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

DAY, MAY 30, 1,444.

the wishes of the people. It might be said that the
Legislature of Upper Canada had consented, and so far
they had the semblance of popular approval; but this was
done at a most unfortunate time. The country had not
yet recovered from the insurrection into which it had been
pluneed—he believed solely by the folly and absurdity of
Sir Francis Head.—(Cheers.) So far from the pres.rva-
tion of Canada being due to him, as had been said by the
Hon. Member for Droitwich, he believed if Sir F. Head
had not been as destitute of common sense as any man
who ever filled a public situation, they would not have
had any insurrection at all —( Cheers.) With regard to
Lower Canada they had had no assent whatever,
as this measure had been brought forward at a time
when there was no Assembly representing the people in
existence. He much deplored the folly and wickedness
of the Lower Canadians when they were in the possession '
of the Legislature, to resort to arms and appear in treason
against the Crown, and, by treason, against the country,
by open insurrection. The party who actually broke out
into rebellion were deserving et the worst punishment ;
but the people were not all guilty, and he thought they
had already been sufficiently punished by what they had
suffered from that time to the present. lie would briefly
advert to Lord Durham's Report, which, after giving every
possible virtue to the French Canadians, stating they
were a mild and benevolent race, possessed of good qualities
as men aed as Christians, recommending that they should
be swamped by the people of Upper nada, and annihi-
lated as a people. They had not been consulted on this
proposition of the Government, and the petition which had
been presented by the Right lion. Gentleman that even-
ing was the only effort made by them to get their opi-
nion expressed to the House. The consequences must na-
turally cause disaffection, arid a weakening of the tie be-
tween the two countries. He would say, restore the Go-
vernment of Lower Canada before you carry this Bill any
further. They did not know what the effect of doing jus-
tice might be. He believed that his objections to the Bill
would be re-echoed throughout Canada. All they wanted
was good government. The soil and climate was the
same as that of the United States ; an imaginary line only
separated the two countries, and yet on one side of that
line an acre of land was worth ed., and on the other side
it was worth 10/. The acre of fivepenny land was aris-
tocratical, the acre of 101. land was under democratic in-
stitutions. On the aristocratic side of the line was a
desert, on the democratic a garden. Could they be sur-
prised if the people, seeing those things were
favourable to democratic institutions? They talk
of the dissension produced by differences of race and re-
ligion. On the other side of the line the same differences
existed without producing any dissensions. He would sit
down protesting against the Bill on the ground of its
injustice.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL believed that the Goverment
were under great obligations to the lion. Member for
Droitwich, for having shown on two occasions that the
decided sense of that House was in favour of the union of
the provinces.—(Cheers.) On the first occasion the
Hon. Gentleman had refused to go at great length
into the question, but had stated his general hostility
to the measure, and in the course of the short debate
which had ensued, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Mem-
ber for Tamworth had declared his intention of voting for
the union.—(Cheers.) On the present occasion the
Hon. Gentleman had gone at greater length into the
question, but ho bad not produced such an effect upon the
House as would induce them to accede to his views—he
had, on the contrary, produced a speech from the Hon.
Member for Newark, more entirely in accordance with
the plans and views of the Government than even the
speech of the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth on a
former occasion. The chief opposition to the present Bill,
in addition to that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, had pro-
ceeded from the Hon.and Learned Member for Dublin, and
be did not imagine that the Hon. Gentleman opposite
would concur in the views of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman on that subject. With regard to the first objection
of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, namely, that the
representation was unequal, as compared with the popula-
tion of the two Provinces, his answer was that it would be
found that the representation was founded on the principle
usually adopted on the American Continent, which was
to found the representation not on the exact state
of the population at the time the Constitution was granted,
but on what it was likely to be in the course of a few
years ; because if this were not the case in a country pos-
sessed of large territory, and in which a considerable in.
flux of people was likely to arrive—if it were not so based,
the very injustice would be committed which it was
wished to avoid. With regard to the debt, that debt had
been incurred by Upper Canada, at no gratuitous and un-
necessary expense, or on charges for the sole be-
nefit of Upper Canada ; but in public works, which
if continued from the Upper Province, so as to open a
communication with the St. Lawreuce, could not be con-
sidered for the sole benefit of Upper Canada or Lower
Canada, bet for the benefit of the United Province. He
would refer to the conversation narrated by the Hon.
Member for Kilmarnock, as to the value of those works ;
and he agreed with his Noble Friend, that that was the
only part of the Hon. Member's speech in which he showed
any acquaintance with the subject. —( Cheers and laughter.)
The Hon. Gentleman spoke with considerable ability, and
he believed the only reason why he had not exhibited the
same ability in speaking on the subject, was, that he had
not studied it, or paid any attention to it whatever. Had
he done so he would surely never have recommended the
government of a portion of the Continent of America in
a manner suited only to a despotic Government, and
which would never be submitted to by Englishmen,
who always, sooner or later, would, wherever they might
be placed, insist on having the benefits of those
institutions which they were used to have the benefit of
at home. With regard to responsible government; having
expressed himself upon that subject so decidedly on an-
another occasion, be did not deem it necessary to say more
about the subject at present. He would only say that when
an Assembly considered that certain institutions and objects
would be for the benefit of the country, and that these ob-
jects were not incompatible with imperial interests, that it
must be considered a folly not to accede to their wishes
rather than refuse them on account of any supposed
incompatability with their own peculiar notions.--( Hear.)
On the other hand, he never could admit that where the
dignity of the Crown was concerned, and the interests of
the country were involved, any opinion of a Colonial
Assembly was to overbear the opinion of the United Par-
liament. He conceived that the proposed measure would
lead to a general spirit of harmony and conciliation be-
tween the inhabitants of the two provinces. The lion.
Member for Kilkenny, in his speech, had alluded to the
events of 1837, but he (Lord John Russell) was certainly
surprised that the Hon. Member was not by this time con-
vinced that he had been mistaken in the views which he
had advocated et that period. It would be allowed, lie
thought, that it was desirable to keep up the connection
between the Canadas and this country ; but if this Govern-
ment had yielded to the suggestions of the Hon. Member
for Kilkenny in 1837—if they had allowed Mr. Papineau
to govern in the Lower Province, and Mr. Mackenzie in
the Upper, he was persuaded that the connection to
which he had alluded would be dissolved, and that the
tics between the provinces and the mother country would
immediately be broken. It would nut be necessary for
him to enter into any argument on that tubject, and he
would say no more about it. He wished to allude
to the case of an individual whose name had been intro-
duced in the course of the debate; he meant Mr. Bald-
win, who had been placed in a very important situation by
the present Governor-General of Canada. The Gover-
nor-General had transmitted an account of the gentleman
in question, in which he stated that Mr. Baldwin's senti-
ments, though popular, were perfectly compatible with
principles of allegiance and devotion to the Crown. He
would not detain the House a:ay longer from going into
Committee, and he felt exceedingly rejoiced that on a sub-
ject which involved so many difficulties, and after so
much discussion, and so many dangers, they should be in
a condition which manifested so little of excitement, and so
complete an absence of party feeling. rho Noble Lord
concluded by reading a passage from a despatch of Sir
George Arthur, received a few weeks before, to the follow-
ing effect :—" There is a natural excitement felt here for
the result of the union on the Clergy Reserves Bill ; but
there is otherwise no general excitement in the country,
and the community at large seem more desirous of repose
than of further agitation. Ido not, therefore, know a
more auspicious moment than the present for carrying the
details of the union into effect, if that measure should be
agreed to by the Imperial Legislature."
Mr. E WART gave his support to the motion for going
into Committee. He was persuaded, however, that the
inhabitants of either province should be treated in a spirit
of conciliation. He believed that this country would fail
in any attempt to govern Canada by coercion, while its
dominion would be secured by an amicable course of pro-
ceeding.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but
Mr. PA K ING TO N immediately rose and said, that
as lie found that a majority of the House was for going
into Committee, be would not press his amendment to a
division.

The question having then been put and carried without
a division, the House resolved itself into a Committee on
the Bill, with Mr. Bernal in the Chair.
Clauses up to 3 were then agreed to without any obser-
vation.
On clause 4 being put, for the appointment of a Legis-
lative Council,
Mr. HUME wished to ask the Noble Lord if the Bill
would give any security that the New Legislative Council
would be a better one than either of those which existed
in the provinces before ? Se far as ho could judge, that
object would not be attained by the Bill. His own opi-
nion was, that a certain portion of the Legislative Council
should be chosen by the people, and the remaining portion
by the Government, as was the case in Trinidad.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that in Trinidad there was
no representative Assembly, which would not be the case
in Canada, and the example would not consequently bear
out the proposal of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny. With
regard to the appointment of a Council, it appeared that
men of all parties in both provinces were favourable to
such a measure. The present Governor-General of
Canada had expressed his conviction that the plan would
be an efficient one.
Mr. lIUME wished to know if the Noble Lord was
prepared to propose a similar measure with respect to Nova
Scotia ?
Sir CHARLES GREY said that the case of Nova
Scotia was an entirely different one, as the Executive
Council there was composed of individuals who were
liable to be changed at any time.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN wished that the Council, instead of
fifty individuals, should be composed of twenty-five, ac-
cording to the plan proposed by Sir J. Colborne.
Mr. 14: W ART supported the clause.
Mr. HUME thought that the Canadas would not be
contented with the proposed Council, inasmuch as it ap-
pointed Members for life, and would thus form a sort of
House of Lords in the provinces.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON rose to propose the amend-
ment of which he had given notice. His reason for pro-
posing that amendment was, that clergymen were to-
tally unable to discuss political questions with forbearance,
more especially
that incap where the predominance or wealth of the
Established Church were concerned. The Clergy, in his
opinion, were notorious for their incapacity as statesmen '
and as legislators. There was a recent instance in which
incapacity was manifested in a most deplorable man. ,

ner. in the year 1838, a Bill for the Improvement of
Church Discipline had been introduced into another place,
which had the sanction of the Archbishop of Canterbury
and of the majority of the Bishops. It was distasteful,
however, to a Right Rev. Prelate notorious for his politi-
cal pugnacity.—( Hear.) That Right Rev. Prelate had
declared in his place in Parliament that if the Bill should
pass :nto a law, he would require his clergy to act on the
old law, and that if they disobeyed him he would first re-
priniand them, and on a repetition of the offence he would
excommunicate them.--(The Hon. Gentleman then read
a passage to the above effect from a speech attributed to
to the Bishop of Exeter in the Mirror of Parliament )
What was that but setting an example to the people to
disobey the law ? He had never heard anything similar
to it from a lay Lord, and he believed the language was
unequalled. He certainly had never heard or read of any-
thing equal to it, except the audacity of Thomas a'
Becket. When the Clergy Reserves Bill was brought
before tho House of Lords, the Prime Minister was not
allowed to finish his description of the Bill, but was inter-
rupted by the highest Ecclesiastical Peer, and another
Right Rev. Prelate, whose temerity was obscured by his
intolerance, expressed his indignation that the measure
should he discussed dispassionately. It was all very well
that a Turnpike Bill should receive a fair discussion and
calm consideration, but any thing relating to the clergy
was only to be controverted by clamour.—( Hear, hear.)
The cases he had mentioned showed the want of
temper on the part of the dignitaries of the
Church, but he would mention something even worse
than that. The Bishop of Toronto gave the most viru-
',.at resistance to the Bill for the settlement of the Clergy
Reserves—not only did he enter his protest against it, but
after the Bill had received the sanction of both Houses and
the assent of the Governor-General, the Bishop published
an inflammatory address to his clergy, calling upon them
to sign a petition against it, and endeavoured to revive po-
litical and religious animosity. His conduct had not only
been refuted to the Home Government, but he had re-
ceived a reprimand from the Secretary of State. The
Hon. Gentleman, after mentioning that the Bishop of
Australia had requested to be relieved from his duty as a
Legislative Councillor, moved as an addition to the clause,
" That no spiritual person should be summoned to the
Legislative Council in the province of Canada."
Lord J. RUSSELL could not agree to an absolate
exclusion of the clergy from the Legislative Council,
although no doubt it might be a question, whether in par-
ticular cases, it would be advisable to appoint ecclesiasti-
cal persons. The Honourable Member appeared rather
to bear in mind the fate of the motion he made a few
Sessions ago relative to the Bishops in the House of
Lords, than the Bill before the House.--(Laughter.)
Sir C. GREY hoped his Hon. Friend would not divide
the House upon the motion, because it might create a bad
feeling in Canada. It would be infinitely better to leave
it to the discretion of the Governor than to put a prohi.
bition against any spiritual persons sitting in the Legis-
lature.

Mr. C. LUSHINGTON hid not taken up the matter
lightly, and was determined to divide the House upon it.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in voting against the mo-
tion, begged to be understood as not affirming that it was
desirable spiritual persons should sit in the Legislature.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when there appeared—.
For the motion 29
Against it B3

Majority against the motion
The clause was then agreed to, as were also clauses
7,8, and 9, with a few verbal amendments.

. .
On clause 10 being put,
Lord II °WICK begged to state, as those clauses re-
lating to the Legislative Council had just been agreed to,
that although ho concurred in the Bill as it stood, yet he
considered these clauses as the most defective part of the
measure. The House should bear in mind that there
were great and practical difficulties with respect to the
constitution of the Legislative Council. It was impossi-
ble to forget that the establishment of a Legislative
Council, on the principle adopted, was first intro-
duced into any British Colony by the Act of
1701.—( Hear.) In the older colonies the Councillors
held their situations only during pleasure. Of late years
certainly the practice had somewhat varied, but he did
not belive it had advantageously varied. In Canada, for
the first time, by Act of Parliament, the Legislative Coun-
cillors were allowed to hold their office during life. He
was bound to say he did not think that experiment was
altogether satisfactory. It was impossible to create a
Council, and give them the weight which the House of
Lords bore in this country. The Council had not in
Canada that stake in the country, nor that responsibility to
public opinion, which the House of Lords in this country
might be supposed to have. The House of Lords, indeed,
in this country, had shown that it was responsible to public
opinion. He felt confident his Right Hon. Friend the
present Governor of Canada would not appoint
any one of the Legislative Council that might
not be fairly relied on, but if hereafter any question
should arise in Parliament with respect to altering
the Act, he should not consider himself bound by
the present arrangement, which he treated as essentially
provisional.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. C. BULL ER thought the Government bad done
right in proposing no alteration in the Legislative Council.
At the same time he concurred in what the Noble Lord
had stated, that it was impossible that the Council could
have that weight in Canada which the second branch of
the Legislature had here. The Legislative Council might
in a few years become a subject of great practical diffi-
culty, and the Government must make up its mind to
effect some alteration as had been suggested by the Legis-
lature of Canada.

Mr. HUME said, that if the clause was intended to be
merely provisional, he should not so much object to it •
but he did not see how there would be an opportunity of
altering it hereafter.
The clause was then agreed to, as was also the 11th
clause.

Upon the reading of the 12th clause,
Mr. S. O'BRIEN objected to the equalization of the
number of representatives for the two provinces as unjust
to the inhabitants of Lower Canada, in which province
the population was so much more numerous than that of
the Upper Province.

Sit:l-i. H. INGLIS objected to the clause upon very
different grounds from those stated by the Hon. Member
for Limerick. He objected to it because it did not
give a preponderance to Upper Canada, the inhabitants
of which were English, in race, language, religion; and
affections.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that be had given his reasons
for equalizing the representation when he brought in the
Bill, that he did not think it necessary to trouble the
Committee, by going now into any further discussion of
the question.

The clause was then agreed to.
The 13th clause was agreed to, without discussion.
On the reading of the 14th clause,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was his intention to pro-
pose, at another time, that the county of Lincoln should
be divided into two districts.

Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought it was not desirable to create
such small constitumcies as the Noble Lord proposed. In
the agricultural districts, the constituoncics of the towns
ought to be enlarged, by admitting a portion of the sur-
rounding districts.

Mr. ELL IS differed from the Hon. Member for Lime-
rick, in thinking that the towns were more likely to furnish
independent representatives than the rural districts ; and
when they came to the 17th clause, he would propose that
the town representatives. instead of being diminished
should be increased,:by giving two representatives to To-
ronto and Kingston. He had no objection to increase the
representation of the county of Lincoln ; but he thought
that the town of Shelbrook, in Lower Canada, was also
entitled to a representative.
Mr. C. BULLER agreed in the propriety of giving
additional representatives to Toronto and Kingston; and
he thought that Quebec and Montreal ought, in conse-
quence of their population, wealth, and importance, to have
each two representatives.
Sir C. GREY thought that each of the four towns was
entitled to have two representatives.
The clause was then agreed to, as were also the lath
and 16th.

On the reading of the 17th clause,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that with respect to this clause
he did not mean to propose any alteration now ; but he
thought there was a great weight in the suggestion that
the towns should be adequately represented. The diffi-
culty which he saw in carrying out the suggestion was,
that it would involve a departure from the principle of
equalization, which it was the object of the Bill to effect.
Mr. ELLIS said that the giving too representatives to
each of the four towns, Quebec, Montreal, Toronto, and
Kingston, would not be rei,Parded in either province as an
infraction of the principles of equality, but that it would,
on the contrary, be hailed by all parOes.
Clauses 15, 19, PO, 21, and 22, were agreed to without
discussion.

On the reading of the 23d clause, which related to the
mode of taking elections,
Mr. HUME asked if it was intended that the elections
should be taken by ballot ?—( A laugh.)
Lord J. RUSSELL'S answer was not heard in the
gallery, but the clause was agreed to.
Clauses 24, 25, and 26, were agreed to with a few verbal
amendments. _

On clause 27, the qualification clause, being put, it was
proposed to fill up the blank with 5001.
Mr. HUME objected to the amount of the qualification,
and proposed the omission of the clause.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the omission of the clause. 27
Against it 94
Majority in favour of the clause
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36 were
agreed to with a few verbal amendments.
Clause 37 was agreed to with an amendment. Clauses
38 and 39 were also adopted.
On clause 40 being proposed,
Mr. C. BULLER said that although he approved of
the principle of the clause making the legal language of
public documents in Canada the English language, yet he
thought that in certain cases considerable hardship might
. arise towards some of the members, who might not under-
stand the English language. He suggested, therefore, that
there should be a translation of printed documents for the
benefit of the French Members.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S object was that the legal
record should be in the English language, but he did not
object to a translation being made for the benefit of those
who did not understand that language.
The SOLICITOR.GENERAL defended the clause.
Sir C. GREY suggested a proviso allowing French
translations to be printed.
Lord HO WICK said the clause was needlessly minute
legislation.
Sir R. INGLIS said the clause as it stood was one of
the few he approved of. A laugh.) He wished to en-
courage English language, English laws, English man-
ners, English customs, English religion.
On the question that the words "or printed," be
struck out,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would consider the
subject.
Mr. COURTNEY pressed upon the Noble Lord the
adherence to those words. It was most difficult to trans.