New-York daily tribune., 1858-12-27
CANADA.
rssss Our Own C-Sresposdenf.


TORONTO, D~c. %, 1853.
The FIVE Judges Of tte Courts Of Queens Bench
and Common Pleas have given Judgment in what
have been called the State trials." They ere
unanimou, in favor Of The defendants three Min
nte,s of the CrOwn--the A,tcrney-GenerA fo'
Ueper Canada, the Postmaster General and the
Commissioner Of Crown Lands. she 'uits We're
brought TO recover damages te the amount OF
$4,000 day for about ten days, that these Minis
tiers were alleged to bsye sat Illegally ia the Legis
la.iye Assembly. The question was whether their
rssceep,ance of Office after being out f,r some ten
dsys vacated their seats. In England there could
b. no such question: for there every time MEM
ber of the House of Commons accepts 4 ministerial
Office he vacatcs his seat. Aud here the same prin-
ciple obtained Til IoJ7, when act was passed
whch empOW cred q Minister 10 exchange enc office
for abothN, provided he was not out OF ohce
for more than a month. On the 2sth July last,
the Macdonald Cartier Government resigned, abd
Brown apd'Dorlon came in the deable head OF
new Cabinet which after two days, gave up the
shost The old Ministry returned ~ a modified
sbape--Br. Cartier being Premier instead of Mac
donald Macdonald, in order to avail himself Of
the neyy law Of -57, providing for the change from
one Ministerial Office to another, accepted the Of
fee of Postmaster General 10 which he was ga
zeted one day and then gazetted TO MS old ohce
the next Mr. Smith, the late and present Postmas-
ter General made q similar double movement;
" wbe Mr.. Van Koughnett, who had been President
Of the Executive Council before, became Commits
sioner Of Crown LANDS, in which Office he still re-
maine. Ut cOntended by the Opposition that
the act Of ,c57 had never contemplated any such ac
ton as this: that it provided merely for the change
Of an individual Minister from office tO another,
and was not intended to apply TO wtole Ministry,
especially in case where an entirely different
Ministry had ntervened before the changes were
completed. The five Judges of the Courts ef
Queens Bench abd Common Pleas decide that
what done could be legally done under the
statute of 1851; that whet might have been
the object of the Legislature in passing the statute,
A. is not for them TO say; but that the statute is
hIge enough to cover what was done under it.
Chiei-J Justice Draper of the Court of Common
Pleas, sa1 he was far from thinking that the
Legislature in passing the statute, contemplated
such rs had arisen; or that, if they had, the
language of the statute would have been what it
was. But the Judge. held that it their busi-
ness TO determine hat the Legislature had really,
by ihe litsral meaning Of the statute, enacted and
not what they might have done, If certain case
had been present to their minds, or even what they
intended TO do in passing the statute.
Tie judgments were furiOusly assailed by a
newspaper which is the personal property of the
leader Of the intervening Cabinet during these
changes, Mr. Brown; but, 20 far as l can learn,
these members Of Parliament who form the Cppo-
stion are far from sympatbizing in these attacks.
People think it highly improbable that five Judges
should all at once forget their duty and decide
against their own convictions, withOu, having any
thing to gain by such a procedure and with the
certainty that, If they gave wrongful decision,
their Judgment would be reversed on appeal by the
Judicial Committee Of the Prvy Council in En-.
gland The case, if appealed would have first to
90 before Canadian Judges, among whom would !
be all the five who have slready decided, and only
four new ones. Thus majority would be sure to !
confirm the judgmt nts. How the might be |
decio ed by the Prlvy Council is another matter;
but nearly all the lawyers here hold that there |
could not possibly be any other decision than that
arrived at. The leading counsel for the plaintiffs,
however and few others, contend That all the |
Judges are wrong. $50
The moral question, OF course, remalns--had Inc |
Ministers q right 10 strain the statute for such Il
nurposel is the course that was taken one that |
ought irrespective of the mere letter oi the law 10
have been takenl This may be a question for Par
lament: but there is little reason 10 suppose that
that body will reverse the decision IT gave last
sion on this question.
The decision affects the fate of political parties to
very great extent; for If judgment had gone
against the three Ministers, the Government would
have been virtually broken up. As IT ls the legal
position of Ministers, III respect to the change oi
Offices last session, being unassallabe, they WIZ be
more firmly seated in power than they would nave
been had there been no suits, aud their legal posi-
ton had been disputed.
Parliament it is thought, viii meet sometime In
February but whether in the beginning or the end
of the month is either not known or not told
The weather, on the whole, continues very mid;
the present Winter having, 80 far, very much the
character of last.