cases did not come under
the operation of the Act of the Canadian Legislature.
Bills were given to these parties for matters supplied to
the troops before these parties had been rebels. But the
entire of these cases amounted to five, and upon in-
quiry, it turned out that two of these were not rebels at
all, and of the other three cases, two were tried for high
treason, but were acquitted; therefore they were in the
position of persons that ought to be recognised in so-
ciety, and, consequently, they ought to receive any com-
pensation to which they were entitled; and in the case
of Mr. Took, it was true he was found guilty of high
treason, and, after the amnesty, he went back to the
colony, but as he never made any claim, of course he
(Mr. Gladstone) need not dwell upon that case any
farther. Now, he did not mean to ask the Noble Lord
to disallow the Act under consideration; what he
asked for was this, that persons actually proved
to have acted as rebels should not receive compensation,
and that reasonable evidence shall be given that the
parties applying for compensation hed never taken a
part in the rebellion. If the Noble Lord could not give
them this assurance, then he would ask the Noble Lord
to say that the Crown will not ra'ify the Act of the
colonial legislature, and that proceedings under it will be
suspended until the Canadian Legislature shall have so
amended the Act as to exclude all parties from compen-
sation who have taken a part in the rebellion. It might
be asked what course he proposed to pursue in the event
of the Canadian Legislature not altering the Act. He would
only say in reply, that he would do nothing that would
be unconstitutional, as a coercive obedience on the part
of the colony towards the mother country ought not to
be sought for. In order that the connexion between the
colonies and tho mother country should be a happy one,
the ties that bound them should be those of partial sym-
pathy. But be would uphold the honour of the Crown,
and is saying this he meant that the Government should
draw a distinction between those who opposed the laws
and those who upheld them. This being so, he clung to
the hope that the Noble Lord would grant him what he
asked him to concede.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had derived much
consolation from the commencement of the speech of the
Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone), as he
said he would not propose any particular course, because
he wished that the voice of Parliament on the present
question should be a united voice. He had hoped that
the speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman would
have been in accordance with that wish, but he was
sorry he had been disappointed in that expectation.—
(Hear, bear.) If anything could embitter the hostile
feelings of parties amongst each other—feelings which
be had hoped had been abated, it would be the senti-
ments which had been expressed that night.—(Hear,
hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman had stated
solely the views of a particular party. He had supplied
the arguments which were wanting in Canada in the
Case which they had made against the Ministry of
Canada—(Hear, hear)—and ho had endeavoured to meet
' every argument which had been urged in favour of the
course which the Governor had pursued. He entirely
concurred with the Right Honourable Gentleman
with reference to a dispatch which was written some
time ago, that there were cases where the honour of the
Crown and the safety of the country required the ut-
most temper and firmness on the part of those entrusted
with the government of the colony, to prevent those
differences being pushed to an extent which might be
fatal to the connexion with this country.—(Hear.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman had, however, said that Lord
Elgin had received some instructions which had inter-
fered with his acting in such a manner as the honour of
the Crown and the interests of the country demanded.
Now he (Lord J. Russell) felt bound to say, in reply,
that neither to Lord Elgin nor to any Governor-Gene-
ral had Government given more than that general dis-
cretion which it was necessary should be given to every
one filling so responsible a position.—(Hear.) Ie Lord
Rlgin, in the exercise of that discretion, had acted in
such a way as did not comport with the honour of the
Crown and the interests of the country, the course for
her Majesty's Government to pursue, however unplea-
sant, would have been clear. It would have been to
have disavowed such acts, however painful such dis-
avowal would have been. But believing, as they did
believe, that Lord Elgin had consulted not only the in-
terests of Canada but the interests of this country—
that his conduct had been guided by a knowledee of the
feelings of the people of Canada and of this country-
and of the interests of the Crown—so believing, the Mi•
misters would have been the basest of men not to have
upheld Lord Elgin, and to have afforded him every
Support and encouragement.—(Hear, hear.) It was not,
therefore, to be presumed there was any intention to
put Lord Elgin in a position in which it was not de-
sirable to place any Governor, and it was in pursuance
of their duty alone they proposed to act in deciding
'upon the conduct of Lord Elgin. Knowing that the
finances of Canada were not flourishing that
many persons were suffering under commercial dis-
tress—he could not conceive that a Bill would have
been introduced having reference to the rebellion
losses, unless under circumstances of great neces-
sity. It was to be recollected that after the rebellion of
1837, a Bill was introduced in Upper Canada, giving
compensation to parties who had suffered by it, and a
subsequent Act was passed to carry out that same pur-
pose, and in these Acts it was provided that the losses
to be made good were losses which had been sustained
from the rebellion, and by parties who were inhabitants
, 'l3f Upper Canada. When that compensation was passed
it was obvious that having paid a considerable sum for
rebellion losses in Upper Canada, a question arose whe-
ther such compensation should not be given to Lower
Canada. The only objection he had made after the
Acts for Upper Canada had been passed was, that the
claim was on the imperial fund, and not on the local
fund.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The Noble Lord
here referred to a dispatch of Lord Stanley, dated the
Bth of May, 1844, and observed, that so far as re-
garded the claim for compensation for the Lower Pro-
vince, the suggestion seemed to have been made by Lord
Stanley, and to have been given to Sir Charles Met-
calfe. After that a Committee was appointed on the
subject, and the Right Honourable Gentleman bad
quoted some instructions which had been given to the
Commission of Inquiry on the 12th of December, 1845,
as to the amount of the loss and the character of the
party, and in reply to an inquiry of the Commissioners
as to the extent of the powers conferred upon them, a
dispatch was written in February, 1846, in which they
were informed that it was not desirable they should go
into any other evidence but the finding of the courts of
lie. Now he did not think that the Canadian Govern-
=ment had departed from the spirit of these instructions.
Be did not see why in this case Lord Cathcart should
be placed in opposition to Sir Charles Metcalfe, an officer
who was not disposed to favour rebels, and who was as
'fit as any one to be entrusted with a question in which
'the Crown was concerned.—(Hear, hear.) They could
'depart from the instructions without doing that which
'would in fact have been a new trial, and that was what
governed the whole case. The Noble Lord having re-
ferred to the statement of Mr. Hincks, which had been
atentioned by the Right Hon. Gentleman,
, Mr. GLADSTONE said that, according to the evi-
cence before him, there was no reason to believe that
• any person who had been a rebel had received coin-
' Peneation.
Lord 3. RUSSELL said the question was not whe-
lher Mr. Hincks was right or wrong. Mr. Hincks had
said that persons had received compensation who had
been rebels, and he mentioned Mr. Haggerman, who bad
been, he said, Commissary-General. Now, in this Mr.
Ifincks was quite mistaken, for Mr. Haggerman was not
convicted but was acquitted. But, why could they not
*Pply to have some test for those persons who were
,c,oming forward for compensation? If they would not
1!0 that, would they have a trial for high treason in 1849,
for that which took place in 1837?—(Hear, bear.) Was
it to be borne that men who declared that they were
loyal, and who from intimidation did not join the Queen's
forces, would they have these men go to trial in 1849, to
prove that they had not taken part in the rebellion?
That was what the Right Hon. Gentleman asked. A
party who was put to the bar, and whe was charged
'with high treason, simply said that he was not guilty;
and if the Judge, as in Ireland last year, would say
to the prisoner, you must bring prima facie evi-
' deuce to prove you are not guilty; would not
the prisoner, and all who would hear it, be filled
'with indignation that a man should bo called upon to
Trove that he was not guilty ?—(Hear, hear.) Only let
the House consider that men should now be called upon
at the expiration of twelve years, when parties, whose
testimony would be essential, might be dead, or removed
from Canada—only let the House consider that under
atich circumstances men should be called upon to prove
that they were not guilty of taking part in the late re-
bellion.—(Hear, bear.) It was thought, he believed,
that 100,000/. would be enough to compensate all the
real losses that had been sustained, and he would remark
that it seemed to be the intention of the Government of
the day to proceed under these circumstances—that no-
thing more was necessary than that those only should be
considered guilty who had been proved to be so in courts
of law.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord then referred
to the dissolution of the Assembly which Lord Elgin
conceived to be necessary, and to the circumstances
under which the present Ministers took office. They
save it was obvious that the question of compensation
was one which would be pressed upon them, and the
Secretary of State had suggested that there should
be compensation for losses in Lower as well as in Upper
Canada; and that those only should be considered guilty
of taking part in the late rebellion who had been con-
victed in due course of law. The preamble to the Bill
stated, that losses not yet proved should form the sub-
ject of future investigation, provided that none of the
parties had been convicted of treason. After noticing
some of the objections to that Act which had been made
by thelliglit Hon. Gentleman, the Noble Lord referred
to the amendinents which had been proposed in Commit-
tee on the Bill, and said he did not feel bound to say that
all those amendments should have been rejected. That
was no part of his duty. He had to see that the Act
when passed did not interfere with the rights of the
Crown, and the just interests of the country. The Mi
nistry had declared that the intention of the Bill
w
deprive•all who were guilty of rebellion of compensaatsio trio,
but it must be seen that, if they were to apply personal
tests, to go back for a period of 12 years, and call upon a
man to prove that he was not a rebel in 1837, would be,
in fact, to establish a Star Chamber in Canada.-- (Cheers.)
It would destroy the peace of families, set party against
party, make out one set of men as having been guilty or
suspected of being guilty of rebellion, and another as
being solely possessed of the feeling of loyalty.—(Hear,
bear.) If they were to have some hundreds of such
eases in the colony, he believed they would have the
effect of destroying all chance of the people living toge-
ther in harmony, and that her Majesty would be utterly
deprived of loyal subjects.—(Hear, hear.) Then, as to
the general character of the rebellion itself. It was
caused by some artful and designing men who bad in-
Illuence over a very ignorant part of the people, but
the great mass of the people were opposed to it. The
under the
saftlorith of the Bee= Ctith9lio population,

teaching of their spiritual leaders, had an abhorrence of
any cause that could lead to civil war.—)Hear, hear.)
A considerable part of the country fell into the hands
of the rebpls for a few days, and he thought that it was
not unnatural the inhabitants should, under the circum
stances, have refrained from any active demonstration.
of opposition to them, while at the same time they had
no sympathy with them. Ile would not, at this distance
of time, call them forward to prove not only that they
were not in arms, but they were not aiding and abet-
ting rebellion at that period.—(Hear, hear.) With
respect to the amendments, he was obliged to pre-
sume, from the conduct of Lord Elgin and the declara-
tion of the Ministry, either that there were valid ob-
jections to them, or that it appeared there were such ob-
jections in the minds of the majority. The Right Hon.
Gentleman favoured the amendment of Mr. Wilson,
which had the highest number in its support, but when
the Bill clear) to the third reading, the majority by
which it was carried was larger than any previoes vote
for it. Persons who had voted for the amendments
withdrew their opposition to it in its final stage, and it
was pased by a majority of 48 to 11.—(Hear, hear.)
In that majority there was a majority included of re-
presentatives of English descent. When the Bill went
to the Legisletive Council, it was introduced by a
member of the Ministry, with a distinct and specific
statement of its objects, in which the intention to grant
compensation to rebels was clearly abjured, while, at
the same time, the justice of awarding the same com-
pensation to Lower Canada that had been previously
given to Upper Canada was insisted upon. He had a
right to say that the Minister was a man of honour,
speaking for the Atiministratien of which he formed a
part, and ilea this distinct declaration of the intention
of the Administration in proposing it, ought not to be
questioned. The Governor. General, in giving his assent
to it, among other Bills, said, in reply
.to an address
which had been presented to him, that he protested
against the outrageous assault which had been made on
the principle of responsible government. At the same
time, in justice to the Parliament, he said he was bound
to express his firm belief that in passing it they did not
intend to compensate persons who had been guilty of
the heinous crime of high treason, but simply to grant
compensation for those losses of property inseparable
from such occurrences, as had been done in other'cases,
and under that belief alone did he give his assent on the
part of the Crown to the Bill. In the spirit thus solemnly
avowed by the Governor-General, did he (Lord J. Russell)
aecept this Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman h A done
full justice to Lord Metcalfe; let them also do justice to
the living.—(Hear, hear.) For his own part, he had
full confidence in Lord Elgin, and that he would do all in
his power to carry the Act out in the manner he had de-
clared he would. With respect to the particular mode
in which this could be done, much must depend upon
the instructions given to the Commission appointed to
carry the Act into effect. Lord Elgin had stated that
it was his wish to send the instructions to this country
for consideration, before they were carried into
effect. At present her Majesty's Government had not
yet received the Bill in such a shape, as to enable them
to lay it before the Queen in Council, but he felt it to
be his duty to state then, that when it did so come be-
fore them, her Majesty's Government would feel it to be
their duty to leave this Act to be brought into operation
in the spirit in which it had been framed—(Cneero—
and therefore unless something very extraordinary and
unexpected occurred, when these instructions did arrive,
he had no doubt but that they would be such as would
enable the Government to advise the Queen to give them
her approbation—(Hear)—and he had no doubt that all
that was necessary for the honour of the Crown and the
country, and for the enforcement of strict justice, would
be done by Lord Elgin.--(Cheers.) He had no cause to
take up the defence of that Noble Lord's character.
When he came into office, he found the Noble Lord
acting as Governor of Jamaica, having been appointed
to that office by Lord Stanley.—(Hear, hear.) His con-
duct in difficulty impressed the Government with the
impression that he was a man of remarkable ability,
especially as that was his first public service. In the
transaction of business he seized upon the main points
which required his attention, and directed the business
under his control in a manner calculated to serve the
best interests of the colony under his will, and to main-
tain good feelings between it and the Imperial Govern-
ment. Being thus struck with these marks of ability,
the Government recommended him fur the more impor-
tant post of Governor-General of Canada, and he must
now declare that the conduct of the Noble Lord had, in
his opinion, done ample justice to the wisdom of that
selection.—(llear, hear.) The Noble Lord had through-
out the late occurrences in Canada acted in a strictly
constitutional manner. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
argued that the Assembly did not fairly represent the
feelings on the subject, and that he should have formed
another Ministry, and dissolved the Asse.nbly. Some-
thing of the same kind had been argued by a party in
this country on the occasion of the repeal of the corn-
laws.—(Hear, hear.) But Lord Elgin believed that the
House of Assembly did represent the country, and that
if he had broken up his Ministry, and put the country to
the excitement of a contested election, the Howe would
have been of the same character, and that he would have
had to take the same Ministry back.—(Hear, hear.)
And he must say that he saw, even iu Upper Canada,
no proof that the representatiVes who had voted for the
Bill had done so in opposition to the wishes of their
constituents. There might be cases; he was not aware
of any; and, at all events, he could say that the great
majority of the Members had not been called upon to
resign their seats on account of their vote on this mea-
sure.—(Hear, hear.) On all these points Lord Elgin was
the best judge, and he had declared his intention not to
dissolve the present Assembly. At the same time, he
was prepared to encounter the full effect of this policy,
even the disapprobation of her Majesty, 'if the
Government should think fit to advise that disapproba-
tion, and to submit to all the penalties which would
follow.—(Loud cheers.) It had been said that the Act
might be disallowed, and at the same time continue the
Governor General in office. Lord Elgin would not re-
tain it in that case.—(Hear, hear.) He believed that
when the opponents of this Act had time to reflect, they
would look upon their opposition, and many of its con-
sequences, sith regret, and especially of the outrages
committed upon the Governor-General ; and he trusted
that a body of men, who had hitherto borne the character
of loyal subjects, some of whom had been the advisers
of former Governors-General, would resume their posi-
tion and submission to the law, and act in a manner be-
coming their professions. He did not attach any value
whatever to the statement as to the separation of the
colony.—(Hear, hear.) He was happy to think that
no such occurrence would take place, because
the great body of the people were in favour
of the law, and the Governor-General was popular in
Canada. It would be far better if the dif-
ferent
,parties in Canada were to lay aside the extreme
animosities which they exhibited, and pursue that des-
tined course of prosperity untrammelled by such con•
tests. That was the lesson which his lamented friend,
Lord Sydenham, had taught the Canadians. " Whatever
your paltry differences may be, by pushing them to an
extreme, you are risking the loss of the immense pros-
perity which lies before you. If you maintain political
differences within moderate bounds, there is no country
which can achieve more happiness, or a higher degree of
prosperity, under the sway of the British sceptre. You
may enjoy as much freedom and happiness as can be the
lot of any other people in the world.—(Cheers.) Un-
happily differences of race and blood were at the bottom
of these disputes. Perhaps in the course of' time this
might be remedied, by the adoption of something like
the plan of federal union, proposed by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck); but however that
might be, feeling anxious that this Bill should be put in
operation in the spirit in which Lord Elgin, his Minis•
ters, and the Parliament of Canada declared it was
passed, being anxious that Lord Elgin should be allowed
the full liberty of acting in accordance with his own
views of what was best for the welfare of the country,
he felt that he would be impairing the dignity of the
Crown, if he were not only, by any show of distrust, but
any half expressed confidence, to deprive Lord Elgin of
that support to which he was fairly entitled. He must
leave the Right Honourable Gentleman to take what
farther steps in this question he might think neces
sary. He left it to him to consider whether he would
raise questions in that House by any farther motion,
which might array two parties against each other, but
his duty was to declare at once the course the Govern-
ment meant to pursue, and by which they were resolved
to abide.—(Cheers.)
Mr. LIEIRIES considered that the elaborate and ad-
mirable speech of his Right Hon. Friend the Member
for the University of Oxford had not received at the
hands of the Prime Minister anything like a close or
legal answer. The Noble Lord had dealt in generalities
and in rather captivating declamation, but he had not
brought the question 'to that point at which the public
oughtwouldthe
t obe satisfied to let it rest. He very nearly came
to
mark,give
sbautitsfaasethieonh,atdhenroetwrlesacnhoedeotohrese pointleft thathim
but to continue the discussion. He (Lord John Russell)
had taken some pains to establish the point that it was
the intention of those who brought forward the compen-
sation measure in Canada, of the advisers of the Crown,
and of the Government of Canada, not to pay, under the
that personstothe
havingtrainßillunderof
but
looking
the rebellion, unless those brought within the excep-
tiong
of the preamble and those woo were convicted as
rebels, should be indemnified. The Attorney General
no doubt had carefully read the Bill, and all the papers
connected with its enactment, and he put it to hill, if
that Act should not he strictly put in force without qua-
lification or interposition, unless it were amended by a
new Act of the Canadian Assembly so as to prevent
rebels from being compensated with the money assessed
off loyal men? The Noble Lord said that he expected
further eoneenunications from Lord Elgin on this subject,
and some account of the instructions he issued to the
commissioners appointed for carrying out the provisions
of the Bill; but he (Mr. Ferries) thought that under the
Act no instructions preventative of awarding compensa-
tion to those who took part in the rebellion could be is-
sued. The Act could not be modified except by subse-
quent legislation, and in its present form it *mild strike
at the foundation of all civil geaernment, as it directly
approved of' thu application of a tax which was likely to
strike at the foundation of all society. The Noble Lord
said the Government did not intend that rebels should
he
indemnified for the losses their stisteinett, bat in the same
breath he tielted would it not be monstrous, after the
lapse
of twelve years, to test by ettamin ttion who were
rebels. Now, unless they entered into an examination and
discrimination, how could those htools
rebellion be found out? Theycou. not ascertain all
who had been rebels; but was he to be told that it was
out of the reach of human reason to discover many per-
sons who had been engaged in that serious rebellion?
A man who had suffered imprisonment,
but was not
convicted for rebellious practices, would, according to
his interpretation of the Act,
mtioent; and ho hdoidwh,
ohtehalsakmeed,
Llvoards
be entitled to' indemnifica-
tion;
ti
hn dr e two
allbe
aEclgais'ae,ofbutthaht
the responsibility on the shoulders .of the Government,
who, kilning that the Bill was introduced so far back

as March last, ought to have properly advised the Go-
vernor-General, and pointed out to him their determi-
nation that rebels should not participate in the indemni-
fication. The only way now to remedy the evil was b)
some legislative amendment in the Canadian Assembly;
and if Lord John Russell gave an assurance that her
Majesty's Government would take measures to carry
out that which they now declared to be their opinion—
if he promised that the Act would be carried into effect
so that the rebels should not receive indemnity, all fur-
ther opposition to the measure would cease. If the
Noble Lord could satisfy the House that he would by
some means so modify this measure as not to give corn
pause don to those who had been in actual rebellion, then
he woule be satisfied. In doing that there was only one
way of acting, and that was by withholding the consent
of the Crown from the measure until the Legislature of
Canada was able to overcome the difficulty which had
arisen. To carry out that object, then, he would pro-
pose a motion to the effect that an humble address be
presented to her Majesty, praying her Majesty to with-
hold her assent to the Rebellion Losses (Canada) In-
demnity Bill until such time as satisfactory assurance
was given that no person who had been engaged in, or
had in any way aided or abetted the rebellion in that
country, should receive any portion of such indemnity.
Mr. BAILLIE COCHRANE said there was one
point which had not been touched upon during the
debate, and which he considered important, and that
was—who were the men that formed the Government
and Council of Lord Elgin in Canada at the present
time?—(Hear, hear.) He had no hesitation in saying
that some of those men now holding high offices under
the Crown in Canada were accused of high treason in
1837, and had to fly from the country in consequence.—
(Cheers.) Mr. Baldwin, the present Attorney-
tieneral, and Lafontaine, the Solicitor-General of
Lower Canada, were both charged with high
treason in 1837, and fled from that country, in order to
save themselves from the consequences of that charge?—
("Hear, hear," from Mr. Roebuck.) It was well for the
lion. Member opposite to cry " Hear, hear," but let him
recal to the recollection of the House those parties now
in office who were charged at that time with the crime
of high treason, and it would be seen that he was not
making any hasty assertion. There was, as he had
already said, the present Attorney and Solicitor-Generals.
There was the Chief Justice of Montreal and his brother,
the Commissioner of Crown Lands in Canada, and there
was Gironard, whom the Hon. Member will perhaps re-
collect a relative of his got 500/. for giving up to justice.
—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) That relative of the
Hon. Member had now, however, changed his opinion of
Gironard, who was now in office, for when Sir Allan
M.Nab asked him if it was not a fact that he received
5001. from Government for arresting him, he did not
deny it, but he said that he had a different opinion of
Gironard now from what he had then.—(Continued
laughter.) He paused to ask the Hon. Member whether
such was not the fact?—(llear. )
Mr. ROEBUCK—I will answer it.—(Cheers.)
Mr. COCHRANE—Yes, the Hon. Member would an-
swer it in the same manner as he defended the Canadian
rebels in 1838.—(Ilear, hear.) These men were now,
however, in office, and there was another of those rebels,
who was appointed to office, hut who, in making inquiry
as to his whereabouts, it was found that he was hung.—
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Such, then, was the way
matters had got on in Canada, and he affirmed that since
1838, the history of Canada had shown that they had
been too ready to forgive their enemies and forget their
friends, and been most anxious to make friend% with all
those men who, in 1837, had acted against the consti-
tuted authorities and the Imperial Government. He
was sorry that Lord Elgin, for whom he entertained the
highest respect, had acted as he had done. He had been
guilty of acts which he considered most objectionable.
He had caused a measure to be brought in to bring
back to Canada the arch traitor M'Kenzie, who, when
he did come back on the faith of that measure, was
soon obliged to quit the country, tho popular feeling
being so powerfully excited against him.—(Hear, hear.)
'There was then the present measure which had crowned
those objectionable acts, and from all he could learn the
only wey to gain preferment in Canada was to become
etlh—a
tc,lldeiadr ,t
hheey. a rg)o—oann d
in he
that h asdy
snt
eo
mt tohfe.
policy, in
adourebbt
the course of a very short period they would not leave
a loyal man in Canada.—(Hear, heal.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said when this question was intro-
duced he had supposed that they were going to discuss
it in that calm, dispassionate, and honourable manner
which usually distinguish the debates in that Heine.—
(Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Opposition.) He could
not for a moment suppose that Hon. Gentlemen opposite
declined to classify themselves under that system—
(Cheers.) He had supposed that they would have dis-
cussed the question in that honourable manner which
distinguished men who were opposed to each other in
political
opinions. He had supposed that if any one was
to be accused, it would be for their own acts, and that
if he was to be accused, it would be for his own acts,
and that he would not be held responsible for the acts
of those who were upwards of three thousand miles re-
moved from them.—(Hear, hear.) What had he to do
with what his friends and relations in Canada did? So
far as he himself was concerned, he defied any man in
that House or out of it to say that he had been guilty
of a dishonourable act.—(llear, hear.) The Hon. Gen-
tleman had said that he had defended rebels. That was
not true.—(Cheers.) He came before the House under
a commission, as the authorised agent of the House of
Assembly of Lower Canada, to argue as their agent
against a measure affecting them, which was at the time
on the table of that House—a Bill which was to destroy
the constitution of Lower Canada, of which that As-
sembly formed a part. He represented that Assembly at
the bar of that House. But it was not true that they
were at all, or at any time rebels. Suppose that there
were some rebels among them.—(Hear, hear, from the
Opposition.) Suppose ho said there had been rebels
among them, had they not in that House, the other
night, been called on to issue a writ in the place of one
who had been convicted as a rebel, and was turned out
of that House?—(Hear.) But did that affect the cha-
racter of that House—(Hear)—or would any one be
warranted in saying that, because Mr. Smith O'Brien
was a convicted reb.l, any one who might be appointed
to advocate the cause of that House was advocating the
cause of rebels.—(Cheers.) He, therefore, appeared at
the bar of that House, at the time referred to, as the re-
presentative of that Assembly of Lower Canada, and he
felt proud to say, that all their acts were not only legal
and constitutional, but that there was not one demand
which he on their behalf made upon the Legislature, but
had been since conceded by the House of Commons.
What right, then, had the lion. Member to say that he
was the advocate of rebels ? In the strongest lan-
guage which the rules of that House warranted him in
using, and with a still stronger feeling than the words
could convey, he denied the truth of the assertion—
(hear)—and had it been made by any man who was not
shielded by the forms of that House, he would have re-
, pelled it in stronger terms.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," from
the Opposition.) Yes, they might endeavour to interrupt
him, but the interruption only showed that while they
could make a charge against his character, they had not
the manliness to listen to its refutation. The Hon Mem-
ber had made a statement without looking into the
evidence, and, like every one who did so, he had made
an unjust charge.—(Hear, hear.) As to the question
before the House, he did not think that, in some points,
the Bill of Indemnity went far enough. It said that
indemnity was to be given for all property wantonly or
unjustly destroyed; but, suppose an honest loyal man to
have his house destroyed by its being made a necessary
fortification; under the wording of the Act that man
could get no compensation for such loss. Then, suppose
another man, who they might call a rebel ; he came,
and he said, " My house has been wantonly and unjustly
destroyed. When I was absent an enemy of mine came
and put a torch to my house and my barn, and they
were burned to the ground." That was a wanton and
unjust destruction, and that man could claim compensa-
tion for such loss under the Bill, and it would be no use
to say that ho was not entitled to such compensation
because ho was a rebel.—(Hear.) Would they say that
parties who had been never tried or found guilty were
guilty of the crime of high treason? The Right Hon.
Gentleman said they were found with arms in their hands.
Why every man in that country carried arms from ne-
cessity. When he was a boy ho never went out without
either a rifle or a fowling-piece. The principle which
was contended for in Canada was, that the majority
should govern. What was the case? A Bill which passed
the Legislature, and virtually reooivod the eanotion of
the Crown was resisted. The danger now contemplated
was, that a man who had been disloyal in 1837, and
whose property was wantonly destroyed by the people
of Canada, might be compensated for the lois. The Right
Honourable Gentleman required that this should not
take effect unless there was a guarantee that no such
person would receive this compensation. It was im-
possible to draw such a line. They could draw no other
line than that which the Canadian Parliament had drawn.
The Right Hon. Gentleman said it was a question of
races; it was no such thing. He would tell them what
it really was. It was that in this colony, as in others, a
minority was enabled, with the assistance of the Colonial-
office, to govern the majority. If this gave the Ministry
that power, there was no doubt this would endanger
British supremacy. The people of Canada inherited
from this country the principle that they were to be
governed by law and the sense of the majority, which
was illustrated in the separation of the colonies from
this country. They should take care not to alienate the
feelings of the people of Canada from the regard which
he was bold to say they felt towards British dominion.
He would leave the question in the hands of the House,
and he hoped there would be no more imputations upon
members of the Canadian Legislature, which had been
cast upon them in the course of the debate.
Mr. B. COCHRANE explained that he certainly had
stated that certain members of the Government of
Canada were engaged in the rebellion, whom he had
named, but he had made no indeterminate imputation
upon the legality of the Legislature.
Mr. C. BRUCE said he deprecated that the press,
which was supposed to be the organ of the opinions of
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxford, had
held up the Government of Canada to opprobrium, he
thought that the adoption of the principles of free trade
bad stimulated the proceedings which had taken place
in Canada, arising from the discontent which those prin-
ciples had excited. He thought that the discountenance
of this Bill would be attended with most injurious effects
to that colony. One would think that this indemnity
for losses in Canada had now been heard of for the first
time, while it was put forward a reward for rebel-
lion. He thought if they examined the question, they
would find it to be no such thing, and that great misre-
presentation had been used to cause this delusion. The
principle of this Bill was sanctioned by successive go-
vernors of Canada. Lord Elgia was not the first
governor who sanctioned the introduction of such a
Bill. The Bill now under discussion was similar to
other Bills sanctioned by previous governors and
previous administrations, and was, in fact, more pre-
cise in its provisions. The opposition to this Bill was as
disgraceful as ever characterised the conduct of 1.1 party
seekin to recover power. Lord Cathcart had sanctioned a
Sill fog compensation, and 119 objection was made at that