§ Mr. Ellicepresented a petition, signed by all the respectable merchants of London connected with Canada, in favour of this bill. He confessed he felt some surprise and regret at hearing the present measure, the object of which was, to give an independent constitution to the provinces of Canada, assimilated, on a former evening, to that odious measure by which the British parliament sought to deprive the province of Massachusetts of a free legislature. He was satisfied that the bill would be received with gratitude by the great mass of the population of Canada.
§ Mr. Brightprotested, on the behalf of our absent colonists, against the wickedness of introducing so iniquitous and abominable a measure at this late period of the session.
Mr. Marryatsaid, he had received strong representations from many persons connected with Canada, that the present bill was likely to produce the most injurious effects. Under these circumstances he should certainly oppose the passing of it, unless withdrawn until next session.
Sir F. Burdett, without entering into the abstract question, how far it was right to legislate for the interests of our colonies without previous communication with them, begged leave to protest against the exaggerated expressions of the hon. member for Bristol, which imputed to his majesty's government an act of gross injury and violent tyranny against the provinces of Canada. Feeling that great credit was due to his majesty's ministers for the very liberal views they entertained on this subject, and believing, that if the same enlightened system of colonial policy had been much better for this country, he felt it his duty to protest against the harsh and violent expressions of the hon. member for Bristol, which had no foundation whatever in reason or justice.
§ Sir J. Mackintoshsaid, he had never applied any expressions of censure to the bill itself; for he admitted that the conditions of the union appeared to be fair and reasonable. He had certainly deprecated the attempt to pass a bill, depriving a free colony of their constitution without hearing their opinions and arguments for or against the measure. He confessed he had heard the sentiments of the hon. baronet on this subject with the utmost surprise. He had never carried his opinions, as to popular rights, so far as the hon. baronet. He venerated every part of the constitution, and he preferred and loved the popular part of it; but he had never carried his popular principles so high as the hon. baronet. This was the first time he had heard it argued, that an incorporating union of two great colonies was not a most essential alteration of their political constitution. The annexation of Holland to France might, on such principles, have admitted of an easy defence; and it might have been said to the former power, "We do not take away the rights of Dutchmen, but we only communicate to you the rights of Frenchmen." He objected to such an interference with the rights of a free people, on grounds wholly distinct from the merits of the constitution which might be imposed upon them. He no more wished to see liberty imposed on a people than despotism; for even liberty imposed on a people did not deserve the name, and was little better than despotism. The people of Canada had no less than two years' notice previous to the measure of 1791; whereas parliament was now called upon to make a total 1731 change in their form of government without any notice, when they already enjoyed a free constitution.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, that as his majesty's government, instead of finding the support they expected, had been strenuously opposed, not on the principle of the bill, but on the period of the session at which it was introduced, it was obvious that the measure could not be passed, except under circumstances which were calculated to alienate the feelings of the people of Canada from the proposed arrangements. He lamented that the learned gentleman had opposed the measure in a tone of earnestness, which rendered it almost impossible to carry it through in the present session. Under all the circumstances, therefore, he felt it inconsistent with his public duty to press the measure, however much its postponement was calculated to injure the best interests of the people of Canada. He protested, however, against the principle, that parliament had no right to legislate for the best interests of the most distant dependencies, without previous communication with those dependencies. He could not conceive any principle more disastrous, since it was calculated to tie up the hands of the legislature from performing its most sacred duties.
Sir F. Burdettregretted the postponement of the measure, and trusted that no opposition would be offered to it next session. The operation of the bill would have been highly beneficial to both the provinces concerned; and he could not help thinking that the gentlemen who had opposed it, had been a little over scrupulous in the cause of technical objections and abstract principles.
§ Ordered to lie on the table.