The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-30 00:00:00

,ATURDAY, MAY gr). IP4O.

,_<~:

7111,1 SUN, _

garde J. Sinclair)—J. and D. Jervis, mercers, Llanidloes, s 6111RIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS
111omtgomeryshire--J. K. and G. Corbyn, tailors, Lowestot, _
Suffolk--W. 3. Cripps, jun., and G. Aclund, common-car-
riers, Richmond, Surrrv—T. Edwards and R. Town, char..
fingers, Kent-wharf, Montague-close, Southwark—C. Alay,
S. Allen, and G. Allen, drug-grinders, Cowper-strcet, St.
Luke, Middlesex.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
DAVID HUNTER, builder, Edinburgh, June 1, and 26,
at one, at the Ship Tavern, Edinburgh.
THOMAS RUBERTsON, rattle dealer, Edinburgh, June
1, and 22, at one, at the Royal Exchange Coffee-house, Edin-
burgh.
DONALD INPGRIGOR, grocer, Tillyeoultry, June 3, and
•)6, at twelve, at the Tontine Hotel, Alicia.

raom TUE DAILY TAPERS CF YESTERDAY.
(From the Glol;c.)
' Lord John Russell last nit lit moved for leave tc
bring in a 13:11 for the prevention of bribery and treat,
at elections. His Lordship had previously stated
, • in the debate on the Ludlow writ, the leading provi.
sloes of the measure, to which we drew public attention
at the time. The Noble Lord now announced his in-
tention to introduce into it a provision, that if bribery
or treating were practised before an election, the ad-
verse candidate might give notice that his opponent was
committing those offences, and that either the bribery
or the treating, if afterwards proved before the Com-
mittee, should unseat the one canditate, and substi-
tute the other, in the same way as where notice is
given that a candidate wants the requisite qualifica-
tion. We hail with approbation this attempt to stay
the plague. The necessity of applying immediately some
chece. to the prevailing practices by which the purity
and freedom of election have been rendered a mockery,
and by which, it allowed to proceed, the old system of
boroughmongeting will be re toned under a new forte,
is now admitted by vel who are not either the bribers
or the bribed. We are by no means sanguiee as to the
efficiency of the proposed measure : its Failure, should
such be the result, will, however, demomerate yet more
clearly the inveteracy of the disease, and convince those
who are most opposed to other meesures, such as the
Ballot, of the necessity of their adoption.
(From the Standard.)
We regard with great suspicion the proposition of
Mr. Hiatt for the appointment Cl" a Committee upon
the griading of bonded corn, and must, therefore,
regret that the motion of the Han. Member was
successful. Prima fade the object is too trifling
to excite touch interest, f not4i"g znifair is
contemplated, but there appears to be a very
great anxiety to carry the point ; and therefore
it is that suspicions are awakened. A loose permission
to grind corn in bond would practically repeal the Corn-
laws, but a strict and efficient guard over the operation
would seem to leave the indulgence worth nothing. A
great deal will, of course, depend upon the construction
of the Committee selected, but we anticipate nothing
from its labours, but more or less of disappointment
to the parties moving the quevion. If the Commit-
tee try to obtain an opportunity of smuggling
foreign corn into domestic consumption—as if the nia•
jority are mill-owners or money-jobbers, they certainly
will—no Bill recommended by them will ever become
a law ; if, on the other hand, the Committee provide
that. no more than is ostensibly :asked for shall be ob-
tained, they who expect a great deal more than osten-
sibly they ask for will be grievously disappointed—and
they, we believe, are the movers of the question. In
short, the Committee appears to us to be incapable of
doing any material good, and it tnay do mischief.
(From the Courier.)
We have, perhaps, more frequently than most of our
daily contemporaries, approached questions bearing on
Colonial affairs, those referring to Canada more espe-
cially, and we have ever endeavoured to come to their
consideration without party bias in any shape or colour,
being entirely of accord with the Times of this morning
in the opinion often expressed heretofore in the Courier,
that the Canada Union Bill, as any other vitally affect
ing colonial interests, " is not, or ought not to be, a part)
measure." It is in this spirit that we trust to see the
Canada Union Bill discussed this evening on both sides
of the House. The time is clearly come when some
decisive action must be taken one way or the other in
respect of a final settlement of the constitutional forms
under which the Caeadas are to be governed for the
future, and this necessarily involves the solution of the
main difficulty which must be encountered at starting,
whether those two great provinces shall remain separate
as at present, with distinct and often conflicting Legis-
latures, which naturally beget, what never should have
existed or have been tolerated from the first, prejudices
or interests really or apparently as conflictingand in-
jurious, or whether by a fusion into one compact body
an attempt should not be made to create a more har-
monious and homogeneous system of legislation and ad-
ministration.

BRITISH. GUIANA.
M. GLADSTONE said, in answer to a question
of his the other night, the Noble Secretary for the Co-
lonics. had declined to produce a despatch to the G.
nernor of British Guiana, respecCng the incre.l3,:il Civil
List. By th 2 last mail papem had arrived, which were
already printed, arid before the public., coatainio the
despatch in question. ‘Vould the Nuble Lord noir
have any objection to produce the despatch with such
oilier papers as he might tiiinh expedient ?
Lord J. RUSSELL, said he had not yet heard from
the Governor, and he should wish to wait.
Mr. GLADSTONE asked if no despatches had ar-
rived by the last mail';
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to reply in.the
affirmative.

well'are of time Canadas ; in tie second place,
to maintain inviolate the connection' between the Ca-
nadas and the parent State, which was the earnest de-
sire of the loyal portion of the inhabitants of the pro-
vinces ; and he was perfectly certain that the Noble
Lord would join heartily with him in dec,iring the at-
tainment alas third object, which was to provide for the
welfare and prosperity of the loyal portion of the people
of Canada ; the great majority of whom were ret:dent in the
Upper Province. These were his object?, and E believed
that the Bill of the Noble Lord then on the table of the
Home would he fatal and destructive to time 'whole of
them. The first objection he had to the Bill was founded
upon the enormous geographical extent of the country
included in the two Canadas. He doubted whether it
would be found possible to govern such an erior-
mous extent of country by one single executive.— !
( Hear, hear.) Was the House aware that the •
length of Canada in which our countrymen had settled
amounted to not less than between 11,000 and 12,000
miles ? Was the House aware that the length of Ca-
nada was nearly or it inieht be as great as that of the
Chinese empire, w ith 350 millions of inhabitants ? He
believed be might add, that the length of Canada,
from east to west, was as great as the whole
of the United States from north to south ; and if
they considered the length of the boundary of the fron-
tier between Canada and the United States, he would
be guilty of no exaggeration if he stated it at 1,800
miles. -He would refer the House to the unfortunate
circumstances that had recently occurred in that country,
and the disposition of the inhabitants of the United
States to avail themselves of any difficulties or troubles
that might arise ; and he would ask them whether it was
safe or practicable to allow that enormous extent of
boundary to be expoeed with only one Executive. His
belief was that instead of uniting the two provinces it
would he far wiser to divide the Canadas into three, and
have executive bodies in each. Another feature in that
branch of the subject was, that not only was that country
`o gigantic in extent, but for half-a-year it was imprac-
ticable, and could not be travelled. The likes and
waters were frozen, and meads were impassable. and if
there was only one Legislature, it. would be impossible
for the Members, without great inconvenience, to attend,
owing to the prodigious distance from the frontiers,
to the central town. On that part of the subject, namely,
the inconvenience that would arise from the enormous
extent of Canada, he begged shortly to refer them to the
opinion of an authority which he wes sure would be
treater; with respect ; he meant Chief Justice Robinson
of Upper Canada, and who enjoyed the respect of ail
parties in that province. The Honourable Member
then read the extract, which stated that any per-
son who, like himself (Chief Justice Robinson) annu-
ally traversed large portions of Upper Canada,
.could speak positively to the great inconvenience which
would attend such an arrangement. If it were at-
tempted the change could not pass, and the in-
convenience it would give rise to could scarcely be
over-rated. He would also refer the Noble
Lord to a despatch of Sir John Colborne (Lord
Seaton), dated August, 1839, in which his Lordship
stated that ho should recommend that the Governor,
or Viceroy, be empowered to appoint Deputy Go-
vernors to reside at Toronto, to act under
special instructions from the Governor or Viceroy.
Now he would not enter into the question whether or
not this plan recommended by the Chief Justice would
be a convenient plan, but he thought great difficulties
must arise from the vast geographical extent of the
country. He would further add, ho believed there
was not in all the world a parallel of any
colony equal in extent to the Canadas being governed
by one Executive ; and he believed, further, there was
no instance, except Russia and China, of any indepen-
dent country of so prodigious an extent as the Canadas
being governed by one Executive. But he passed from
this position of his argument to that most important ques-
tion which Parliament were now called on to decide--the
importance of which could not be over-rated, it being a
question on which the future welfare of the Canadas de-
pended.—(Hear, hear.) That question was, whether,
looking to the population of Canada, to the comparative
number of the two races by which the country was
inhabited, to the recent events by which the country
had been disturbed, and to the nature of the Bill which
the Noble Lord had laid on the table of the House, it
was possible an union so arranged could conduce to the
welfare of the province—whether a united Legislature so
constituted could carry on the Government of the country
either with advantage to the Canadas or to the fur-
therance of the connexion between them and the
mother country? In discussing this most important
branch of the subject the House would allow him to
refer to the high authority of Mr. Pitt—an authority
only liable to this one question—whether an opinion
expressed in 1791, when advocating the separation
of the two colonies, was of equal application to the pre-
sent state of affairs. This was a question the House
must decide. He found in one of the speeches of Mr.
Pitt, urging the seperation of the Canadas into two
colonies, the following passage :—" If the pro-
vince were not divided there would he only only
one House of Assembly, and there being two parties
equal, or nearly equal, these would surely be divided
into factions, and one party being much stronger than
the other, the latter would complain they ware op-
pressed." But Mr. Pitt contemplated the two races
being equal, or nearly equal, in which case there would
be partial fictions ; or the one being stronger than
the other—in which case one would be oppressed—
The passage which he had just quoted showed the
greatest foresight on the part of Mr. Pitt. That
passage could not refer to the state of Canada
then, for the British population at the time
formed but an extremely small proportion of
the inhabitants of those countries. It was evi-
dent, therefore, that Mr. Pitt, in expressing bis
opinion, looked to a distant period. Mr. Pitt pro-
ceeded to say that he believed there would be a con
flirt of interests in such a House of Assembly as he had
alluded to, and as parties would be nearly balanced there
the consequ nee would be, for a great many years,
a series of animosities and contentions. He (Mr. P.)
would next refer to another authority, if possible equal
to that of Mr. Pitt—he meant that of Mr. Burke—
who made a statement which he thought was still nmore
applicable to present circumstances than the language
of Mr. Pitt. Mr. Burke says, "that an attempt to join
two people dissimilar in laws, in language, and in man-
ners, appeared to be altogether absurd—that an attempt
to join the conquerors and the conquered would give
rise to many conflicts and dissensions, and that he would
not recommend a system which could only promote
anarchy." The Noble Lord, however, was making an
attempt precisely similar to that which had been con-
demned by Mr. Burke. He was attempting to join
a people dissimilar in laws, in language, and in manners.
And what were the circumstances under which the Noble
Lord was about to make that attempt ? When Mr.
Burke used the language in question, he was not speak-
ing after a civil war, but thirty years after the
conquest of Canada had been effected. What
was the case now ? The disaffected party in
Canada had been discomfited, it is true, but not com-
pletely conquered. A civil war had taken place, not 80
years ago, but almost at the present day. While the
blood that was shed had hardly been dried, and while
the fires that were lighted had scarcely been extinguished,
what hope of good, he would ask, could be expected
for the measure proposed by the Noble Lord under
such circumstances? In order to give the House addi-
tional information on that subject, he would mention
the number of disaffected in the two provinces.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) The entire population of the
provinces amounted, according to the Noble Lord
opposite, to 1,100,000, and 450,000 of the number
formed the French minority. He would refer the
House to the authority of Lord Durham with regard
to the character of that minority.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord Durham's mission to Canada had been unfortu-
nate for Canada, unfortunate for England, and un-
fortunate for the Noble Earl himself.--(lnterruption.) Lord Durham's Report was a tissue of misrepresenta- I
tion.--(Cries of " Hear, hear," from Mr. C. Buller,
and ironical cheers from Mr. Hume and other Ho-
nourable Alembers ) He stated not an opinion, but
a fact, when he said that in every important particular
the Report had been disproved.—(Hear.) With, this
caution he would quote Earl Durham on the almost
only point on which he had not been shown utterly mis-
taken, and that was as to the feeling of animosity
between the two races in Canada. 'rho Noble Earl
stated that the French and English races were
divided, not only as two writers holding different opm-
nions, but with contrary objects ; that their animosity
had been heightened by the exasperation of the blood-
shed attendant on a contest ; that it would be as
constant as intense, and that never would the
British population submit to time House of
Assembly, in which the French party possessed, or
approximated to, a majority. Did the Noble Secretary
fur the Colonies coincide in the correctness of these
statements, or were they as hasty and unfounded as
the rest of the Report? If correct, why did the Noble
Lord attempt to throw the population of Lower Ca-
nada as a weight and an incumbrance upon
the loyal inhabitants of Upper Canada? Was not the
experiment too fearful to be tried ? It was utterly fal-
lacious to estimate the relative positions of the
two races merely by their numerical force.—(Hear.)
He was not aware whether any of the friends of the
Hon. Member for Kilkenny hail died suddenly in
Lower Canada, but he knew that several of them
had run away from that province, to avoid the most
unpleasant description of sudden death.—(A laugh.)
But there was still re Paining in Canada a considera-
ble section of persons who were opposed to " the bane-
ful domination of the mother country." The Report
of Lord Durham was working considerable mischief in
the Canadas, and could any body doubt that the minority
of disloyal persons in Upper Canada would return their
fair share of representatives, who would make common
cause with the representatives of the French Canadians in
the Lower Province, so that there would be a formidable
minority in the new Legislature. Was there not ample
ground for dissatisfaction ? He would remind the House
of what the principal causes of dissatisfaction in Canada
were alleged to have been. The first ground of complaint
was the want of what they called a responsible Govern-
ment; the second was, that the Legislative Council should
be made elective ; - and the third was, that the total reve-
nue of Canada should be placed under the control of the

EGYPT AND SYRIA.
Mr. FECTOR zn.:ked if there was any hope of Dr.
13ov:ring's: Report relative to Egypt and Syria being
laid on the table of the House, and is an u;imutilattd
sate.—( Laughter, and hear.)
Lord PA LM ERS TO N said he could so far console
the Honourable MemLer as to state that the Report
had been returned to Dr. Bowring for the purpose
of his superintending- the printing of it. He ( Lord
l'alinerston) had, however, been compelled to strike
out some short pa sages in the Report, containing poli-
tical speculations of the Author, considering that if the
Doctor wished to write a pamphlet about his own odinions
upon political matters he ought not to do it at the public
exponse.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Report,
hotycver, would contain every information of a commer-
cial nature.

FVF.".TING EDITION.

legisletiee body. New had any one of those measures
been connected? Quite the reverse. The Bill before the
House distinctly refused what was called the responsibility
of the Geyer:orient. It refused to make the Members
of the Executive Council elective, and on the contrary
enacted that they should hold their offices for life.
And instead of giving the House of Assembly the control
of the revenues, 75,000/. were entirely taken awey from
the control of that body. He did not blame the Noble
Lord for net making these concessions. On the contrary,
he thought the Noble Lord was quite right ia refusing
them. There remained, therefore, those three grounds of
discontent, which would raise an opposition of such power
that the Government would find it very difficult to con-
tend with it. He would not speak of what new sources
of dissatisfaction might arise ; but be would take the
House of Assembly as if it were convened in this present
year, 1840, and he would ask, could any man Heine sire-
.dertake to say that in the very first Session the House
Yeoeld not declare itself in favour of dissolving the connec-
tion 'tie Great Britain ? The Hon. Member then read
from a tteeeatch cf Sir G. Arthur, dated the 15th of Oc-
tober, an extract, to the effect that in the then state
cf populae feeling in the Provinces, both amongst the Re-
prellicans t eel the Royalists, it was wise of her Majesty's
Gevermeen, not to press the measure of the Union at that
time. He next referred to an authority which he was cer-
tain would be :is teived with respect, that of Sir F. Head.
He would take that opportunity of expressing his opinion
with regard to thts services of Sir Francis Hi ad, and with-
out ‘NlilillteT to cast the slightest doubt on the great value
of the services of reord Seaton, he had no hesitation in
sayine. that it was his decided opinion that the country
was itidebted to the greit moral struggle of Sir Francis
Head in 1836, for the possession of the Canadas at the
present moment.._( Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Minis-
terial benches, answered by cheers from the Opposition.)
He was sure he need notremind the House of the value of
the services of Sir Francis Head, or et' the weight due to his
opinion. In one of his despatches he had reported to the
Government, and mere recently he bad published his
opinions to the country in another shape, Gad had offered
the strongest opposition to the union of the tirq provinces,
which he stated in his opinion would be attenzied with
the most disastrous consequences. He had another ob-
jection to the proposed union, and before he called the
attention of the House to that part of the subject, be
wished to advert to a recent despatch of Governor Pou-
lett Thomson—he twain the despatch which ac-
companied the Clergy Reserves Act, in which he said
that among the evils which had afflicted the Lower Pro-
yhice, almost the only ene from which they had been hi-
therto fee had been religious dissension and in the other
in which he had transmitted the order relative to the semis
nery of St. Sulpice, he had stated the same op:nion. Now
he would ask if they were rot incurring a great risk, if
they pasted th's Bill for the union of the Provinces, of in.
trootreing a most fatal source of religious dissension into
that country, from which Mr. Poulett Thomson said they
had hitherto been fortunately free. The great tnejhrit,i
of the people of the Lower Province were Ro-
man Catholics—while the majority of the people of the
Upper Province were Protestants, and the effect of the
union would be to make the Protestants and Catholics as
nearly as possible equal in the two countries; and he felt
that they were not only introducing a certain source of
bitter animosity, bat, looking to the great wealth of the
Catholic Church in Lower Canada, and to the destitution
of the Protestant Church in Upper Canada, he feared that
in the event of the union the Protestant Church of that
country would be destroyed ; and this he thought ought to
be a suiject of grave consideration with the House before
they gave their consent to the Bill of the Noble Lord. In
confirmation of that opinion he would cite the protest of
the Bishop of Toronto with regard to the Clergy Reserves
Bill, in which that Prelate points out that such must
be the inevitable result of the union of the Preeince,„
The Hon. Member then read the protest of the Bishop of
Toronto. Such were the strong terms in which the Bisbep
of Toronto protested against the uniee of the two Canadas,
in consequence of the destructive bearing that union
weuld have upon the Protestant Church in Upper Canada.
He had already occupied the House at considerable length,
but he would not split this subject without adverting to the.
arguments that had been brought forward in favour of the
measure by the Noble Lord opposite, and others. One of
the arguments of the Noble Lord was the necessity of de-
fendieg the interests of the loyal population in Lower Ca-
nada. lie did net tee the force of that argument, becauee
he was convinced that whatever course was necessary to
put an end to the disturbances in that country, the inhabi-
tants of the Lower Province would most willingly agree to
it, but they were convinced that the union of the two
provinces would not effect that object. Another argument
was the necessity of instantly returning to a renresentative
Government in Lower Canada. Now he (Me. P.) denied
that there was any necessity for that. Trey were bound
to look to the interests of the loyal inhelsitants, and if re-
presentative Government was injurious to them, it ought
not to be established. It therefore appeared to him that
they would be premature, and following a false policy,
to establish a representative Government in Lower Canada.
Their policy had been too great conciliation. What
favour had they shown to the loyalty or bravery of those
who 'had exerted themselves to maintain the British cou-
tiection with the Provinces? Had not Captain Drew been
treated with studied neglect?—(Hear, hear.) Had they
not numerous instances of the favour shown to the dis-
affected; and had they not under Mr. Poulett Thomson a
recent 'nstance—of Mr. Robert Baldwin, who bad just
been made Soliciow-General. Ile would not go throueh
the history of that Government ; but every one knew the
position he occupied at the time cf the rebellion in Upper
Canada, atd he did say that it 'cat a most dangerous step,
and most discouraging to the loyalists, to take such a step
as the injudicious elevation of Mr. Robert Baldwin.
The,Noble Lord had spoken last night of the tranquillity of
Canada, but he would warn them that that tranquillity was
not to be relied on. The tranquillity of the loyal was that
of despair, while the tranquillity of the disaffected was that
of the bayonet. Another argument dwelt on by the Noble
Lord was the embarrassed state of the finances of Upper
Canada ; but while he admitted the claims of that province
upon Great Britain, he denied that the union was at all
necessary to effect that object. In his opinion the far
better course would be to annex Montreal to Ueper
Canada, and by governing Lower Canada after the Con-
stitution of 1774, namely, by a Governor and Counsel,
till the English language and English laws were intro-
duced, and till the population had been so far modified and
changed in their views as to make them fit for a full parti-cipation in the privileges of the British Constitution. But
he must beg to call the attention of the House to that
argument in favour of the union which had been more dwelt
on than any other, namely, that the Canadians themselves
were desirous of the union, and that the Legislature of the
two provinces had declared in its favour. The House would
remember that the Hon. Member for Coventry, whose opi-
nions on any subject connected with the Colonies were en-
titled to great weight, on the second reading, had sand that
he had entertained serious doubts as to the union of the
two provinces, but that he was reconciled to the proposition
by the fact that the Canadians themselves were desirous
,f it. If that fact were established, it was one which
ought certainly to be taken into consideration, and have
great weight ; but he ( Mr. Pakington) did not himself
believe that such was the fact, and lie hoped the House
would permit him briefly to call their attention to the cir-
cumstances which bore on this important argument. In
the first place, he thought they had this evening, in the
petition from Lower Canada, a pretty good proof that at
all events the Lower Canadians were not unanimous in
their approbation of an union. His Right Hon. Friend
the Member for the University of Cambridge had that
evening presented a petition from 400,000 inhabitants of
Lower Canada, deprecating the union of the two pro-
vinces ' - and while lie felt they must be regarded as parties
who had lately been in open rebellion against the Crown of
England, yet if the argument of universal consent were em-
ployed, it would be impossible to leave out numerically
so large a portion of the inhabitants.—(Hear.) Then what
were the feelings of the inhabitants of Upper Canada?
Were they unanimous? He feared they would find public
opinion there extremely divided on the subject. Many
were anxious for the union, but he believed a large propor-
tion of the inhabitants were decidedly opposed to it ; but
he now turned to the feelings of the Legislature. With
regard to the Lower Province, he mutt say, looking to
their present state, he did not think any great weight at-
tached to their decision, whatever it might be. It had
been alleged lately, that at the time the Special Council
consented to an union, there were not more than half of
them assembled, therefore he did not think much attention
should be paid to their opinion. But there was a more im-
portant question—what was the opinion of the Legislature
of Upper Canada on this subject ? The House of Assem-
bly in Upper Canada were arrived at the full length of
their existence. It had now sat four sessions, and it was
an important fact, that in every session they had turned
their attention to the subject of an union. In the first
session of 1837, the Legislative Council and the House
of Assembly concurred in a joint address to the Crown,
praying that no union might take place. And what was the
answer received from Lord Glenelg ? That her Majesty's
Government did not consider the union of the provinces
a " fit measure to be recommended to the Crown
of England. No longer ago than 1837, so different
was the opinion of the Queen's Government ! In 1838,
the Legislative Council of Upper Canada attain drew up
an able Report, deprecating the union. if he retnem-
bored rightly, the House of Assembly also drew up a Re-
port, in which they adverted to certain conditions. In
1839, the subject was again taken into consideration, when
they approved of the union, subject to certain conditions.
In 1840, they again consented to an union, and, by a con-
siderable majority, passed an Address to the Crown, in
which were the same terms as those they bad previously
laid down. This was the history of proceedings in Upper
Canada, with regard to their consent. They deprecated
the union, and then consented to it, on conditions. But
he would now advert to that which uniformly for three
yea-s had been the first and foremost condition on which
they would consent to the union—namely, that the seat
of Goverment should be in the Upper Province. Now, ho
thought the course adopted by her Majesty's Government
was neither ingenuous, wise, nor politic, onsthfs subject.
They knew the importance the Assembly in Upper
Canada attached to this point, hut they studiously avoided
giving their opinions on the subject; and be thought he
s
had now a right to ask the Noble Lord what those epi-
nions were? If he rightly understood the course
which had been taken by Mr. P. Thomson, it was notj an
ingenuous course. He had held out that the seat of Go.
vertu-trent might in one year be in one province, and in the
next in the other. This was impossible. With regard to
the interest and importance of the question, he need not
remind the House of what had taken place in the United,
States, where so great had been the jealousy on this subs.
ject, they had been obliged to make the separate district
of Washington to obviate it. On this subject Chief Jus-
tice Robinson said, " To remove the scat of Government
from Lower to Upper Canada was not only contrary to
the sense of the Legislature, but that it was likely to pro-
duce certain discontent to a degree that could hardly be
anticipated " If the seat of Government were fixed at
Montreal, they would at once deprive the inhabitants of
Upper Canada of that condition which they had made an
indispensable one, before they consented to the union ; and
it was the duty of the Government at once to say where the
seat of Government would be fixed ; and tell the
people of Upper Canada, whether. the conditions made
with them were to be kept. It was a question open to