Lords Sitting of 19 March 1835

Preamble
MINUTES.) Bills. Read a third time:—Transfer of Aids Exchequer Bills; Newspaper Printers' Relief.

LOWER CANADA.
Lord Brougham,in pursuance of the notice he had given, begged leave to present to their Lordships a Petition from Members of the Assembly and others in Canada. As the petition was one not only of great importance in itself, but as it referred to a great number of peculiar circumstances, and as the petitioners were all men of great respectability, he hoped he should be excused if he went into a short statement of what its contents were, and who were the parties who had signed it. The petitioners were a considerable majority of the Representatives of Lower Canada in the House of Assembly of that province; and also a number, a minority, but still a number of the Members of the Legislative Council or Upper House of Canada. A large majority of one House and a minority of the other agreed in the complaints in the statements and in the prayer of this petition. The state of the province of Lower Canada was so well known that it would be superfluous for him to remind their Lordships that it had long been anything but satisfactory. For years past it had presented a lamentable picture of discontent, he would not say of mal-administration, but of such an administration as did not meet with the approbation of the people. He need not say, that there could not be a greater evil than that the people should disapprove of the Ministers who governed them, or of the measures
1182
that they introduced. Yet that was the state of this colony. Of course, he hoped that it would not be the case with the mother country. Lower Canada was a residue of those great American possessions that once belonged to us, and it was remarkable for having among its inhabitants great numbers of what were called Loyalists, that is to say men who entertained a devoted affection to the mother country, and that affection was in itself a great title to our consideration. This province now possessed a House of Assembly, which, after a recent appeal to the people, had returned a majority of seventy-eight to ten, the House of Assembly containing eighty-eight Members opposed to the Government. To these must be added eight or nine Members of the Legislative Council, or Upper House of Legislature. The first ground of the complaint of the petitioners was against the construction of the Upper House of Legislature. The Representatives in the Lower House of Assembly were chosen by the people. The Upper House of Assembly was nominally chosen by the people; but it was so managed, that it had principally got into the hands of a certain number of persons, so that they reelected themselves; and the consequence was, that there was great danger of what was well known on this side of the water by the name of a collision, between the two Houses. This was attended with a most unfortunate circumstance. He did not blame any one,—he merely stated the fact, which was, that numberless Bills were sent up from the Lower House, and were rejected by the Upper House. Now, these Bills were such as deeply affected the feelings and interests of the people of the province, who were represented in the Lower House, and not represented in the Upper House. On one occasion, no less than twenty-eight Bills had been thus rejected; fourteen rejected altogether; and the rest so altered—mutilated, the petitioners called it—that the Lower House could not consent to adopt the alterations, and they therefore were rejected altogether. That occurred in 1827; but, more or less, this had been the case for every year for some years past. In one year, indeed, in consequence of these disputes, there was no Session at all. In the space of the last ten years, 167 Bills had been thus positively rejected by the Upper House, or so altered as to cause

1183
their rejection by the Lower House when sent back to it. Some of these Bills had for their object (he could not say anything of the details) matters of the most wholesome and necessary kind. He should state some of them. One was a Bill to obtain better security from the receivers'-general. One of these receivers had been a defaulter for 600,000 dollars; but instead of suffering for his default as he ought, he was made a Member of the Legislative Council, or Upper House; so that he operated doubly, first, as a defaulter himself, and next, as a Member of the Council, in rejecting a Bill that was to provide against the recurrence of such defaults in others. This receiver-general had also possessed a large property which was nominally taken from him for the benefit of the state; but it was understood that he was in flourishing circumstances, and really had the enjoyment of the property at a very low rent. Another of the Bills was to secure the vacating of the seats of Members of the House of Assembly on their accepting office. Another, to prevent the improper interference of troops at elections. Then there were Bills for promoting the education of the people in the colonies; and a Bill—(in which, to be sure, the Legislative Council had the example of their Lordships to justify them in its rejection; though he was not prepared to say that the rejection was the more proper on that account)—a Bill for establishing Local Courts. Another of these Bills was a Bill for better securing the independence of the Judges. The independence of the Judges in the colonies must, he was aware, rest on a footing different from that in the mother country. He should belie the opinions he had always declared, if he did not say that that independence might require, in some degree, to be modified, though he must insist, that whatever it was, it ought to be clearly secured. He hoped that this would be one of the objects to which the attention of the Commissioner now about to visit Canada would be directed. The independence of the Judges in the province was anything but secured. One of the Judges held two or three offices, and he could not say that he approved of a Chief Justice, who was a criminal as well as a civil Judge, being Speaker at the same time of one of the Houses of Legislature. To be sure, that was the case with the
1184
Speaker of their Lordships' House, but then that noble and learned Lord was only a civil and not a criminal Judge. This, as he had said before, was a petition from a majority, and a great majority of one House, and a minority of the other; and it was, therefore, on account of the persons from whom it came a most important petition; for this majority in the Lower House of the Constitution, the same as in England, would have the right to impeach the Judges. The Judges had rendered themselves odious by the part they had taken in political controversies, and by the strong terms in which they stigmatized the laws which it was their duty to administer. The petitioners complained of the violation of the Acts of 1788 and 1832, Acts which were framed for the purpose of giving the House of Assembly a control over the funds of the province. He could not say anything about the matter beyond observing that the petitioners spoke of things of which, from their very situation, they ought to have peculiar knowledge. The charges he had already stated, were now, for the first time, formally made, but the control over the funds of the province had been long a subject of dispute. The feelings of the House of Assembly might well be known. They chose a Speaker in a most horrible manner—in a manner utterly unprecedented—they did not patronise the person named by the Government—no such thing—they sent up a Speaker of their own. Whether they agreed to amendments to addresses to the Governor he could hardly say; he believed that they hardly agreed to any address, or if they did, it was one in opposition to the Government. Such was the state of things in Canada. It was to be profoundly hoped that the example would not cross the water. There certainly were no addresses common civility agreed to. There was one great intestine war that prevented the progress of public business, and interfered with the advantage of the common weal. The petitioners next complaint was, that the Governor had seized upon the revenues of the province, a practice that certainly was not in use on this side of the water. Notwithstanding that the Governor had seized upon the revenues, he had refused to lend them his aid at a most painful period. When the cholera raged in the province, so that 11,300 persons died in Montreal, and

1185
1,000 in another place, application was made to the Governor for assistance, but he refused to advance any money whatever. Perhaps, the Governor was afraid that if he advanced the money he should not get repaid; but the petitioners declared that they should have been but too happy to have repaid him. Another complaint of the petitioners related to the killing of some persons by the troops in 1832, at the election. They complained that with great haste the Governor had tendered a vote of thanks to the troops for their conduct. The Governor, for aught he knew, might be right in what he had done; the troops might have been obliged to fire on the people in their own defence; he could not say anything about it, as he did not know all the facts; but it appeared from this petition that the House of Assembly differed from the Governor on this point, and they complained of the vote of thanks that had been given to the troops. Another complaint against the Governor, was, that he had refused to issue a writ upon a vacancy in the Lower House of Assembly, whose number was thus left imperfect. They complained, also, that the Governor had refused to offer a reward for the discovery of a person who had committed a murder. These were the charges that the petitioners made against the Governor. He gave them, as he received them, and was in no wise responsible for their correctness. Some of them might not be capable of being well made out, and might be capable of being answered by statements of a different sort. There was no doubt that there were important differences between the House of Assembly and the Governor, and the former desired their Lordships to apply such a remedy as in their wisdom they should deem sufficient. That which they wanted was an alteration of the constitution; so as to give them a better security for possessing a control over the administration of the finances, for the preservation of their privileges, and for the promotion of the general interests of the province, by the reform of the Upper House of Legislature. This petition, signed as it was by a majority of the House of Assembly, must be supposed to speak the sentiments of the majority of the people, for if it did not, he should say that they wanted something like Parliamentary Reform; if there were any close boroughs in the province the sooner
1186
their Lordships exported thither the benefit of schedule A the better. As things now stood it was impossible to go on. The greatest possible discontent existed, and if the mischief was not stopped by some appropriate remedy, evils of a very serious nature would occur, and at no great distance of time. His opinion with respect to these establishments differed, perhaps, from that of many noble Lords in that House, and most of all, perhaps, from the noble Earl opposite. His opinion was, that we ought not to keep these colonial establishments, expending large sums of money upon them, and embarrassing ourselves with their affairs, unless we could contrive that the Government of them should go on smoothly and to the satisfaction of the colonists; and, above all, unless we could so manage them that they could pay not only the expenses required for their own establishments, but also a large proportion of the military and naval expenses entailed upon us in defending them.
The Earl of Riponbegged pardon of the noble Earl (the Earl of Aberdeen, who had also risen) for interposing at this moment, but he was obliged to do so in his own defence. He had not the smallest idea that this petition was about to be presented, so that he not only had had no opportunity of recalling to his recollection the circumstances connected with the statements contained in it, but he was not in the House when the noble and learned Lord began to make the statement of its contents. He was unaware of the complaints being about to be made; but he must say, that he was surprised with the sweeping censure which the noble and learned Lord had cast upon the Colonial Department while it was under his directions.—[Lord Brougham had cast no censure upon the noble Earl.]—it was true his name was not mentioned, but if the noble and learned Lord knew as much as he did, he would not have passed so severe a censure on the conduct of the Colonial Office while he (the Earl of Ripon) was a colleague of the noble and learned Lord. This petition, he presumed, embodied the set of resolutions, ninety-two in number, which in the course of the last year had been agreed to by the Assembly of Lower Canada. Anything more violent, more unjust, more contrary to truth, never had been affirmed by any legislative body whatever. What took place in the House of Commons when the

1187
question of these ninety-two grievances was discussed? The matter was referred to a Select Committee, which his right hon. Friend, then at the head of the Colonial Department, had proposed. That Committee had entered fully into the consideration of everything like a grievance complained of by those who presented this petition. Every fact was considered. No part of the conduct of the Government of the various Secretaries of State for the Colonies was omitted, nor was any in formation that they could give attempted to be withheld. That Committee did not think itself justified (there were, no doubt, good reasons for that opinion) in publishing the evidence on the subject; and, therefore, it was a little unreasonable to expect that those charges which were then so fully investigated, should be now answered off-hand, when, from not knowing facts, it was impossible to know how many of them had been rebutted before the Committee, and so required no further repetition. He did not, therefore, think that he was called on to go through the items of this account of grievances, and to vindicate himself against the charges contained in this petition. He would venture, however, to say, that there was not a single matter complained of in this petition, which he did not endeavour to send out instructions to remedy. It was not the fault of the Government, nor was it the fault of the Governor, nor even of the Legislative Council, if what he desired had not been successfully carried into effect. If their Lordships were to go into the question, he should be able to show them that every difficulty in the way of settling these differences, had arisen from the unjust conduct of that body whose petition the noble and learned Lord now presented, and to which he seemed, from his manner of discussing it, to give his concurrence. A great complaint, in which he fully agreed, had been made on the subject of the independence of the Judges, as if that matter had not been touched by the Government— as if he (the Earl of Ripon) had not sent instructions to the Governor to send a message down to the House of Assembly on the subject. There were two sorts of independence of the Judges—an independence of the Crown, and an independence of a popular assembly. His object had been to render the Judges in Canada independent of both. It was true that the
1188
House of Assembly had passed a Bill to secure the independence of the Judges, but the House added to it a tack which it was well known would not be agreed to by the Legislative Council, and could not be assented to by the Governor. The tack declared, that the payment of the salaries of the Judges, was not to be made, except from funds belonging to the Crown, over which they had no legitimate control. He did not recollect whether this Bill had had the provisional sanction of the Governor; but this he did distinctly state, that if the Governor refused his assent, he (the Earl of Ripon) conveyed to the Governor his Majesty's approbation for that refusal; or if the Governor gave his provisional assent, then he (the Earl of Ripon) advised his Majesty to refuse the Royal assent.—[Lord Brougham: The Petition stated that the Bill was thrown out by the Legislative Council.]—The Legislative Council might have been the instrument for throwing out the Bill, but it was refused for the reason he had stated. There was no part of the duty of a Secretary of State for the Colonies to which more attention was requisite to be given—and the demand for attention in this respect was increasing from day to day—than to the state of the Canadas. He should not now go into the items of this petition; but should assert, without fear of contradiction, that there was nothing more unjust than the charges, of the introduction of which at the present moment, he had taken the liberty to complain.
Lord Broughamhad read the petition, and he could not discover the slightest allusion to his noble Friend in it. The charges were directed against the system of Government in the colonies, not against the Government at home. It was his duty to present the petition; but when he did so, he told their Lordships that he knew nothing of the statements but what he saw there, and that, for ought he knew, they might be all untrue, or all exaggerated. These were the statements of the petitioners; he had not pledged his personal credit to the truth of the statements.
The Earl of Riponknew that his name was not mentioned; but the petition alluded to a series of transactions in which he was, as Secretary of State for the Colonies, officially concerned. As to the matter of the elections, if there was any blame on that point he bore his fair share of

1189
the responsibility, for he held the Seals of the Colonial Office at the time. When he considered all the facts that were laid before the inquests, he felt that there was no blame to be imputed to the soldiers, and therefore, he did convey his Majesty's approbation of the way in which the troops had acted, and nothing had since occurred to make him see any reason to blame the conduct of those who took part in those transactions.
Lord Broughamhad said, on that particular transaction, that for ought he knew the soldiers might have had a painful duty to perform, might have been compelled to fire in their own defence, and that the Governor might have done right in approving of their conduct.
The Earl of Aberdeencould not suffer this petition to be laid on the Table without addressing a very few words to their Lordships, and but a few words they should be; for it would be most unwise and unjust in him, considering the circumstances that had occurred last night, to go into the subject matter of this petition, and to follow the noble and learned Lord into the different parts of this question which he had brought under discussion. He was ready to admit that this province was not without some just grounds of complaint, but he must say, that for several years past there had been the most earnest desire on the part of the Government of the mother country to meet and remedy all these grievances. During, the Session of Parliament last year ninety-two resolutions on the subject had been forwarded from Canada, and were presented to the notice of the other House of Parliament. The present petion was now brought forward, and if instead of ninety there were 900 grounds of complaint stated, he should be willing to meet them all with the same spirit of a desire to listen to, and remedy them, and not only with that spirit but with wishes of justice, conciliation, and kindness toward the colonist; and if they had omitted any one complaint which struck his mind, he should be happy to suggest it to their notice, and to adopt some remedy for it. It was impossible that this subject could be entered upon with feelings more cordially disposed to meet every just matter of complaint. The noble and learned Lord opposite had taken a most extraordinary course. The petition he had presented was not a petition that had
1190
the least reference to the greater portion of the subjects to which he had called the attention of their Lordships, nor were the grounds of complaint in the petition directed against the noble Earl who had just spoken; they were directed against the noble and learned Lord and his colleagues, and against them alone. The petition arose in consequence of what had been done since July last. It was framed in December last, when the petitioners imagined that the noble and learned Lord still sat upon that Woolsack. He did not know whether the petitioners meant to make the noble and learned Lord as Lord Chancellor, the vehicle of communicating this petition to their Lordships, but he must say that he believed, that had the petition still found the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, though it would have been his duty to present the petition, their Lordships would not have heard of it accompanied with these complaints. The whole of the grievances contained in the ninety-two resolutions did not form the subject of the present petition, the complaint in which was, that no practical measure of relief had been founded on those resolutions. That was a matter of complaint against the noble and learned Lord and his colleagues, and it was precisely of that, that the petitioners did now complain. With the exception of praying for an alteration in the constitution of the Legislative Council, there was scarely one other subject of complaint in the petition that could apply to any but the noble and learned Lord and his colleagues. The petitioners then complained of the continuance of Lord Aylmer in the office of Governor. The Governor was continued by the noble and learned Lord and his colleagues—he did not say improperly continued, but the continuance itself was the subject of complaint with the petitioners. They complained of the existence of the British North American Land Company—a Company that was established under the Government of the noble and learned Baron and his colleagues, if not with their approbation. Then it was said that the petitioners complained of the Government seizing on the revenues of the colony: now, how had that happened? The conduct of the Assembly itself had deprived the Government of the means of carrying on the necessary acts of Government. It was impossible to carry on the Government. No person employed in it

1191
had received one single shilling on account of his appointment for a considerable time. It therefore, became necessary for the Government to provide for the means of paying the current expenses of the Government. The Governor was directed by the noble and learned Baron and his colleagues to seize upon the revenues and apply them to the actual necessities of the State. He did not blame their decision. It was certainly a very strong step, and a great interference no doubt with the constitution in that country, as it would be in this. Another noble and learned Lord had insinuated that one day or other the time might arrive when a similar course of proceeding would be adopted here. He repeated it was a very strong step; whether it was or was not justified he would not undertake to say, but in either case it certainly was taken by the Government of this country. Well, then, were these complaints—were these grievances which the noble and learned Lord had a right to put forward as a matter of charge? Why, if they were grievances at all, they were grievances of which he himself had been the cause; and he (the Earl of Aberdeen) must say, that if the noble and learned Lord had bestowed that degree of attention on the petition which he should have thought it had deserved, it would have been quite impossible for him to have enumerated among the grievances complained of, those acts of which he himself had been guilty. He only made this observation with the view of calling their Lordships' attention to the course which the noble and learned Lord had thought proper to pursue. It had nothing to do with the great body of grievances of which the petitioners complained, to which he had already referred, and into the nature of which he would not enter at any greater length, as it might be most injurious to the satisfactory termination of the questions at issue. There was no doubt, that if the noble and learned Lord did choose to make himself in that House the organ of the petitioners, he might either promote or retard, very essentially, the settlement of those questions. Whatever might be that noble and learned Lord's course, he felt it must be his duty in that place, not to say anything which could possibly prejudice the success of that most important, most difficult, and most delicate undertaking to succeed in which—from the confession of the noble and learned Lord himself, and
1192
the description he had given of the state of the colony—the Government had no slight obstacles to surmount.
Lord Broughamdid not take the slightest degree of blame to himself for not examining the petition, for one plain reason—because he had examined it, and examined the whole of it. He had found certain charges brought against the Governor of the Colony, and no charges whatever against the Government at home, with the exception of the single one of not having sufficiently examined into their case. He knew very well the whole of that charge three weeks ago, and he stated yesterday the answer to it. The answer to the charge against the late Government, on his part, was, that they had done all that men could do, up to the very instant of the Government being dismissed. The answer of the noble Lord opposite, on his part, was, that on his taking the Seals of the Colonial Department, he applied his mind to the redress of the grievances complained of. With respect to the charge of interference of troops at the election of May, 1332, he begged to say, that he had stated the only charge made in the petition against Lord Aylmer, the Governor, and he begged to add his own statement, that he took the charge on the credit of the petitioners and stated their case. The noble Earl had told them that it turned out that the charges were made, not against the present Government, but the last, and that he (Lord Brougham) had brought those charges forward. This was not the case: there was no charge whatever against the late Government. The petition did not point at them, it pointed at the Governor, in one passage especially, in which very strong language was used, and which he (Lord Brougham) had purposely suppressed. He had guarded himself twice over, both in prefacing the charge against the Governor, and finishing it, against it being supposed that he guaranteed the authenticity of the statements in the petition. In both instances, he specifically said, that he took those statements on the credit of the petitioners, as well in other respects as with reference to the revenue charge, of which he knew nothing. He stated particularly and emphatically that he took those charges from them—that they might be right, or that the Governor might be perfectly justified—that he hoped he was —but that, however the fact might be, he

1193
repeated merely the statement of the petitioners, and the statement of the petitioners alone.
The petition to lie upon the Table.