§ Mr. Humeinquired if it were true that eighty or ninety political offenders in Upper Canada had recently been sentenced to transportation to New South Wales.
§ Mr. Laboucheresaid that he could not, with due respect to what he owed to the interests of the public service, give a distinct reply to that question, without prefacing his answer by a short statement, and reminding the House of the position in which Sir J. Colborne had been placed. In November last, when Sir J. Colborne had arrived at Montreal, he found the whole town in such a state, that information was received that there were 3,000 men ready to rise on a certain day, being bound by secret oaths. The surrounding districts were in a state of rebellion; murder and outrage were prevalent every where. The loyal subjects of the British crown were flocking into the town from all quarters in a state of panic; so that it was requisite that he should instantly adopt rigorous measures for restoring the authority of Government, Consequently numerous arrests took place. In Montreal alone 800 persons had been confined. The next question was, how these persons 1146 should be dealt with. The object of Sir John Colborne was to shed as little human blood as possible, consistently with the preservation of peace in the colony. He issued a commission, composed of four barristers, to make a previous examination into the charges, to see if any circumstances could justify the liberation of the persons arrested. The result was that the greater number were immediately liberated, the rest were tried by court martial, and about 100 were capitally convicted of high treason, but only twelve underwent the extreme sentence of the law, and of these only six were charged with political offences merely; the other six were guilty of murder also. The question then became, what measure of punishment should be allotted to the remainder, so as to avoid capital punishment, and the result was that about eighty persons had been banished to New South Wales. This was the course pursued, and, from a careful perusal of documents, he believed the conduct of Sir J. Colborne was not more distinguished by justice than sagacity and firmness. Her Majesty's Government fully approved of every thing the gallant Officer had done; and when the whole documents could be laid before this House, it would be seen that Sir John Colborne had simply done his duty, and that he merited the approbation of the country.
§ Mr. Humesaid, the opinion just expressed was contrary to that entertained in the United States, by whom Sir John Colborne's conduct was considered cruel, tyrannical, and unjust. He wished to know whether it was true that Mr. Viger, a most respectable gentleman, and member of the Legislative Council, and of very old age, had been kept in prison for two years, and that the Government would neither bring him to trial nor set him free?
§ Mr. Laboucherewas sorry that Mr. Viger should have suffered so long an imprisonment, but he believed, under the circumstances, Sir J. Colborne had no other course to pursue.
§ Mr. Leaderbegged to say one word with respect to the case of Mr. Viger. That Gentleman had been imprisoned for a year, and then offered his liberty on condition of giving security for good behaviour. He declined; and demanded his trial, which was refused, he conceiving himself to be innocent. He begged to ask the hon. Under Secretary 1147 one question. Did he not think that the promise of pardon contained in the proclamation of Lord Durham had been broken by the transportation of those men to New South Wales.
§ Subject dropped.