HL Deb 10 May 1850 vol 110 cc1286-301
The DUKE of ARGYLL

then rose to draw the attention of their Lordships a second time to the case of Mr. George Herman Ryland, late Clerk of the Executive Council of Canada, as set forth in a petition presented to their Lordships' House on the 8th of June, 1849, and as further set forth in addresses voted to Her Majesty by the Legislative Assembly and by the Legislative Council of Canada in 1846. It was only necessary to make a simple narrative of the facts, for the purpose of showing the hardship and injustice to which this gentleman had been subjected. He regretted that the task had not fallen into other hands; for it was entirely owing to accidental circumstances that the case had not been brought forward by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst), the cause of whose absence from the House he was sure all their Lordships would concur with him in hoping would be speedily removed. Though Mr. Ryland's case in its more immediate aspect was one of individual hardship and injustice, it was not merely as such that he brought it forward. He held, that unless some compensation were given that gentleman, an injury would be inflicted, with which no mere private injury could compare, upon the good faith and honour of the Imperial Crown. He must remark that this gentleman did not lose his place under the action of what was called a responsible Government. He was induced to give up the office which he held, of which he could not be dispossessed except for misconduct, under the promise that he should be appointed to another. He should first inquire who gave the promise, and under what circumstances it was given; then, what was the nature of the promise; and, lastly, how it had been fulfilled.

Now, the person who gave the promise was fully entitled to give it—he meant the late Lord Sydenham. At that period, Mr. Ryland was in possession of an office of more than l,000l. a year. Lord Sydenham did not guarantee that he would give him an office of equal value, but he guaranteed that he would appoint him to a new office, the income of which should at least not fall below the sum which he would then be entitled to receive on the pension list. Now, the office to which he had been removed, instead of being equal to his retiring pension, had entailed upon him actual losses, and had reduced him to ruin. The history of the whole transaction since that period might be briefly stated: On Mr. Ryland's part, hope deferred—on the part of the Government, repeated official acknowledgments of the hardship and injustice of the case, and official expressions of regret that they could not easily see how the injustice complained of could be remedied; and, lastly, he hoped that it would not end—for he did not wish to anticipate the answers of the Government—in a repudiation by the noble Earl opposite (Earl Grey) of the claims of this gentleman altogether. His noble Friend (Lord Stanley), when he was in office, though Mr. Ryland's case was not at that time backed by addresses voted by the legislature in Canada, gave instructions to Lord Metcalfe to put Mr. Ryland on the pension fund of the colony until a more lucrative office should be given him. A pension of 100l. was given him for one year, and then he was appointed to a place which it was supposed would be more remunerative. The next notice of Lord Metcalfe of this case was a most important one. The new office did not turn out more remunerative than the former one; Mr. Ryland pressed his claim on consideration of the Government of Lord Metcalfe, and the council of that noble Lord's Cabinet drew up a report, repudiating the claim altogether, on certain grounds. So strongly, however, did Lord Metcalfe feel the justice of Mr. Ryland's case, that he refused to sign the report of his own council, and his refusal was registered in a minute which was appended. He says— I withhold my assent, not only because the principle of the report is an unjust one, but because I foresee, from the adoption of such a principle, future embarrassments in carrying on the Government. I am of opinion that the pledge of Lord Sydenham to Mr. Ryland ought to be redeemed, and I conceive the local government are the proper parties, because that pledge was given to enable Lord Sydenham to carry out a new system of government which it was of importance to the welfare of the colony should be adopted. Nothing was done, and Mr. Ryland then determined to appeal to the justice of the colonial legislature. Accordingly, he presented a petition, and on that the assembly appointed a committee, which, after full investigation, made a report. He (the Duke of Argyll) had been informed by Lord Cathcart, then the Governor General, that the committee was one which comprised men of all political parties, and, of his own knowledge, he could say that it was incapable of being influenced by any private motives, and that its report had been drawn up strictly on the facts before it. The report said, that by trusting to the promise of the Governor, Mr. Ryland had been subjected to the loss of a retiring allowance which he had a right to claim, and which other officers enjoyed, and that he ought to be placed on the pension list; and they added— Your committee cannot but consider the case as one of great hardship; the claim is one, the justice of which being acknowledged, ought not to be avoided or overlooked. In pursuance of this report, an Address was forwarded to the Crown, praying the Imperial Government "to take into consideration the case of Mr. Ryland, and to order him such compensation as to the Crown should seem fit." This was received in the brief interval during which Mr. Gladstone held office; and the next document on the subject was a letter of the noble Lord opposite, written in July, 1846, in which he said— My predecessor did not deny, neither do I deny, Mr. Ryland's claim for compensation for his surrender of the office of clerk to the executive council; but it appears to me that his is not a claim against the Imperial Treasury, but against the colony, the House of Assembly having ac- knowledged its validity, and you ought to insist on the Colonial Assembly satisfying that claim. The noble Earl very strangely omitted all allusion to the fund derived from colonial sources, but placed at the disposal of the Imperial Government, to satisfy such claims as this. However, on the 25th of September, the noble Earl did mention the pension fund, and said he did not agree with the grant of a pension, but added, that if the Provisional Assembly advised such an appropriation, Her Majesty would defer to their recommendation. But if such a course was right, of what use was the retention of the pension fund at all at the time of the union? He (the Duke of Argyll) understood that it was for the sole purpose of enabling the Imperial Government to fulfil their own promises and their own servants', independently of the Colonial Government. Upon the reception of the letter of the noble Earl, a committee of the council considered the case, and drew up a report, which concluded by advising that 2,500l. should be placed on the estimates in a block sum for the satisfaction of Mr. Ryland's claim. Mr. Ryland complained that that was not enough; but he (the Duke of Argyll) could not detain their Lordships with mere details. However, instead of getting the 2,500l., which the council admitted he was "fairly entitled to claim," it turned out that the sum had not been put into the estimates, and the cup of expectation was dashed from his lips. Lord Elgin's Cabinet was driven from office, and their successors advanced another step, and repudiated the claim altogether. They did this upon two grounds, to which he would allude, as he supposed they would be adopted by the noble Earl. He did not expect, in that House, to hear the noble Earl say, "True, Lord Sydenham promised compensation, but he is dead, and we are unable to have his explanation of the circumstances under which that promise was made; and, therefore, we cannot fulfil it." There never had been a governor, perhaps, who had not done individual acts to which exception might be taken; but if this were such an act, and he did not believe that it was, the honour of the Crown was pledged to keep the promise. Mr. Ryland's father had been in the service of the Crown, in British North America and in the Canadas, for more than half a century, and he had been his father's assistant for sixteen or twenty years; and, under those circumstances. Lord Durham—the most liberal of all liberal gover- nors that Canada ever had; whose views of responsible government went beyond that of the Ministry which sent him out—appointed Mr. Ryland to a more lucrative situation. He denied that they had any right to go back to those circumstances at all; but if they did, they would find them in all respects a justification of his appointment. Well, then, it was said that Mr. Ryland was merely guaranteed that he should receive from his office a certain income; and that if his conduct in his office had been more economical, he would have realised such a net income. It is said, not that they are not bound to fulfil the promise of Lord Sydenham, but that that promise has been fulfilled. That was the argument held in Canada by some parties, and that was the tone of the noble Earl when the subject was broached last Session. He (the Duke of Argyll) had taken the greatest pains to make himself acquainted with the facts on this point, and he could assure their Lordships that the evidence was such as would convince any unbiassed judge that that argument was untrue, and that Mr. Ryland's conduct in his office was marked with all due economy, and with the greatest efficiency. But that, after all, was no argument for that House, since the circumstances of the case had been repeatedly inquired into, and in every instance the validity of the claim admitted, and, by one Committee of the Council, the amount fixed at 2,500l. The noble Duke then quoted the report of two independent gentlemen, appointed by the Canadian Government—without any reference to this particular case—to inquire into the emoluments and duties of the registrars of the province. That report distinctly stated that all those officers had to complain of inadequate remuneration; and in respect to the Montreal Office, this report expressly stated that the receipts scarcely met the actual expenses, and that the office "yielded no remuneration whatever to Mr. Ryland." The noble Duke then spoke in high terms of the open straightforward candour of Mr. Ryland, which had impressed him most favourably in the intercourse which had passed between them. As an instance of his fair dealing, Mr. Ryland, when he sent the whole documents on which his claim was founded to him, sent copies also to Lord Elgin. The rules of ordinary courtesy, one might have thought, would have suggested that Mr. Ryland should be fur- nished with at least an outline of the reply; but instead—and the fact was characteristic of the manner in which he was treated throughout—every one of the communications made to the noble Earl opposite was concealed from Mr. Ryland, and at the last moment he was informed that Lord Elgin had sent home his opinion of the "alleged" claim. He (the Duke of Argyll) thought that a most unfair proceeding. Worse than all this, in a general and national point of view, was the fact that Lord Elgin sent home without note or comment, disclaiming any participation in the text, an official memorandum from Mr. Hincks the inspector-general, in which it is stated, without the slightest disguise, that "the principle of pensioning of servants of the Crown has long been repudiated in Canada"—and why?—would their Lordships believe it?—" because they were so close to the United States, where the tenure of office was strictly dependent upon the will of the people"—not the will of the Crown, but "the will of the people." He did not know whether the Canadas were so far infected with republican principles that the promises made by the Crown, at a moment when it was taking a course deeply connected with the permanence of the welfare and the power of that great colony, were to be wholly renounced. This repudiation was utterly at variance with the sentiments expressed in a recent speech of Lord John Russell upon responsible governments, in which he asserted the impossibility of confiding implicitly the honour and faith of the Crown to a popular assembly. That principle had been acted upon by all the governors of Canada down to Lord Elgin. It might be perfectly true that republican principles had advanced in Canada; it might be true that principles hitherto thought essential to the monarchy of England could no longer be maintained in Canada; it might be true that the principle laid down by Lord John Russell was a fallacy; it might be—and he did not then question it—Lord Elgin's duty to transmit to the Imperial Government a memorandum, without one word of comment, or one syllable of dissent, openly declaring that promises of the Crown were to be disallowed on republican principles: all this might be true; but if it were true that this was the result of responsible government in Canada, they were at least bound to see that the last promises which the Crown had been entitled to make, and which it was still enabled to redeem, should be fulfilled with a scrupulous and proud fidelity. The noble Duke concluded by moving the following Resolutions:— That it is the Opinion of this House, that the Case of George Herman Ryland, late Clerk of the Executive Council of Canada, as set forth in a Petition presented to this House on the 8th June, 1849, and as further set forth in Addresses voted to Her Majesty by the Legislative Assembly and by the Legislative Council of Canada in 1846 (upon the Report of a Committee specially appointed to inquire into the Circumstances of the said Case), is one of great Hardship and Injustice: That it appears from the Papers laid on the Table of this House, that this Hardship and Injustice has been acknowledged, both directly and indirectly, by successive Governors General of Canada, by both Branches of the Legislature in that Province, as well as by the Imperial Government: That it is the Opinion of this House, that the Claims of the said George Herman Ryland, which have heretofore been officially acknowledged, ought not to be avoided or overlooked, and that he has a Right to expect that the Agreement entered into between him and the Governor General, of which he has performed his Part, should be carried into effect according to its Terms; or, as that may now be impossible, that he should be compensated for the Non-fulfilment thereof.

EARL GREY

said, that his noble Friend had addressed their Lordships with great ability on this subject; but if he had considered the case more calmly, he would see that there were no grounds for the appeal which he had made. The best answer which be could give his noble Friend would be, by stating very shortly the facts of the case as they had come under his consideration. In the year 1838, Mr. Ryland, having at the time held a small situation in one of the public offices in Canada, was promoted to a more lucrative office, which, according to the then system, was not in the gift of the Governor General, but in that of the Crown. This was in a time of great difficulty and confusion, and the consequence was, that the appointment, which could only be a provisional one, was not confirmed by the Colonial Office at home. Sir J. Colborne wrote to Lord Normanby on the subject. He stated that he had received an application from Mr. Ryland for the issue of the usual warrant, but Mr. Ryland must be informed, that if the two provinces of Upper and Lower Canada should be united, and it should be impossible to continue his services, he would not be entitled to any retiring allowance. Mr. Ryland was appointed in 1838; in 1840 the provinces were united, and a difficulty arose as to Mr. Ryland continuing in his office, and he was removed. This office stood on the footing of what was called a permanent office. The rule was not to give a pension unless the office had been held ten years. The utmost economy was exercised as to every one of these offices; and according to the ordinary practices of the Board of Treasury in this country, Mr. Ryland, when the union took place, had no claim on this country; he would have been entitled to a gratuity for the number of months that he had served. His claim was further regarded by the express declaration of the Secretary of State, that, in the event of the union of the provinces, Mr. Ryland should have no claim to a retiring allowance. But Lord Sydenham had a strong desire to show real regard to Mr. Ryland; he undertook to provide him with another office of not less than 500l. a year. He (Earl Grey) would not say that was a promise hastily given, and given without due authority; but a governor bad no right to contract pecuniary obligations of any kind, not only without the consent of the Secretary of State, but of the Board of Treasury; and the necessity of insisting upon that rule had been repeatedly laid down by both Houses of Parliament. They all knew that enactments re quired to be ratified with the concurrence of the Board of Treasury. However, this engagement was given, and having been given, it ought to be fulfilled; but undoubtedly it ought to be fulfilled by the provincial Government. At the period when Lord Metcalfe held the Government, his view of the case was that Mr. Ryland had no claim to a pension; that he had a claim to an office, and it was the duty of the provincial Government, if possible, to provide such an office. Accordingly he was appointed to the situation of registrar of the district of Quebec. The emoluments of that district appeared to be too low, and Lord Metcalfe, with the concurrence of the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) assigned to him a pension of 150l. Mr. Ryland complained that the emoluments and profits did not meet his expectations, and accordingly after a time another office fell vacant, and Lord Metcalfe assigned that office; but Lord Metcalfe was so satisfied that the office which he had assigned was sufficient to meet his expectations, that in giving that office he withdrew the pension. The noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley) expressly approved of Lord Metcalfe's conduct in this particular. There were various applications upon the subject; and in the different letters to Mr. Ryland, he invariably stated that he conceived Mr. Ryland's claim to be exclusively the case of the provincial Government. Lord Cathcart succeeded Lord Metcalfe, and in transmitting another application of Mr. Ryland, he expressly stated his entire concurrence in Lord Metcalfe's view of the subject, that view being that Mr. Ryland had no claim whatever on the Imperial Government. Since he (Earl Grey) had been in office, the case had been brought before him, and the noble Lord had quoted the despatch he wrote upon the subject in acknowledging Mr. Ryland's claim to certain sums; but it was worded in a most careful manner, to avoid recognising the claims further than he stated. The despatch was in these words:—" My predecessors do not controvert, nor do I deny, Mr. Ryland's claim to whatever loss he may have sustained by the surrender of the office of clerk of the executive council." Since then the subject had been considered repeatedly, and by various authorities in Canada. The question, then, reduced itself to this, had the emoluments which Mr. Ryland had received from the different offices which he had held, boon sufficient? That was a question upon which, in this country, it was totally impossible to form an opinion. The evidence which the noble Lord had quoted on that point, proved nothing whatever. Mr. Ryland had exchanged the office of registrar of Quebec for that of registrar of Montreal, and, according to the returns, the sum made by Mr. Ryland's successor at Quebec amounted to 545l. The situation of registrar at Montreal had been reckoned a good situation by the person who held it prior to Mr. Ryland; his situation at Quebec was found to be a good situation by his successor; and yet both, in Mr. Ryland's hands, turned out to be very unproductive. Mr. Ryland had been so intent in pressing his imaginary claims on the Government, that he had left business unexecuted. Under these circumstances, it did seem that there was no ground for interference. The noble Duke asked the House to resolve— That it is the opinion of this Hous that the case of U. H. Ryland, late Clerk of the Executive Council of Canada, as set forth in a petition presented to this House on the 8th June, 1849, and as further set forth in addresses voted to Her Majesty by the Legislative Assembly and by the Legislative Council of Canada in 1846 (upon the report of a Committee specially appointed to inquire into the circumstances of the said case), is one of great hardship and injustice. He did not wish to meet that resolution by a direct negative; certainly he did not wish to prejudice the case of Mr. Ryland, which was still under the consideration of the provincial Government. All he could ask the House to permit, was to allow the question to be put, and he should, therefore, move the previous question. There was no evidence to show that the provincial Government were not disposed to look at Mr. Ryland's claims in a fair spirit, and it was quite impossible that this country could be called upon to make compensation to Mr. Ryland.

LORD STANLEY

said, that all who had listened to the very able, clear, and eloquent statement of his noble Friend (the Duke of Argyll), and to the answer attempted to be made by the noble Earl opposite, must feel that this was a case of gross and grievous hardship and injustice. He was not prepared to go all the lengths of the various claims put forward at various times by Mr. Ryland; but it could not be denied but that the complication and difficulty attending them, was not a little increased by the somewhat extraordinary and lamentable fact, that no less than six Governors General, who had been engaged in the administration of the province during the transactions with Mr. Ryland, had been by the hand of Providence removed from this world. Lord Durham, Lord Gosford. Lord Sydenham, Sir R. Jackson, Sir C. Bagot, and Lord Metcalfe, had all in succession been removed by the hand of death, and Mr. Ryland had therefore lost the testimony of many important witnesses. After recapitulating the principal facts of the case, his Lordship proceeded to observe, that although when the question was submitted to him, he did not think Mr. Ryland entitled to the full amount of the pension claimed by him, yet he could not but feel that, after he had accepted the office under the guarantee of the Governor General (Lord Sydenham), and thereby incurred great loss, he had an equitable claim upon the consideration, justice, and good faith of the Crown, pledged through the colonial administration, and he therefore directed Lord Metcalfe, as far as possible, to make good the promise held out to Mr. Ryland by Lord Sydenham, although, in point of fact, he disapproved of the guarantee given by Lord Sydenham, and thought he had no right to give it. The emoluments of Mr. Ryland fell far short of what he had a right to expect, and he had accepted office for the convenience of the Government. He therefore wrote to Lord Metcalfe to bear Mr. Ryland's case in mind, and if possible to promote him to a more lucrative office at the earliest period; and until he should find such an office, he did not direct Lord Metcalfe to refer to the local assemblies or consult his cabinet, but to exercise the power entrusted to the Crown, and use the funds placed at its disposal, and out of those funds which were not under the control of the local executive and local parliament to satisfy the claim of Mr. Ryland, which had been contracted on the faith of the Crown. Lord Metcalfe did not recognise the claim of Mr. Ryland to a pension, but granted it to him by his (Lord Stanley's) orders; and when he conferred on him an office which he believed would in amount fully comply with Lord Sydenham's guarantee, he told him the pension would be withdrawn. Formerly, a sum of 5,000l. a year was placed at the disposal of the Crown as a pension fund. Now, he wished to know whether the noble Lord opposite had sacrificed to the local legislature, to whom he appeared to have handed all the powers of the Crown, the disposal of this pension fund? If so, he had deprived the Crown of the power of doing justice, and placed all the servants of the Crown, to whom the faith of the Crown had been pledged, at the disposal of a legislature who, if they were to judge of their disposition by the disposition of some of the chosen advisers of the Crown, was so far impregnated with democratic views, in consequence of their neighbourhood to the United States, that they were quite prepared to repudiate pensions which, at the time they were granted, the Crown had full power to grant. He therefore repeated his question—had he or had he not at the disposal of the Crown, or had he sacrificed, this 5,000l.? If he had parted with the power, a republic was practically established in Canada, and the Governor was placed in a degrading position, and called upon to place his hand, as a servant of the Crown, to documents and to subscribe decisions and pronounce judgments which, in his conscience, he believed to be unjust and derogatory to the authority and power of the Sovereign under whom he served. The noble Earl admitted the claim of Mr. Ryland to employment and remuneration; but, said the noble Earl, "Do not vote for this resolution, for how do you know what may be decided in Canada, as the case is still open?" The last Minute of the Executive Council stated, that the subject was open to consideration. But what was the date of that Minute? Some time in 1848 or 1849; and since that they had the declaration of Mr. Hinks, on the part of himself and his colleagues, it was to be presumed, repudiating Mr. Rylaud's claim. It was no excuse for a Minister to say, "I have parted with the power of the Crown; I have left it a mere shadow; I have abandoned all the means of assisting this gentleman; and I must humbly wait the pleasure of the Legislature in Canada to do that which the Crown is pledged to do, and which I, as a Minister of the Crown, by my act, have debarred the Sovereign from doing." This was not a case in which their Lordships ought to pass to the previous question. His noble Friend did not call on them to go to the House of Commons to ask for compensation, but called on them as a body which had the power of controlling the responsible Ministers of the Crown, and the power of expressing their opinion on public matters and on the conduct of the Crown's responsible advisers, to declare that in their judgment Mr. Ryland had suffered gross hardship and injustice, and that this hardship and injustice had been acknowledged, both directly and indirectly, by successive Governors General, and by both branches of the legislature of the province, as well as the Imperial Government; and, by the 5th resolution, he called on their Lordships to declare that the agreement entered into between Mr. Ryland and the Governor General, of which the former had performed his part, should be carried into effect according to its terms; or, if that should not now be practicable, that he should be compensated. Whatever might be his feeling with regard to the others, he thought their Lordships would not, by any means, be justified in passing by the 1st, 2nd, and 5th resolutions, by voting for the previous question, after the clear and unanswered statement of his noble Friend—unanswered in all its material facts, and presented to their Lordships with a force and power independent of the force and power derived from the "importance of the question itself. If, therefore, his noble Friend should think fit to divide on those three resolutions, he would, with a full sense of the injustice done, and of his duty to vindicate the right of the Crown to fulfil its obligations to its faithful servants, give him his humble support.

EARL GREY

said, the noble Lord had asked him a question which he would very shortly answer. The question to which he alluded was, whether the right of the Crown to the disposal of the sum of 5,000l. a year had been surrendered? He begged to state that that right had not been surrendered; it was continued by the new Act which had been passed by the Canadian legislature, and in consideration of which the Civil List Act had been repealed. But the noble Lord knew as well as he did that, under the existing constitution of Canada, all the powers of the Crown must practically be so exercised that harmony between the different branches of the colonial government would be maintained; and the noble Lord was also aware that when his own instructions were sent to Lord Metcalfe, to give Mr. Ryland the pension, in order to their being carried into effect it was necessary to obtain the signature of one of the members of the Legislative Council. As the noble Lord had commented so strongly on what had been done recently, he would refer to the two last despatches on the subject, written by the noble Lord himself before quitting office. The date of this grievance was 1841. In 1845 Lord Metcalfe promoted Mr. Ryland to the office of registrar of Montreal, as the compensation to which he was entitled for the withdrawal of his pension. The noble Lord (Lord Stanley) wrote to the Governor General— I have to convey to your Lordship my approval of the terms of the answer which you directed to be written to Mr. Ryland with reference to his remonstrance against the discontinuance of his pension. Mr. Ryland had remonstrated against the discontinuance of his pension; the noble Lord thought the office to which he had been appointed a sufficient compensation. Mr. Ryland remonstrated again. On the 16th of September, 1845, three months before quitting office, the noble Lord wrote— I have received your Lordship's despatch of the 8th of August, including your reply to the letter which Mr. Ryland has written to you on the subject of his claims upon the government of Canada. I do not perceive, in Mr. Ryland's present statement, any ground for altering the view which I have already taken of his case. I agree with you in thinking that if the pledge given to Mr. Ryland were a valid one, the responsibility of redeeming it would rest with the province, and not with the Home Government, the latter not having been a party to the transaction. I request you to inform Mr. Ryland that it is not in my power to interfere any further in this matter. The noble Lord now thought that the advisers of the Crown should interfere. In September, 1845, he officially directed Lord Metcalfe to inform Mr. Ryland that he himself could not interfere any further. He begged to repeat that the question of the pension was still before the Canadian Government; and he believed the sole reason why the Minute to which he had referred had not been acted upon was, that no one had been able to induce Mr. Ryland to urge his claim with moderation and justice. It appeared from the minutes of the Council, that in March 1850, the subject was still under consideration. He would only add, that the noble Lord appeared to take then a view somewhat different from the one which he took formerly.

LORD STANLEY

explained. The noble Earl had forgotten to state that before he (Lord Stanley) acquiesced in Lord Metcalfe's decision, Lord Metcalfe had informed him that he had conferred on Mr. Ryland an office more lucrative than that which he had held at Quebec. That information was conveyed to him three or four months before he quitted office, and it was then perfectly impossible that he should know the amount of the emoluments. That was the state of the case in 1845. It was different now, experience having proved that the new office was not more lucrative than the old one.

LORD BROUGHAM

had stated on a former occasion, that he thought Mr. Ryland's was an exceedingly hard case; and after hearing the unanswered and unanswerable statement made by the noble Duke, he was confirmed in the opinion which he had expressed a year ago. He might now add, that he thought it a case of great injustice, and it was the first time in his Parliamentary experience, when a charge of great injustice had been met by the previous question, which was as much as to say that it was not worth while to put the question at all. The refusal to satisfy the claims of Mr. Ryland had not been based upon grounds which he could have well understood—viz. on the want of funds; on the contrary, he had been told that there were plenty of funds, which made his case one of even still greater hardship. The noble Lord then referred to a testimonial, signed by twenty-three notaries of Quebec, which spoke in terms of the highest praise of the manner in which that gentleman had performed his arduous duties. By agreeing to the resolutions proposed by the noble Duke, their Lordships would not commit themselves in any way with reference to the fund out of which Mr. Ryland would be remunerated. and he should, therefore, most cordially support the Motion.

EARL GRANVILLE

remarked, that as to the motive which had induced his noble Friend (Earl Grey) to move the previous question, instead of meeting the Motion with a direct negative, be could assure the noble and learned Lord that it was not because his noble Friend felt it to be inconvenient to do so, but because it was deemed the more proper course, inasmuch as the case, within certain limits, was still under consideration by the Executive Council in Canada. Under such circumstances, it would have been improper, on the part of the Government, to have given a verdict that might be unfavourable to Mr. Ryland. The case of that gentleman assumed a double aspect: first, was he really suffering any hardship; and, secondly, if so, who were the parties to recompense him? Those who had read the papers must be convinced that it was not in the power of his noble Friend (Earl Grey), on the part of the Imperial Government, to give compensation to Mr. Ryland, whether the case deserved it or not; but the question as to whether any hardship had really been sustained by him, was very much shaken from what appeared in the memorandum drawn up by Mr. Hincks. It could not be denied that Mr. Ryland's successor had, by industry and diligence, received a greater sum from the office than was assigned as a pension to Mr. Ryland by Lord Sydenham. Without wishing, however, to pronounce any definitive opinion on the subject, his belief at present was that Mr. Ryland was not suffering any personal hardship.

LORD GLENELG

said, the impression left upon his mind after listening to all the discussion on both sides was, that a great wrong bad been done to Mr. Ryland. There could be no doubt that a guarantee was given by the representative of the Crown, under most important circumstances, and that on the faith of that guarantee Mr. Ryland was induced to surrender his office and to accept one, the emoluments of which had been only about half those of his previous office. He entirely agreed with his noble Friend on his left that the colonial funds were answerable for the deficiency. But it was clear that if Mr. Ryland expected compensation, it could not come from the colonial fund. However, as the evil had been fully established, the only question was what fund the compensation was to come from? He differed entirely with those noble Lords who thought the question merely a colonial one, as, in his (Lord Glenelg's) opinion, it was an imperial question, and, as such, it was considered by the Government of that period. It was thought essential to the greatness and security of the empire, that an union should be consolidated between the Canadas. The nation thought so; Parliament thought so; and eventually decreed by a solemn compact that there was a union. He would recommend the noble Duke to press the whole of his resolutions, as in that case he would vote for them; and, in conclusion, he should say, that in his opinion, the colonial funds not being available, the compensation should be made good out of the Imperial Exchequer.

The DUKE of ARGYLL

replied. He was not prepared to adopt the course suggested by the noble Lord who had last addressed the House, namely, to put all the resolutions; and he could not understand why the noble Lord should decline voting for the resolutions, unless all were comprehended in the decision. He held that the promise originally made was an imperial promise, and that as such it should be fulfilled in imperial good faith. He (the Duke of Argyll) was not willing to push the resolutions against the sense of their Lordships' House; and though he was of opinion that, as a whole, they should be passed, yet, in deference to the opinion of the House, and in compliance with the advice of his noble Friend (Lord Stanley) he would content himself with moving the first, second, and fifth of the resolutions.

The previous question was put, whether the said Question shall be now put.

Their Lordships divided. The numbers were—Content 22; Non-Content 19: Majority 3.

List of the NOT-CONTENTS.
MARQUESSES. BISHOPS.
Lansdowne Down
Westminster Limerick
Manchester
EARLS. Peterborough
Besborough BARONS.
Carlisle Beaumont
Granville Dufferin
Grey Eddisbury
Minto Foley
Morley Overstone
Strafford Say and Sele
Paired off.
Lord Sudeley Viscount Strangford
Earl of Charlemont Lord Lanesborough
Bishop of Worcester Lord Wynford
Lord Poltimore Earl of Digby
Lord Kinnaird Earl of Eglintoun
Lord Cremorne Earl of Clare
Marquess of Donegal Marquess of Ely
Marquess of Anglesey Marquess of Westmeath
Duke of Bedford Lord Feversham
Earl of Fingall Marquess of Huntley
Lord Londesborough Earl of Beauchamp
Lord Byron Earl Talbot
Earl of Oxford Earl of Roden
Duke of Norfolk Duke of Montrose
Earl of Zetland Earl of Ellenborough
Earl of Wicklow Earl Somers
Lord Portman Earl of Luan
Lord De Mauley Viscount Combermere
Lord Dormer Earl of Harewood
Lord Elphinstone Marquess of Londonderry
Lord Lovat Duke of Cleveland
Earl of Yarborough Earl of Lonsdale
Duke of Devonshire Earl of Enniskillen
Lord Colborn Earl Delawarre

Resolved in the Affirmative. Then the said Resolutions were, on Question, agreed to.

House adjourned till Monday next.

Back to