The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-31 00:00:00

and character among the leading persons in the colony
the same advantages as in this country. No political
constitution could except by forbearance among
those who exercised the supreme power. If, in this
country, the Sowreigu were to exert the prerogative of
the Crown to the utmost extent, and the House of Com-
mons were to exert its powers of the purse, in order
immediately to force through any of its measures,
the utmost confusion would be produced in less
than twelve months. The Government of the
colony could only be carried on by each party exercising
a moderation.—(Cheers.) Such were the senti-
ments of the Noble Lord, and in those sentiments he
entirely concurred. He deeply regretted that, in the
exercise of his discretion, Lord Sydenham, then Mr.
Poulett Thompson, had not thought it necessary to layv
before the Legislature of Canada that dispatch. He
laid in extenso before them another dispatch of the Noble
Lord regarding the tenure of political office, which was
to be contingent on the party retaining the confidence of
the Assembly; and it was unfortunate that he had not
also laid before them the dispatch on the subject of re-
sponsible government, for, had that been communicated
to them, it must have prevented much misapprehension.
Mr. Poulett Thompson entertained the same views, as
appeared from his dispatch relative to the tenure of
office in Canada, in which he stated that the principles
of responsibility, if carried to their utmost extent,
were incompatible with colonial dependency. The
Hon. Gentleman had asked if he concurred in the
view taken by Sir Charles Begot of responsible govern-
ment. He would state explicitly to the House his views
on the subject. He understood by a responsible govern-
meat in Canada, that the administration of Canada
should be conducted by the heads of departments en-
joying the confidence of the people and of the Legisla-
ture of Canada. With regard to the Executive Coun-
cil, he thought it was necessary to the due exercise of
their functions, that they should have the power of ad-:
vising the Governor, of propounding their legislative
measures to the Parliament of Canada, and that the Go-
vernor should be guided by the advice of those whom be
had called to his councils, they being responsible ,for
the advice offered. But if be were asked whether the
Governor-General should be in all things the mere ma-
chine—the mere passive instrument of the Executive
Council, his reply would be that he did not so undera
stand the term " responsible government ;" and
if such were to be the case, the Governor-
General would cease to be the Governor of a
British colony. He apprehended that Sir Charles Met-
calfe understood the term " responsible government" in
the same manner ; and in terms the most explicit, Sir
Charles Metcalfe had expressed his adherence to the
resolution of the 3d of September, 1841. He had stated
that he considered every other government but one
which recognised the responsibility of the-heads of de-
partments to the people as represented in the Assembly,
was impracticable in Canada. He would not- stop to
inquire whether that species of government—necessarily
a party one—would be the most likely to conduce to the
happiness of Canada. The principle had been frankly
conceded by the Government at home, and to that prin-
ciple Sir C. Metcalfe had expressed his adhesion; but the
Governor-General was responsible to the imperial autho-
rity alone.—(Cheers.) If he was made a mere instrument
in the hands of the Executive Council, what became of
his responsibility to the Imperial Government. It was
a practical absurdity to leave the Governor without
any authority, and yet to make him responsible. With-
out power there could be no responsibility. If they took
from the Governor all power it was a mockery to
talk of his responsibility. For what was he responsi-
ble ? He was responsible for the proper distribution of
rewards and honours, and for the exercise of the prero-
gative of the Crown in refusing or giving the Royal
consent to the Bills presented to him by the Colonial
Legislature—of these powers the Executive Council
wished to deprive the Governor. The Hon. Gentleman
would not deny that demands had been made upon the
Governor-General by
,the Executive Council to give up
both of these.
Mr. ROEBUCK—I do not see any proof of that.
Lord STANLEY—The Governor-General had made
that statement to the Assembly, in the presence of the
Executive Council ; and that statement had been uncon-
tradicted. It was a remarkable circumstance, that the
Executive Council had made a statement in writing of
the grounds on which they had resigned, and the Go-
vernor-General had protested against that document as
not containing a true statement of those grounds, and
that protest had not been answered. When that dis-
missal had taken place, the Governor-General had written
to him (Lord Stanley) stating what had occurred,
and the conversation which he had had with the Coun-
cil previously; he had written back approving of the
course adopted in the acceptance of their resignation,
but expressing his regret that he had not required them
at the time to put their demands in writing as the mem-
bers of the Executive Council might charge the issue
upon him, and state other grounds as the reason for
their resignation. Within two days after, he received
a dispatch from the Governor-General, which proved
that his anticipations had been correct. So long ago as
the month of May last the Governor-General wrote to
him (Lord Stanley), and said "I am required to give
myself up entirely to the Council, and to submit to their
absolute dictation and judgment as to the manner in
which I shall bestow the patronage of the Government,
appointing some persons and proscribing others, and
they require me to make some public and unequivocal
declaration of my adherence to these conditions, involv-
ing a complete nullification of her Majesty's Governa
ment." As early as the month of May that principle
was contended for, and pressed upon the Governor-
General, not only that he should so exercise the patron-
age of the Crown, but that he should make a public
declaration of his intention so to act. The Governor-
General in December last wrote to him, and he
then stated that he had done all he could
in his appointments to consult the wishes of
the Council, but ho did not feel that he was
absolutely bound to do so. Now, with regard to the
patronage, the House must not run away with the notion
either that the Co!onial-office at home, or the Govern-
ment at home, was in the slightest degree connected.
Long since, the whole patronage of the Crown in the
North American colonies had been placed in the hands of
the Governor of the colony. He (Lord Stanley) as Se-
cretary of State, had not the disposal of the value of 50/.
worth of patronage in all the North American colonies
put together. Every appointment was made on the re-
commendation of the Governor, and no appointment was
made of any person who was not resident in the colony;
and he (Lord Stanley) declared that since he had-held
the seals of office, he had neither, by recommendation,
hint, or suggestion, been interested, either directly or
indirectly, in any one appointment which had been made,
or any appointment which had not been made, in Canada.
The patronage of the Crown was vested in the Governor,
in the exercise of those functions, for which lie was re-
sponsible to the Crown of this country. And do not let
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman say that the distribu-
tion of patronage in a country like Canada was of such
merely local importance that it might be safely—that it
could be wisely—intrusted to the absolute control of a
political party there. He (Lord Stanley) was sure that
it would not be to the advantage of any colony that pa-
tronage should be so dispensed. He would shortly illus-
trate this. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was well
aware that in all small communities, and in all colonies,
the leading men, or a large portion of the leading men
of all parties were gentlemen of the legal profes-
sion. They were men about the seat of Government.
they were generally men of superior education, men of
some leisure, and men whose attendance at the seat of
Government, and the places of legislature, did not
interfere with their ordinary pursuits. They formed
therefore a very large proportion of every colonial legis-
lature. Did the Bar and Learned Gentlemen think that
was a class from which judicial officers ought to be se-
lected, upon the recommendation of the Executive Coun-
cil, which was composed of those-very persons ? Did
the Honourable and Learned Gentleman think that the
judicial offices—the best paid offices, as they ought to be
—did the Hon. and Learned Gentleman think it was de-
sirable such offices should be given as prizes for politi-
cal leadership, or as rewards for political partizanship ?
He (Lord Stanley) could not conceive any principle more
likely to tarnish the source of justice.—(Cheers.) He
said the appointments to the judicial office were safely
vested in the Governor-General exercising the preroga-
tive of the Crown, and that it was not wise or safe to
vest them in any leader of a political faction. Suppose
that rivalry of race should again begin. Suppose that
rivalry of race should be rekindled in Canada, and sup-
pose it should happen that the British party should be
aiming at the exclusion of the French party, together
with their political power in that colony. Did the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman think it desirable or safe that
a political party, in such a state of things, should have
the power of excluding from all office—not only
all political office, but all office whatever—the
whole French population ? But he would go
a little farther. Suppose an administration to
be formed mainly of those persons who, at least,
had been lukewarm when the colony had been threatened
to be torn from the mother country. Suppose a Legis-
lature, or Administration, so constituted, having the ab-
solute disposal of the patronage of the country, did the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman think it consistent with
the dignity—consistent with the honour—consistent with
the metropolitan interests of the Crown, that the patro-
nage of the Crown should be placed in the hands of an
Administration so composed ? He (Lord Stanley) did
not know what the House would think of such a pro-
position—yes, he did think, and he did believe that the
House would see that it was inconsistent with the ho-
nour of the Crown to place that power in an assembly
so formed. He felt confident that, sooner than submit
to such demands, there was no privation and no sacri-
fice to which Sir Charles Metcalfe would not submit, and
he was sure that nothing could induce him to be subser-
vient to such a demand. But the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman said that Sir Charles Metcalfe had been most
unfortunately educated for the service of a free coun-
try. Now, who and what was Sir Charles Metcalfe ?
Was he a man of extreme opinions with respect to a des-
potic Government? Was he a man of repulsive manners,
hostile to all public institutions, and willing to be the
instrument of any Government for crushing free insti-
tutions? Those who knew anything of him, knew that be
was precisely the opposite of all these. They knew that
he was not a supporter of the present Government—
(Hear, hear)—and that he was a man extremely liberal
in political matters.—(Hear, hear.) They also knew that
he was the man who first introduced into India the
liberty of the press. lie was also selected by the late
Government to the government of the colony of Jamaica,
at a moment when the legislative Government of that
colony was in such a state of hostility to her Majesty's
Government, that it was considered almost as being ab-
solutely incapable of being made a fit instrument of
government. Sir Charles Metcalfe was sent out, and
in two years he brought the island of Jamaica into
a state of order and subordination. Yet this was the
man whom the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said had
been unfortunately brought up for the management of
the affairs of a free country. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman had alleged that Sir C. Metcalfe had never
explained what his views were with respect to a responsi-
ble government. Now he (Lord Stanley) must say that