CANADA. (Hansard, 18 February 1831)

§ Lord Howick
said, that he rose to move Resolutions, on which he should afterwards propose a bill, which his Majesty's Ministers considered necessary, in consequence of the angry controversy which for some time had been carried on between the House of Assembly of Lower Canada, and the Executive Government of that colony. The debates which had already taken place on the subject in the House which he had then the honour to address, rendered it unnecessary to go at length into a detail of the controversy to which he had alluded. It could only be requisite, for the information of those Members who had but recently taken scats in the House, that he should give a brief sketch of it, and of the proceedings to which it gave rise. The revenues of Canada had been principally levied under the provision of the Act of the 14th George 3rd. By another Act, however, the Constitution of Canada was established, and under the words of that Act, he (Lord Howick) believed that the strict legal right of disposing of the revenues of the Canadas was vested in the Crown. Nor did the Assembly claim any right to dispose of them up to the year in which the British Parliament discontinued the grant by which, until then, it had been accustomed to make up for the deficiencies of the Canadian revenues. So long as Parliament here gave the necessary Supplies for the internal expenditure of the colony, the House of Assembly did not interfere. But when it devolved on them (the House of Assembly) to find the necessary revenues, that House had obviously a right to control the application of them, and it became necessary that they should exert that control. For they could not consent that the government should lay on what charges it might think proper, without consulting the House of Assembly, and call upon that House to find the means of defraying them. Indeed the Act was clear. The House of Assembly had no legal right to a control over the application of the revenues, but it was obvious that it had the power of refusing to supply them; and by that refusal it would leave to the government only the alternative of either disposing of the revenues at the pleasure of the Assembly, or of raising them itself in an illegal manner. To such a conclusion the differences of the Assembly and 687 the Executive were brought by the Governor (Lord Dalhousie), and, unfortunately as it seemed to him (Lord Howick), the government chose the alternative of committing a breach of the laws. The House was aware of the unhappy state in which the affairs of Canada continued for years. Petition after petition was forwarded from the colony to the British Houses of Parliament, and the result, was, the appointment of the Canada Committee, which eventually recommended to the House the course which to him seemed the most just and reasonable. He would remind the House that it appeared by the Report of that Committee that it had not thought proper to confine its attention to the words of the different Statutes; but took into consideration all the circumstances of Lower Canada, and the means by which a recurrence of the recent differences might be prevented. It was in the power of Parliament to make a settlement according to the recommendation of that Committee. But the Report was presented too late for the passing of such a measure last Session. Sir James Kempt, who at that time received the government of that colony, under the administration of the right hon. and gallant Baronet opposite, made a speech to the House of Assembly, in which he informed them that no further illegal appropriation should take place. He applied to them for a Bill of Indemnity for what had been already done, and stated, that his Majesty's Ministers only required that the salaries of the Officers of State, and of the Judges, should be paid, being willing to leave all the rest at the disposal of the House of Assembly. He said, that the arrangement was for the time only provisional, and that the government were preparing a plan for the final settlement of the question at issue between it and the Assembly. In a few days afterwards the House of Assembly claimed the right of control over the disposal of all the revenues, and denied that the House of Commons had any control over those revenues, or had any power of interference, except in removing the restriction by which his Majesty's Representative in the colony was then prevented from giving assent to an Act of the Provincial Legislature for the settlement of the question. The Assembly said, that it could do nothing respecting the appropriation of the Crown revenues, and cautiously avoided anything that could imply 688 the surrender of their right of controlling the expenditure. The Governor, however, accepted the grant then given on that understanding, because, although the House of Assembly did not give up its right of control, neither did it enforce the claim. Since that time it had required all the prudence, the firmness, and the popularity of Sir James Kempt to prevent disagreement between the Legislature and the Executive of the colony from leading to unhappy results. Under those circumstances, it would be his duty to propose a Bill, removing the restrictions which the former Acts imposed upon his Majesty's Government, and to enable the Governor to give assent, in the name of his Majesty, to any bill passed by the Provincial Parliament for the disposing of the revenues of the colony. Although the Bill which was last Session proposed by the right hon. and gallant Baronet, then Secretary to the Colonies, (Sir G. Murray), was in direct opposition to the opinions of the House of Assembly, yet it would put the Canadians in the same state in which he now proposed to place them by the Bill which he was about to introduce. But in acquiescing in the Bill of last Session, the Canadian Legislature would have distinctly admitted that they had been wrong in their proceedings; whereas it had been the declared opinion of Mr. Huskisson and others, who understood the whole question, that if any concession should be made, it ought to be made graciously, and without reserve. It was useless, indeed, then to decide which party had been wrong in beginning the unhappy controversy. He, certainly, was of opinion that the Judges and Officers of State ought not to be made dependant upon the pleasure of the House of Assembly; and his Majesty's Government relied upon the good feeling of that Assembly for a proper provision for conducting the civil Government of the colony. In that confidence the Ministers would leave the whole of the revenues at the disposal of the House of Assembly. The revenue hitherto levied by the Crown amounted to nearly 32,000l. per annum, which the Crown proposed to give up, calling on the colony to provide a sort of Civil List for at least seven years. The sum required by the Government would be, for the Governor, 5,200l.; for the Judicial Establishments, 11,150l.; Pensions and Allowances 1,000l.; Miscellaneous Expenses, 1,750l., by which the 689 whole became 19,100l. Of that sum, 5,000/. were provided by an Act of the Provincial Parliament, and, therefore, in return for the revenues of the Crown about to be placed at the disposal of the House of Assembly, and amounting to 31,000l., the Government only required 14,100l. He trusted, that the House of Assembly would perceive, from that Bill, that his Majesty's Ministers had consulted, not only the interest, but the feelings of the inhabitants of Canada. An hon. Member reminded him that there were other points on which it was necessary to consult the feeling of the Assembly. He trusted, that in adjusting those other matters there would not be much difficulty. As to the Constitution of the Legislative Council, of which the House of Assembly complained, fourteen Members had already been added to that branch of the Canadian Legislature, and his honourable friend intrusted with the Government of the colony, would, in adding to the numbers of the Council, select the fittest persons. With respect to the Judges, it was not in the power of the Government to remove them from the Council as the Assembly desired, the Members being appointed for life; but directions had been given that none of them should take part in its proceedings or sit there at all but the Chief Justice; and his Majesty's Ministers had also recommended the present Judges not to interfere in any party or local controversies. It was but justice to the right hon. and gallant Baronet opposite to say, that such instructions had been given whilst he was at the head of the Colonial Department. The Governor would propose a bill to the Canadian Legislature, to place the Judges in the colony in the same independence as that which the Judges of this country enjoy; that is, that they should hold their offices during good behaviour. He trusted that those explanations had satisfied his hon. friend, the member for Taunton (Mr. Labouchere). There was also in the Bill a clause, giving to the Provisional Legislature power to alter and amend the Act at present in force respecting Canadian tenures. He trusted that those concessions would give satisfaction in the colony; and he trusted also, that it would be seen that his Majesty's Government had not compromised the paramount power of this country, or the dignity of the Crown; neither of which could be impaired by yielding to just 690 claims. It would have been impossible to resist those claims, and he would ask, did he or the House regret that impossibility? He rejoiced rather that the Canadians had had the intelligence and the power to assert their rights. It was better for this country that the colony had so asserted its rights, and had not cringed to those who would invade them. Of what use, he would ask, could it be to this country, that its Government should have that power of control over the internal affairs of the colonies, which seemed to be so much valued by some persons here. He had been accused on a former night of neglecting colonial interests. He admitted that he wished to avoid vexatious interference in the internal affairs of the colonies. But he was desirous of protecting them from aggression, of cherishing their prosperity, and of combining their efforts with those of the mother-country— in peace for the common welfare, and in war for the common defence. On such principles he should wish the connexion to continue for ages. Governed on such principles, the colonies would be found more useful, as willing allies, than they could be as reluctant subjects. But if the House should view the matter in a different light, and, rejecting the Bill which he should have the honour to propose, should endeavour to suppress the spirit of liberty, the effect, he feared, would be, that instead of binding more closely the ties which unite Canada to this country, it would not only tear them asunder, but kindle a conflagration which would spread desolation over the globe, and prove fatal both to the prosperity of Canada and to the stability of the British empire. The noble Lord then moved a Resolution, "That the Committee was of opinion, that the restrictions imposed upon the Government and Legislature of Canada, by the Act of the 14th Geo. 3, should be removed, and other provisions established in lieu thereof."

§ Sir G. Murray
asked, was there a Gentleman in the House who, having heard the other bill brought in on the subject, of Canada, could think that there had been any want of attention on the part of his Majesty's late Ministers towards that colony? In the Session of 1829, the bill to which he alluded was postponed, in consequence of the important measure which absorbed the whole attention of the House during the greater part of that Session to 691 the exclusion of everything else. Last Session, the melancholy event by which the business of the Mouse was interrupted caused a further postponement of that bill. It had always appeared to him (Sir George Murray) that the Legislature ought to interpose for the purpose of settling the differences between the two branches of the Colonial Legislature. The right hon. Baronet said, it was true that the paragraph in the Report of the Canada Committee, which had been already referred to by the noble Lord who moved the Resolution, recommended the removal of the restrictions by which the Crown was prevented from assenting to the disposal of the revenues by the Colonial Legislature; but he wished the House also to recollect, that in the next paragraph the Committee recommended that the House of Commons should, at the same time, render the Judges and the Officers of State independent of the House of Assembly. But the noble Lord opposite, instead of carrying that recommendation into effect by his intended Bill, was about to leave it to the good feeling of the House of Assembly. He hoped, however, that the noble Lord would find his expectations, in that respect, justified by the result. The noble Lord had said something of the jobbing which, hitherto, characterised the Government of the Colonies. Now, he would request the noble Lord to say what job could be charged upon the Colonial Government when he (Sir G. Murray) was at the head of that department? The noble Lord had an opportunity of exposing any such job, and he hoped he would do so. The principle on which he (Sir G. Murray) had acted was, to govern the Colonies with liberality, but, at the same time, not to allow the House of Assembly in Canada to obtain an undue preponderance over the other two branches of the Legislature. It had also been part of his policy to extend, as much as possible, the Legislative Council, by adding to its members the fittest persons who could be selected.

§ Lord Howick
said, he certainly meant to make no personal allusion to the gallant Officer, but he appealed to the House, whether the colonial administration of the country had not been for years one system of jobbing? In saying so, he had not meant to asperse the administration of the right hon. and gallant Baronet, who had misunderstood him also on another point. He quite agreed with him as to the pro- 692 priety, indeed the necessity, of the Governor, the Judges, and other civil officers being independent of the House of Assembly, and a bill to render them so would be passed by the Provincial Legislature.

Mr. Labouchere
said, that he had opposed the bill brought in by the right hon. Baronet opposite, but he would support the Bill of his noble friend below him. It was his opinion (and he well understood the state of Canada), that the best mode of governing Canada was, that this country should not attempt to govern that colony at all as far as regarded her internal affairs. He believed the Canadians to be loyal, and attached to the connexion with Great Britain, if they were only treated with justice. But if this country should alienate them by harshness or neglect, and thereby throw them into the hands of some hostile Power, we should severely suffer for the impolicy of our conduct. The British Parliament owed it to its own character to give to its colonies as much happiness and freedom as it was in its power to bestow. He hoped that the principle upon which his noble friend below him had acted, regarding the revenue, would be applied to other questions, especially to that of the Clergy reserves.

§ Mr. Twiss
observed, that the only differences between the Bill of the noble Lord and that of his right hon. friend, introduced last year, were to be found in these two points; namely, that the present Bill enabled the Governor to assent to any measure which the House of Assembly might adopt; but made no provision for the appropriation of the revenue in the intermediate time. The other was that which declared the independence of the Judges: with those two exceptions, the Bills happened to be in every respect the same.

Lord Sundon
had no doubt that the experiment of his noble friend would prove successful, and he sincerely congratulated him upon the prospect then afforded of his being able to carry it beneficially into effect.

Mr. Hume
said, there was this difference; between the two Bills—the one could be carried into effect, the other was impracticable. He fully concurred with the noble Lord in thinking that it would be infinitely better to trust to the liberal feeling of the people of Canada, than to any measures of coercion which the Legislature of the mother-country might adopt. He wished to be informed, whether the Bill before the 693 House applied to both the Canadas, for he was quite sure that if it did, it would be thankfully received as a boon by both and highly prized by them. [Lord Howick intimated that it did.] Should the present Bill pass, he thought that the people of Canada ought to support the expenses of their own military establishment. Three regiments would be sufficient for their defence, and there was every reason to believe, that if they were allowed to officer those three regiments with the youth of their own country, they would cheerfully pay the expense of the whole establishment.

§ Lord Howick
wished to point out another difference between the present and the bill of last year. The latter assumed the right of voting away the money of the people of Canada; the present Bill was silent on that point.

§ Mr. Twiss
said, in the amended bill of last Session, that right was not asserted, though it was in the original bill.