IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

r- m.

% %"

*^-

L^/

t/j

1.0

!.!

1.25

IrB i'^'

ii40 !

1.4

12.2
20

1.6

p^j

//,

.""^

A'r

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

-^^

.<#s

/i^

.^;<»

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CSHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques dt bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

D
D

Coloured covers/
Couverture de .::ou!eur

Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagee

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul^e

I 1 Cover title missing/

I iri ft titre de couverture manque

D
D
D

Coloured maps/

Cartes gdographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 a/ec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
elong interior margin/

La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

["T'T'Blank leaves added during restoration may

appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
havf been omitted from filming/
II se peut quo certaines pages blanches ajout^es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6X6 film^es.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires:

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage
sont indiquds ci-dossous.

D
D

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag^es

ges restored and/or laminated/
Pages reistaurdes et/ou pelliculees

r^;3^Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
I I Pages ddcolor^es, tachet6es ou piquees

□
D

Pages detached/
Pages detachers

*^owthrough/
Transparence

Quality of print varies/
Qualite indgale de I'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplementaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or pa'tially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partieltement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t6 film^es d nouveau de facon d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu^ ci-dessous.

1CX

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

29X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Library of the Public
Archives of Canada

L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

La bibliothdque des Archives
publiques du Canada

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Les images suivantes ont 4t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire filmS, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol — ♦» (meaning "CON-
TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END ').
whichevar applies.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant
psi' le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte una empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les a-Jtres exemplaires
originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la
premiere page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une t&lle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole --► signifie "A SUIVRE" '-
symbole V signifie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction racios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to oottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagraniS illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent gtre
film^s d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd d partir
de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de qauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

'^;..:

■tf-:

^.DDPvESS

>;y

MR. BLAKE AT BOWMAN YILT.E.

(By Oar Own Reporters.)

On the evening of Tuesday, the 26th ult.,
Mr. Blake acldresse.' his old constituenta in
the Town Hall of Bowmanville. Mr, Blake
bjgan by referring to the connection which
liad subsisted between himself and his audi-
ence for the six preceding years, and after
recounting its story and expressing the feel-
ings of alfection which he entertained to-
wai'ds West Durhani,stated that he was that
night before them for the purpose of bidding
them farewell. Having spoken for some
time npon these topics, Mr. Blake proceeded
as follows : —

I have come also for another purpose. I
have come because I have been told, and I
believe, that jit is my duty to say somewhat
to my fellow countrymen on the great topic
which is now agitating the public mind.
I cannot hope to say much that
is new, but what I do say
shall at any rate be, according to my convic-
tions, true. The subject is of such vast
scope that I cannot hope to treai;
it in one address, 1 shall therefore en-
deavour to point out what I believe to be the
true history of the matter up to a certain
period, reserving for another time and pi .ce
the detailed expression of my views '■a the
later phases of the story. In order ruUj' to
realise the situation, it is necessary th." b we
should gi) back to the close of 1871. You
will recollect that the Canadian Government
which met Parliament in 18G7 with a very
large majority — with a majority in the whole
of about 75 votes, and a majority from the
Provinces of Ontario and Quebec of some 47
votes— had during the four preceding years
been engaged in building up its political
strength by means which we condemned —
by grants of the public monies, given in
some cases almost openly, or in other cases
in fact upon a consideration of the political
opinions of the constituency or its member,
and not solely, as we contended these grants
should be giv«n, upon public grounds and
with reference to the general interest. There
can be no doubt, owing to the demoralization
of public sentiment in various quarters
from various political occurrences, that
this atrocious doctrine received con-
siderable countenr,nce, and that the prac-
tice of it produced considerable elTect within
the walls of Parliament and in several of the
constituencies. The last session approached,
and with it came the preparation
for the general eldctiona — that great

trial the verdict in which would estab-
lish M'licther or not the Government retained
the confidence of the country.

Some of the priujijjal preparations
•of the Government were these: —
They determined to play the part
of Conservatives as to the Election Law;
to insist on retaining that law, which was
vicious in two important particulars. First,
in that it gave to the Government the power
of determining the order in which the ^lec-
tion should be held, a circumstance by no
means insignilicant in its effect on the geaeral
result; because, as we ail know, the eii'ect of
carrying twenty or thirty constituencies at
the commencement of a general election may
be very great. It is calculated to excite the
hopes and animate the exertions of the win-
ning party, to damp the spirits and depress
the energies of those who are losing, and to
transfer from their ranks to those of their
adversaries that too large body of weak-knee'd
and faint-hearted voters whose con-
victions of the right are too feeble to with-
stand their fondness for the winning side.
Thr Government determined to retain to it-
sel the advantage of tixing the order in
wl ich the great trials to take place before
tht people between the two parties should
take place, and so to arrange the elections as
to give themseh es every advantage, and to
'nflict on their adv ersaries all possible dis-
couragement. But the second particular in
which the Election Law was vicious is of in-
finitely greater consequence. I refer to the
machinery for the trial of controverted elec-
tions. We knew well the evils of this law;
we had experienced them for many years.
So strong had been the popular feeling that
remedies had been applied in several of the
Provinces, but it was quite obvious that the
advantages of undue influence and corrup-
tion were too great to be thrown away by a
Government which could procure means
to exercise undue influence and to
practice corruption, and so they determined
to resist this great reform. The additional
preparation which the Government made for
the coming contest, was to arrange for the
means cf influence and corruption. I need
hardly tell j^ou that that preparation was the
Pacific Hallway charter. That gigantic
scheme was to be acoomplished after a fashion
unexampled in modern times, and calculated
to give to the Government powers and facd-
it'os for influence and corruption of a most
extraordinary character, The Government
determined that two private oompamea who
applied for incorporation, should be chartered
01 precisely the same conditions. But they

stated that in order that the] country might
not be at the mercy of either of these
companies or both, in case there
should be a combination, fhay would ensure
competition by taking unto themselvespower
to, charter another company. They also de-
termined to take to thcmseh-es power to
afree upon all the terms and stipulations of
the contract, with the excoptiin of some
very general provisions which weie contained
in the Act of Parliament — provisions so gen-
eral as to give an extremely Avide discretion
,19 to the disposal of the money and land sub-
sidies. They took the power of making the
company as they cliose. They assumed the
coLtrol of the .$.30,000,000 and 50,000,000
acres of land, and the large additional acre-
age for the two
It is difficult for
appreliend tlie niajmitude
$30,000,000 is a national
50,000,000 acres you can
dependent States,
limits of the afl'air.

brancli lines.

the mind to

of these figures.

treasure ; from

carve several in-

But these were not the

The national control

over another 50,000.000 acres, the power of
dealing with tiiat iiun ense additional area,
was also demanded lor themselves by the
Government. They went further still. By
this extraordinary Act, it was provided that
the order of the Privy Council should over-
ride the order of Parliament, the provi-
sioES which Parliament had, during the
same session, deliberately determined to be
wise and ue«.dful in the public interest,
This enactment, ceding to the Executive the
control, utichcckcd by Parliament, of
transactions of iuch enormous magni-
tude, gave a means of exercising undue in-
fluence, and of acquiring funds
for improper purposes, altogether beyond the
means* which had been in the possession of
any Government of Canada at any pre^ ious
time. Now, sir, these were the views with
which the Government were preparing for
the struggle. There was another body also
preparing for that memorable meeting — the
whole army of speculators. They saw before
them in the prospect of this great railway no
ordinary contract, no ord.inary job. The
treasury ©f a nation, and the area of inde-
pendent States, a predomina^it and command-
ing position in the country, were all to be the
prize of some fortunate ring of speculators, and
they too were making preparations to influ-
ence Government, Legislature, and people in
favour of their particular views, and in fur-
therance oi their private and personal objects.
You knov/ I do not state this from repute
merely or froni rumour. You know it frori
what has been published of the correspond-
ence of these gentrJ^ Let us look for a
moment at what they wrote. Let us listen
to the utterances of these birds of ill omen.
They saw before them a mighty carcase, and
where the carcase is the eagles- -but I will
not so degrade the name of the noble bird —
no, the cormorants and vultures (applause)
were gathered together ready and anxious to
batten on their country's vitals. What says
James Beaty, junior • —

"I had some conhdential communication
with a member of the Government, when in
Ottawa, of great importance to us. I want
to profit by it. We must be prei>arcd for a
f:£;ht, and now is the lime to Icgin. There

has been — as you are no doubt aware — a ne\T
Government formed in Ontario, the Oppo-
sition element preponderating in it, although
a friend of the Ottawa Government is a mem-
ber, and I may say to you he went in on the
advice of Sir John. The result may be that
this Local Government will eventually be
driven from power, and that the entire party
will side to a certain extent with the Ottawa
Government, or it may eventually go iu di-
rect opposition tothcTn, especially at the next
elections this year. Our Bill and arrange-
ments'must tlierefore be made this session to
be safe under all circumstances. 1 am in that
position to advise a united effort in co-opera-
tion with the Government to carry thistliiHg
successfully. To do this money will l)e neces-
sary, and a considerable sum. I therefore
write to say that I ought to be supplied at
once with §50,000, and another $50,000
when the session opens, and I think
tliat will do it. I will give an account for
the v/hole of it, and I think I can guarantee
a satisfactory charter. Of course, this is not
to be wliispercd this side of the line, and on your
side only as far as necessary to obtain it. It
would play havoc with us if it were known
that any money was in liand connected with
it. I see now the best use to make of it,
where prompt action is necessary. A letter
of credit to Patterson & Beaty, or Bank of
Montreal, or Bank of British North America
— I prefer the Bank of British North America
for various reasons. It is unpolitical, &c.,
and the same notice would not be takei: of it
there as in the Bank of Montreal. Of coiii«e,

I always understand you M'^ere prepared to
come to the requirements of the case when
necessary, and I therefore write in this way.

I I is novj iieressary to redeem myself, to sa-
tisfy parties that must be satisfied, and
to ask no questions at present. Kersteman
does not know of this. It must not be
known, and will be the more effectual the
less it is known."

Hf, 'k again : —

" I have had about three months' corre»-
pondeice both by letter and personal inter-
>iew8 of the first importance to the Go\rern-
ment, and all this with the ultimate object
on my part of settling the Pacific. The pro-
ject had more of direct reference to the elec-
tions, and I always understood you to say
that some thousands of dollars would be no
object in reference to our common object."

Again,—

"The Government have now taken the
matter in hand, and will have, it is expected,
$100,000 subscribed in a few day? to promote
their influence in the conntry, which might
have been done under one direct control and
with special reference to one scheme."

What were these unhallowed myateriea
between the Canadian Government and
James Beaty? But let us not waste our
time, let u.s turn from this minor villain
(hear, hear, and laughter), and listen to the
utterances of a bigger and still baser man.
In the same month Sir Hugh Allan (laughter
and groans for Sir Hugh) writes: —

"Dear Sir, — It seems pretty certain
that, in addition to money payments, the
folio iring stock will >aveto be distributed: —

'«*

a
r
u

(naming various snins and pa'-ties to amount
of $850,000. ) To meet this I propose that
we give up of our etook as follows: — C. M,
Smith, $250,000; G. W. McMullen, ?250,000;
Hugh Allan, §3,10,000; total ^'SoCOOO.
(Cheers and laugh to..)

He goes on to sa^' ; —

" Please say if this is agreeable to you ? I
do not think we can do wth I ss, and may
have to givfj mere. I do not think we will
require more than $100,000 in cash, but I airi
not cure as yet. Who am I to draw on for
money when it is wanted, and what pmof ol
pajTnent will be required ? You are aware I
cannot get receipts. Our Legislature meets
on the nth of Ajiril, and 1 am already deep
in preparation for tlie yame. Evijry day
brings up some new difiiculty to be encoun-
tered, but I hope to meet them all success-
fully. Write to me immediately.
"Yours truly,

"Hu<;u Allan."

And then comes the postscript. (Laugh-
ter. ) Like the ladles' letters, the most im-
portant part is in the postscript, — " I think
you will have to go it blind in the matter of
money — cash payments. (Laughter.) I li.,ve
already paid .*8,500 and have not a voucher,
and cannot get one." (Laughter.) There,
Mr. Chairman, is the language of this gang,
working their work in darkness, because
their deeds were evil. (Cheers and laughter. )
Urging the necessity of silence, pointing out
the impossibility of getting vouchers or
receipts, and saying, each inhis own language,
that their correspondents must ask no ques-
tions,but go it blind in the matter of money.
I think, considering the difference in situa-
tion, in standing, and in every attribute of
the two men, that there is a wonderful family
likeness in them notwithstanding (cheers
and laughter) ; and I suppose it is only to be
accounted for by the fact that they were of
the same class — engaged about the eame dirty
business, proposing the same dirty meaas,
and so revealing in private that baseness
of heart which no scruples of conscience,
but their dread of the public wrath,
caused them to conceal from the public
mind. (Cheers.) The discovery of these
letters has disgraced their writers in the
sight of every honest man. (Cheers.) Now
you have had a glimpse at the preparations
of the speculators ; you have heard a short
extract from the language of the prince of
bribers (cheers), and of his humble follower,
Beaty (laughter) ; and 1 shall next direct
your attention to the preparations which
were being made by another body in the
State, The Liberal party was making ready
tc foil the devices of these corrupters of
public morality, the Government and the
speculators. It was proponing to offer to the
consideration of Parliament and the country,
additional grounds for reposing confidence in
its policy and for reversing in 1872 th^
verdict given for th« Government in 18C7.
(Loud cheers.) We proposed measures
which, Lad they been received by the Gov-
ernment — had they been heeded by Parlia-
ment — would have obviated the very great
scandal which has since arisen, and saved
the countrv from deP''-cndin<r into the humi-

liating position in whiol, I am sorry to say,
it stands this day. We recalled, sir, i:i anti-
cipation of the great contest, the fundamental
principles of Ljtrty. We were not
forgetful of 'the murcim that public
virtue is the found.v.tion of popular
Goverumunt ; we ^verv not forgetful
of the great truth that unles.' there exists in
the people a high degree of public virtue,
they will lie unequal to tiie g'-a^e responsi-
bility of self-government. Wt rememberf'd
that whatever tends to vitiate, degrade, or
weaken this principle, tends to the destruc-
tion of popular (.iovernmont, whiiVii is endan-
gered by the introduction of miitives con-
ilicting with that principle, and niust, the
moment such motives l)econie vrevalent,
inevitably fa'l. When that hit,'h s^ense of
public virtue has been so far weaken^^l as to
leave the country practically at the n.ercj' of
men who, by money or infhience, control the
exercise of tlie sulirage, tliey have succeeded
in converting that which ha.<5 been rtgard-
ed as the shieid of liberty into an
instrument of tyranny. (Cheers.) Feeling
that the exercise of the suti'rage, the grea^.est
political right that belongs to a freeman,
mirst, amongst the mass of the electors, be
based on public grounds, not upon grounds of
private affection, or of prejudice, and far, far
less upon the basis of undue influence, or o.'
the purchase of the vote, we regretted to
see that there had been growing, from gen-
eral election to general election, a sys-
tem of bribery and corruption. We Mere
aware that, pressed by similar difficulties,
the longing for a n-medy had so far animated
the people of the old land that they had
pressed upon Parliament, and Parliament
had agreed to, the new election law. Wp
were proposing to do not only what had been
done in Great Britain, but what had been
done by the Local Legislatures in our own
Province, in New Brunswick, and in British
Columbia. Thus a large majority of the con-
stituencies of tho Dominion, in their local
electio' jj, were ruled by that law, and we
felt that we could do no greater public ser-
vice than forthwith to make it the
law of the Lominion. We Telt
that it was a law which would
give comparatively cheap, speedy, and cer-
tain justice in the trial of controverted elec-
tions. W'e felt that that law, severe and
harsh as some erroneously call it,«vculd
really be most beneficent, fulfilling the high-
est function of a law, acting as a preventitive,
and not simply as a punishment, of bribery
and corruption. I say a preventitive, for
the candidate and his supporters, knowing
that under its provisions the use of undue
means would ensure defeat and failure
in the accomplishment of their object,
would be restrained from the crime. Un-
der the existing law, so great was
the difficulty of trying such charges, bo enor-
mous the expense, so marked the uncertainty,
that to have ol)tained, by whatever means,
a seat, was for aU practical purposes, to have
secured it for the entire Parliament. The
new law, and one for simultaneor.8 polling,
%yere pressed upon the consideration of Par-
liament. But the Government said no.
They told us in grave and impassioned tones
that it would be most improper to ask the

JHilecR to try «it<li oaues, even if they con-
Heiuod. They toM us that it was impossible
for tlie jiuIkch to iiml time to try them, even
if it woiiUlue proper to aak them; and they
referred us to a fiinglc case in Ireland,
where the language used by the judge
produced great excitement, as a most cunaiu-
hivo iciwoii wliy we shfnild not adopt that
law in this country. Of tlio weiglit which, in
their own mindn, they attached to these ar-
guments, you and I can well judge, knowing,
aa wc do, that no sooner had their true ol)-
jeet been accomidiHlied and qn the meeting
of the new i'arliamcnt the feame law was
proposcil by themselves. (Hear, hear.) Now,
may wo not justly conclude that their titie
o1)ject was 8ini}ily and &oK:!y to obtain the'
benellt in tiic coming struggle of the evil
system which they so soon afterwards
agreed to abamlon? (Hear, hear, and
cheers.) lUititwas abtiolutely needful for
them just then to retain the old law, bi;caus-e
without that their means of undue inllucnce
and corrin)tiou would have been of little
avail. As Ihavt'said, they had to go furtlicr.
Tii..y jiroueeded to find the means of inHu-
cnce and corruption. They introduced and
carried, in spite of our op]iusition, a law giv-
ing them thoxe extraordinary powers with
rct'erenee to the I'acilio llailway contract.
Wc all reuKinbor the often quoted saying
of a Mini.ster at the Toronto t'onveu-
tiou of '(i7, that the Intercolonial
llailway wouhl give Sir John A. Mac(h)nald
ton years' lease of powei-, and also how far
that saying has been verified. But it would
puzzlo anybody to determine how many
times mo>'e powerful the PaciHu Kaihvuy
scheme would be than the Intercolonial, the
.enterprise being inlinitely more gigantic, and
the mode upon which it is being carried out
inttnitely better adapted to give unlimited
power to the Executive of the day. When
that measure was proposed we contended
that a constitutional principle was involved,
Wc were told in reply that the powers
of the Executive would ))e used on cou.%titu-
tional principles, and that no harm would re-
sult. I hit we contended that a violation of
sound principle would produce unsound prac-
tice, rraotice is simply the reduction of
principles into action ; and to i>e sound in
practice you must be s»mui in principle also.
( Hear, hear. ) Now, sir, the principle which
was violated was this, that in free Cousti-
■tutions the Executive power must 'oe
guarded, limited, and restrained, and must
not be permitted to encroach on the rights
of the people aiid their representatives.
Executive power it is which has at all times
boon the gi-eat foe of liberty. The name
nndor which this power ia exer-
cised ia 'vholly immaterial. Whether it •
bo a King, President, or Cabinet which
wields the Executive power, the constant
tendency of those possessed of such power,
is to invade the domain of the other branches
©f the Government, and to enlarge their own
jurisdiction. In tUe great struggle whichsub-
sisted for so many years in England, out of
which the liberties you now hold were grad-
ually evolved, this was the main principle.
This lesson was graven on the hearts of the
British people, and we muat never for an instant
forget it. 1 warn you to beware lest the length

of time since that struggle ended should make
you heedless of the prizj which it secured.
iJy gradual steps, here a little and there a
little, the liberties of a peoplemayV>e invaded,
and results accomplished by degrees which,
had they been proposed as one operation,
would have been rejected as monstrous. It
is then the duty of every representative of
tlie people narrowly to watch any i>ropo3al
which may tend to give larger authority to
the Executive than it has, according to the
Mell-establishedprincipleaof the Constitution.
These piinciijles were violated when wo gave
the Executive power to conclude irrevocjildy,
and without the assent of Parliament, sucli a
gigantic contract as that for the construction
of the Pacific Kailway. Ar. ordinary steam-
])ackct contract is submitted to Parliament
for approval. There have been two contracts
made in the last year with Sir Hugh — one the
contract for carryingmails across tiie ocean for
a short period, and an amount, too large, in-
deed, but still insignificant comimred with
the Pacific. That comparatively trilling af-
fair was i)roperly submitted to Parliament;
but the otiier and enormous contract made
with Sir llugh for the Pacific liailway, wa.s
left in the hands of tlic Executive without
any power being reserved to Parliament. Can
these things be reconciled ? But argument
was vain ; the Government prevailed,
and certiinly at the close of the session
it seemed as if they had won the
battle. They had maintained the bad elec-
tion law which gave them facilitic- for bri-
ber}'^ and corruption, and they had obtained
power to make the mighty contract which was
to give them unlimited influence and funds
for corruption. In the meantime the bribers
had been at work. We know that Sir Hugh
received some §40,000 during the session
from his American associates for the secret
purpose referred to in the latterpart of Ihe let-
ter I read. He spent the money, he tells us, in
polluting the press, the bar, the pulpit, and,
1 suppose, he entered the legislative halls as
well. To him no place was sacred; in his
eyes overy man had his price; and
in his mind the only questions were,
how cheap he could be bought and
whether he was worth the money.
There has arisen in these days, through the
extension of the press, a means of influenc-
ing public opinion more potent than any
known to our ancestors. You know there
have been no speeches on recent develop-
ment? in this great scandal, but you are
familiar with the arguments on both tildes
because you read the papers. But what con-
fidence can you place in those utterances, if
you are told by the man who is said to be
the representative man of Canada, commer-
cially, that he bought and subsidised the
newspapers and so polluted public opinion at
its source? He undoubtedly gathered around
him a very strong influence. He combined
certain local interests in Quebec with the great
scheme he had in hand. There was a very
strong desire to promote a railway from
Montreal to Ottawa, and thence westward.
This he took hold of and identified it with
the Pacific Railway scheme. He told those
locally interested that both should stand or
fall together — that if he obtained the con-
tract for the Pacific Railway their anticipa-

any
lere
jlop-
are
Lidea

coa-
Icipa-

tions would be more than realiznl. And hav-
ing so gained their confidence he took his
Btand. He stoml a gigantic figure in the
path of the < Jovemment, and dominated the
situation. The Liberal party in the mean
while was preparing to light the l>attlo on
the gror.i da wnich it had indicated during
the preceding session, confident that
it wa« sustained by tlie public voice,
and, Sir, this confidence was not misplaced.
The arrangements which liad been made for
the earlier seriously contested elections to
Guit the convenience and wishes of the (iov-
trnment turned out most propitious to the
Ijberal party. Seat after seat was wreste<l
from the Clovemment in Ontario. In Que-
bec Sir Geo. Cartier's election and those of
other friends were in imminent danger, and
it became evident that unless some new lever
were brought into action they would be lost.
The situation of the Government was des-
perate. Under these circumstances, in the
last of July and the first of August they
yielded to Sir Hugh Allan. His influence
and money became necessary to them. Ad-
verse as Sir George Cartier had been
at an earlier period to Sir Hugh
Allan's pretensions, he yielded, and
arrangements were made between these
jiersons satisfactory to Sir Hugh Allan.
What precisely was the assurance Sir Hugh
obtained is matter of controversy, but those
who are well-informed with regard to the
history of the negotiations say that there
were more formal assurances than those Sir
Hugh has produced. But it is enough for
our purpose to know that there were assur-
ances given which Sir Hugh accepted as satis-
factory. "Well, the matter wa^ to be kept quiet
till after the elections, partly because em-
barrassment might be created in Ontario.
Mr. Macpherson was at the head of another
company, and he was opposed to any prefer-
ence being given to Sir Hugh. So Sir John
Macdonald states, and he makes the stipula-
tion that nothing was to be known till after
the elections, so that he miglit have Sir
Hugh's assistance from below and Mr. Mac- .
plierson's assistance from above. The in-
Kuence which Sir Hugh had been prepared
to exercise till that moment to defeat Sir
Geort^e (Jartier and his friends lie turned
in their favour on receipt of the assurances
for which he bartered tliat influence. A few
(lays after the assurances were given, upon
the 8th of August, he api)eared at a public
meeting in the city of Montreal, btside
Sir CJeorge, and formally stated to his
friends that lie had received satisfactory
pledges, and intimated his desire accordingly
that they would support Sir (ieorge and
his party. At the same time that Sir Hugh
Allan's influence was thus acquired,
arrangements were made for liis advancing
money, 1. 'it merely for Sir George Cartier's
election, Ijut for other elections generally,
the elections in the Montreal district — in
the city of Montreal and surrounding con-
stituencies — were managed by a central com-
mittee, which had its headcjuarters in that
city Arrangements were made for the sup-
ply of funds to this CommitteeonSirGeorge's
leqnisition, to be dealt out amongst the con-
stituencies. All these arrangements were
contemporaneous with the giving of the satis-

factory assurance to Sir Hugh Allan with re-
gard to the Pacific Railway contract. These
things are incontrovertible. There ia no
(piestion of their truth. But it ia stated
in defence of Sir Hugh Allan and the fJov-
ernnient that the several transactions had
nothing to do with one another ; they w^ero
mere coincidences. (Laughter.) Tliofavtthat
Sir Hugh Allan having insisted upon a par-
ticularthingbeinggiven to him, upon a certain
memorable day obtained it, and the further
facts that on that day lie turned round and
extended his influence in favour of Ministers
and tlieir friends, and upon the same day ar-
ranged for the supply ^:f money for the same
purpose, you are to regard as entirely dis-
tinct—mere coincidences (laufjhter), events
which, though occurring at precisely the same
time, 113(1 nothing whatever to do
with one another, (Ironical cheers.) It
was a pure accident that they liappened to-
gether ; that is the argument. No v, all
those of you who have ever been suitors, or
witnesses', or jurors, or spectators in a court
of justice, must have heard and seen, time
and again, similar absurd but utterly futile
efforts to persuade the court that two con-
temporaneous transactions between the same
parties were yet wholly independent of each
other. The answer has always been, in the
words of tl:e proverb, " I can put two and
two together ; ' and if such a flimsy argu-
ment were presented in a court it would bo
laughed out of the place. It is perfectly
ridiculous and unworthy of every intelligent
and honest man to argue that these facts had
no connection with one another. (Cheers.)
I say it was utterly impossible for the Gov-
ernment to have honestly, even for legiti-
iiiate election purposes, taken one shilling
from Sir Hugh Allan, or from John Abbott,
in the relations which they mutually occu-
pied to them. Sir Hugh was then at any
rate a competitor for this great contract. If
he had not already obtained it, he was at
any rate seeking it, and had received certain
assurances, satisfactory to himself, as he tells
us in his affidavit. Standing in that relation
to him, was it possible that honest men could
have received from him or from his solicitor
and regent contributions even for honest elec-
tion purposes ? Could they bo free
in dealing with him afterwards! v
Yet these men had supplied Sir John A.
Macdonald with money to the amount of
about. .■* 1 00,000, and the Central Committee
to an amount approximating to .$150,000 ;
and all tliis money was supplied during the
election times, not, as the amounts plainly
showed, for h(mest purposes, but for the pur-
pose of bribing the electors of this country.
(Cheers.) Now, sir, let me remind you of
some of the declarations of Sir John Mac-
donald. You will remember that while this
business was going on, while these trans-
actions were being accomplished at
Montreal, Sir John A. Macdonald was
making an election tour tlirough Ontario,
and after they had been concluded,
ho continued that triumphal tour; he made
his impassioned speeclies; more than once
ho called his God to witness that his hands
were clean. He poured filth upon hirt adver-
saries. Let me rvad you from the MniC.'< re-
ports what he said. At Clinton, on the 17th

;

of Auffust, he Hairt :—" After the long service
he had given to the public he couW now come
forward and challenge friend or foo to state
on the huatinga before the neople, or in j)ri-
vate discussion, that he hart over been gudty
of an unclean and diHreputablo act. In the
United States they had seen one judge dis-
missed and dying broken-hearted, and an-
other brought to his death-bed, because im-
proper conduct bad been proved against
them. There, too, they saw corruption rife
in all political parties, public men, depraved
ofScials purchasetl, whole communities sold
like sheep in the shambles, and the public
outraged by lujh indecent venality. But
nothing of the kind was seen in Canada,
and why?" Can you conjecture why,
my friends? Let mo read on: — "Because
for seventeen years he had been the
chief member of the Covemment, and
during all that time had looked steadily to
the mother country for an example. There
might be political contests in England, but
whoever lettthe Government there, whctlier
Mr. Gladstone or Mr. Disraeli, both of whom
were his personal friends, they might be
certain it would be composed of honest and
upright men who would earnestly devote the
intellect and capacity God had given them
to the best interests of the country. It wan
his pride and boast that he had endeavoured
to pursue the same course in Canada. He
might \vithout dishonesty or dishonour have
used occasionally the means of information
possessed by every Minister of the Crown
in order to amass a colossal fortune; but
from tho beginning of his political career he
I'ad laid down this rule, and not only hail ho
insisted upon it himself but he had insisted
on the observance of it by his colleagues, that
no Minister of the Crown should make one
farthing beyond the salary which lie derived
from his 'iHice. If ever there had been a
Buspicion, or a doul>t, or a charge to the con-
trary — and sometimes there had l)cen charges
— he had investigated the matter^to the bottom,
and sometimes they miglit have seen that Min-
isters had disappeared from his Government."
A curious statement this ! The cliarges
which had been made against nienibcrs of his
Government were true then, and the gentle-
man told the public tliat he ha<l found, if not
himself, at least some of his colleagues,
guilty of acts of corrujition charged against
them, lint he, forsooth, was a moral and
high-toned gentleman — (derisive laughter) —
and dismissed them from his counsels as un-
worthy • of his distinguished company.
(Hear, hear.) At St. Marj''s, two
days afterwards, on the I9th August,
where Mr. Kidd was the Conseivative
candidate, he said:— "He appealed to Mr.
Kidd to say whether he had received or been
promised any money from the Government
to carry on the contest in South Perth ?'
Mr. Kidd replied " Not a farthing. " Sir
JohnMacdonald said "the same answer would
be given by every candidate in Ontario if he
were appealed to."

Now, Sir, this is a statement made by him-
self — thatevery Government candidate would
say, if appealed to, that not a farthing had
been supplied to them by the Government to
aid them in their ilectious ! At Sarnia, on
the 21st of the same month, his speech is

thus reported: -"He went on to charge the
Government of Ontario with using its powers
corruptly, by granting silver lamia in return
for assistance at these elections. This would
be proved before a Committee of tho House
(hiring the next session of Parliament."
On the 30th of August, four days after tho
famous 2r)th, ho said: — " He had come to
Lindsay for the purpose of doing what ho
could in his humble way for his personal and
political friend Mr. Dormer. * * * Ho
referred to the attempts that had been made
to corrupt the constituencies during these
elections. He charged the Opposition with
bribery on an extensive scale. * * * He
did not doubt that large sums had been
raised as a corruption fund among persons
interested in timber licenses under the On-
tario Government. He said that already a
case had been made out against them which
would demand legislative action of tho most
stringent kind. To show tho capacity of the
Opposition for corrupt work of that kind, ho
referred to the outrages that had been com-
mitted in Proton and elsewhere, and said
that these matters would undoubtedly como
before Parliament at its next session." This
was on the 30th of August, while his hands
were reeking with pollution. (H^ar, hear,
and cheers. ) This was while he was putting
those unclean hands into the money-bags ot
Sir Hugh Allan and Mr. Abbott, and bribing
the electors of Canada with money obtained
by his cession of the rights of those
whom he was thus corrupting and do-
moralizing. (Cheers.) I need hardly say
to you that four days before that last spcecii
he hail sent the now famous telegram,
"Must have another ten thousand. W ill be
the last time of calling. Do not fail me"
(laughter) ; showing tliat there had been
" ten thousands " sent before, and that tlie
money was l)oing received and sj^ent at the
very tnne he was making these as.iurtion3 of
his innocence, and accusing others of guilt
his alone. Sir, I

which was
not remind
repeat those
ernment of

('id

need

not

Cov-

you that he
charges against the
Ontario during the sessior.
His statements that the) e would lie a Com-
mittee of investigation, when these facts
would all be brought before the House and the
country, have not beer made good. The ses-
sion began and ended, but he never dared to
moot the subject in the House. (Hear, hear.)
He knew he had no ground or pretence for
these charges, which were utterly false, but
he sought by charging others witli what he
had beer guilty of himself to divert public
attention from his own culpable proceed-
ings. He acted like the robber who,
while he is running away with the
"Stop thief" very loudly
(Cheers and laughter. ) Now,
these are the circumstances, as they appear
before you, undisputed and indisputable, oc-
curring while the elections were proceeding.
While he was at this work in Ontario, ^he
Central ( "ommittee and Sir George Cartier
were at like work in Quel)ec, and as I have
told you, a still larger sum was disbursed
down there than was disbursed up here.
Well, sir, it was said at one time that the
money had to do with the Northern Coloni-
zation Road. That is of no consequence. Of

spoil, cries
all the time.

the
ma of
guilt
need
not
Oov-
ssiop.
Corn-
facts
1-1(1 the
le ses-
cd to
hear. ) .
nee for
V)Ut
hat he
public
roceed-
who,
;h the
loudly
Now,
appear
ble, 00-
eeding.
io, ;he
Cartier
I have
sbursed
) here,
lat the
Ooloni-
nce. Of

courso it is equally iiupropor to i' .ibc with
money obtained from one quarter aa with
that obtained from another, but at any rate the
Northern Colonization Road was identified
with the Pacific Road. They were part of
the same scheme. It wan said, again, that
it had to do with Si>* llugli Allan's political
feelings — that he was an ardent ConserA'ativo
and subscribc<l these sums for the interest of
the caaso. (Laughter.) Hia letters have
told how much he thinks of politics. There
he describes the two political parties as
factions, and informs his correspondent that
tho Lower Canada members, whom Sir
Ceorge Cartier iuHuenced, held the balance
of power and could control this country.
He does not tell you in the freedom of pri-
vate correspondence of political aspirations
of one kind or anotlier; on the con-
trary, ho intended to stand in the
!)ath of the Government, determined to do
lis best to defeat them, unless he obtained
the Pacific contract, willing to support them
if he should get that contract. He an ar-
dent politician ! I am told he never sub-
scribed to an election in his life before. He
is conservative of one thing — I mean his
money. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) But
it was not because he had any interest in
politics for their own sake, one way or ano-
ther, that lie advanced these monies. It was
a pure — or rather an impure — business trans-
.letion, and his letters show that the whole
amount he expended, including the $40,000
which heobtained from his American confrere.'^,
nigh $400,000 in all, wasan expenditure made
in order to obtain, and charged upon, this
contract, believed by his American a.ssociates
CO have been so expended, and claimed by
him to be payable to him after the con-
tract M'as secured, and yet men will dare to
tell an intelligc/it people that tliese are po-
litical subscriptions by a public man, with-
out any refoi'ence to contracts, or anything
but political purposes. Sir, the culprits may
come forward, and they may pledge their
oaths to their innoceiice; they may call their
God to witness again, as they have called
their God to witjiess before. I know no dif-
ference in the solemnity of the adjuration,
whether it be made ui>on tlio hustings
or in the witness box, but in the face of all
thv se letters and telegrams, and in the face
of these admissions, it is utterly impossible
to believe any such statement. It is utte-rly
impossible to find any means of escape from
the conviction that "those hands" are un-
clean, indeed. It is utterly impossible to
find means to escape "from the conviction
that the enormous powers entinisted to them
in reference to this contract were used for
the purpose of procuring influence and cash
from the contractor to whom they agreed to
give the contract. What, sir, was the result of
this profuse expenditure " I have said
that the Government majority in On-
tario and Quebec had been forty-seven,
and e\en after this expenditure that ma-
jority was turned into a minority of
nine in these tv/o Provinces. (Clieers) The
disgraceful conduct in reference to the seats
for South Renfrew and ^Vest Peterboro' took
two of those votes away, making four on a
division. (Hisses.) There was, therefore,
on the whole a change ia the two Provinces

of old Canada from a majority of forty-seven
for the(jiovonimenttoamajorityof live aflainst
it. (Cheers.) Now, with such ovei whelming
ovideuccb of the change in public opinion,
what would have l>een the result if $.')S0,000
of the Pacific money had not been put into
the scales? I venture to h.-v that I am speak-
ing far within bounds Wi m I say that
twenty constituencies in Ontario and Quebec
have been purchased by that expenditure,
and that instead of the Op))osition being in a
majority of five in both Provinces, they
wouM, if that money had not been used, have
been ui a majority of 4.5. (Cheers.) The
situation of the Government was desperate,
they bad taken these desperate means to
remedy it, and ' yet when Parliament met,
their power depended upon the men fro the
Maritime Provinces, the majority of v iom
had bel«)nged to the old Liberal parties in
those Provinces, and were by no means
strenuous supporters of the Govern-
ment. Thgy were able to obtain
a majority on the first vote, and
having done so they obtained temporarily
the control of the House, but by no certain
tenure. There was no moment at which
their position was easy during the session.
The people of the outlying provinces did not
feel satisfied with the course they were taking
in supporting a Government which had only
a limited share of their confidence, and which
had lost its hold on Ontario and Quebec,
while what strength it had was obtained by
the corrupt means to which 1 have referred.
Some of tiio friends of the Government rrgo
that they are less bb.meworthy than if they
had pocketed this money themselves ; and
seem to wish a verdict of not guilty on that
"round. They were not charged with having
pocketed the money; but I declare to you
that I conceive that would l)e a crime less
grave than the one with which they vjere
charged. It would certainly have been 'a
more sordid, a meaner crime — a crime wiiich
would expose the perpetrators to greater con-
tempt, but by no means to greater indignation.
In the case supposed it is the disgrace of the
Minister alone, whilst in the actual case it is
the disgrace of the whole countiy. In the
case supi)osed you can easily punish the
criminal Minister, ]>ut in the actual case
how are you to vindicate public justice ?
$350,000 have • been scattered broadcast
throughout the country in corrupting thou-
sands of electors. Sad experience has shown
that those who have been once bought
are more likely to make merchandise of their
votes hereafter. Thus not one but thousands
of crimes have been committed, and the
moral sense of the community has been sen-
sibly lowered. You may indeed punish the
Minister, but how shall you punish these un-
worthy voters— how shall you restore the
purity and independence which has been
bought away? Again, remember that by
what has been done, a majority has
been purchased. The free voice of
the people has been overborne, and
these men ruie, not because the free
voice of the people has so decided, but iu
spite of the utt'^rances of that voice. I deny
that my rights or your rights are to be sub-
ject to the control of those who sell their
votes. That is not the theory of popular

Oovernmcnt, and in practice would be fonnd
intolerable tyranny. Snch a House Khould
be purged at an early day, and if it were
found continuously that the unbiassed vote
of the country were crushed by the purchased
vote of some unworthy men, the time would
have arrived for such a change in the system
of Government as would render it tolerablj
by free men ; and 1 havef|no doubt that in
that evil day you would bo found ready for
the exertions and sacrifices to which you
might be called, as yuur ancestors were ready
when the day came for tlio vindication of
liberty against tyranny. liut it would
be in truth an evil day ; and it
is because I am so fully sensible
of its horrors that I am inclined
to describe as the moat heinous of public
crimes such a betrayal of your liberties aa
would result in your being forced to rise in
their defence. Shortly before the session be-
gan the Government made the great charter
contract. I shall not enter into its details
to-day. You are familiar, I suppose, with
its provisions, which have been the subject
of discussion in the press. They have not
yet been the subject of an exhaustive discuh-
sion in Parliament. We saw be-
fore the session was far advanced
that there was a prior question. Before
we ] came to discuss the charter we had
to discuss the charterers; we had to discuss
the parties, and the considerations moving
them, before we came to the terms of the
document itself. A word or two 1 may say
with reference to the composition of the
Company. I have seen it stated that while
Sir Hugh Allan is only President of the
Company, the other corporators are respect-
able gentlemen, wi!:h the great majority of
whom he has but little connection. I am
willing to admit that some of those gentle-
men are very respectable, otliers are
less so. The subscription shows that
they have aa a rule taken up .$7oO,0(X) each
and paid down .*7">,000 each, and we well
know that there are very few of these gentle-
men who coald pay the 10 per cent. Xot a
single man, except Sir Hugh Allan, could
pay the $750,000. It has been seriously pre-
tended that these subscriptions and payments
were made bona Me, but respecting some of
them at any rate there can be but little doubt.
(Hear, hear.) The payments of some of
these gentlemen were, I believe, advanced
for them, others subscribed upon an under-
standing that they should not be called on
to assume any continued responsibility, and
it is said that one of the corporators was not
aware of his situation till after the formation
of the company ; and on the whole it is impos-
sible to describe what has been done as a
bona fide subscription and security for SIO,-
000,000.

The cash it seems has been an anged for, so
that it is to remain undrawn at the various
banks at 5 percent., under the deposit receipts
of •* e banks. These have been accepted by the
G rnment upon the same terms, so that
unless Parliament should otherwise order, the
money is not to be drawn out of the banks in
which it is said to have been deposited. You
understand Avhat that means. (Hear, hear.)
It means that the so-called payments were
in some ins\ance8, at any rate,

made through the banks, nomi'
nal payments i-nresenting merely tr&asac-
tiona of accommoilation. and not cash at all.
Now, sir, it ia said that this Comjpany is not
to stand or fall by Sir Hugh Allan; but 1
say that the memorandum of Sir John A.
Macdonald upon the contract shows that Sir
Hugh is the great controlling spirit of the
concern. (Hear, hear. ) }le is the head of
this Company, and if no honest man is to bo
found— and for the lionour of my Jcountry I
hope no man will be found— to vindicate Sir
Hugh Allan, whatever may be the result to
the (Jovernment of the groat cause now so
long pending, it is utterly impossible that
we can entrust to a man, tiio author of a cor-
respondence the most scandalous and profli-
gate of modern times, the asserter of his
own disgrace, that influence and
position M'liich is to be looked for
and must bo tlie property oi hiiu
who is to be the President of the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company. (lioud cheers.)

The honourable gentleman then intimated
that ho had arrived at that stage of his nar-
rative at which he proposed to close his more
detailed remarks, and that he would endea-
vour, in a very few words, to [jive a cursory
account of the subsequent transactions in
this connection. Neither their patience nor
his strength would permit him to deal with
the whole subject just now as he desired or
as its importance deserved. He then re-
' viewed the subsequent events, referring,
amongst other matters, to the constitution of
the Royal Commission, and pointed out that
it was not to be wondered at that the head of
the judiciaryof Ontario should have (as it wa^
publicly stated he had donej repelled the
approaches made to him on the subject of his
becoming a Commissioner, and this on the
ground that the proceeding was unconstitu-
tional.

The hon. gentleman took his seat amid
loud and oft-renewed applause, having spoken
upwards of two hour.?.

♦«-<•>-»«-

MR. B LAKE

AT LONDON.

The following is a full report of the speech
delivered by Mr. Blake, at London, on the
evening of Thursday, the 1 7th ult. Having
been formally introduced by tlio Chairman,
who brieHy explained that the f ibject of the
address would be the political Situation,

Mr. Blakf. said : — Mr. Chain lan. Ladles,
and Gentlemen — Deeply conscious, as I am,
of my incapacity properly to handle the great
que&tion to which you, sir, have alluded, I
did not feel free to decline the invitation ex-
tended to me by my political friends in thus
city, considering that it was my duty at this
great crisis to contribute my f, .»ta, however
small, to the defence of the common weal. The
subject is so large, rnd involves so many con-

;ca

)cech
tlio

''f

aideratiuns of a hssturical as woll aa of an
argumentative charac^ter, that I shouid not
attempt even the most cursory Humnmry
within the limitH of one addruHV. Ou a rv
cent ocL'UHii»n 1 took the opportunity of diu-
cusKing some of tlie earlier evuntM 'ovaring on
the pituation of lo-day. Trusting to youi
acquaintance with public aS'airs, I shall not
now review those events in detail, (The
speaker proceeded to autnmarize the account
given by him in h'm speech at MownianvilU;,
already reported in our columns, and con-
tinued as follows) : — Permit nio, then,
to commence my detailed remarks
by adverting to some of the inci-
dents of the late session. In accordance
with a promise contained in the speach from
the Throne a law for the trial of electionn
was brought forward, and then was seen thu
hoUowuesa of the protoncos on which, only u
few months before, when a similar law liud
been proposed, it was kicked out of I'arlia-
ineut by the very men who now iatroduoe«l
it. All the ditiiculties which they had an
nonnced anterior to tho elections had van-
ished when tho elections were over. The
steed had been stolen, and the stable door
waj about to be locked. (Laughter.) But
not just yet; there was yet a steed to steal.
(Renewed laughter.) Some elections were
expected shortly. Some vacancies there were
already in the Cabinet, and further changes
were known to be imminent. Although it
was acknowledged now, so late, that this
was a good law, which it was in the interest
of the country to pass; yet even at this lato
moment the Government resolved to post-

Eone its oporatipn until tho month of Novem-
ernext, leuvmg the intermediate elections to
be held under the provisions of the old and
abandoned law. This action ou the part of
the Government was utterly indefensible,
but it wan necessary for the completion of
Ministerial ai rangements. South Ontario
must Cistain tlie bad pre-eminence it
has of late years acquired amongst
the constituencies of this country,
Mr, Gibbs must become a Minister,
and Mr, Gibbs must not be deprived of the
only means by which he ever had represented
or ever couhl represent that unhr.ppy TUding;
and so for a whde longer tho powers of dark-
ness were to prevail. The Minister who hits
so long ruled this country with a cyni-
cal disregard of consistency and prip'-'nle,
perhaps the moat remarkable feature a a
remark.ablc career, was now to give one ore
example of this characteristic. That good
and groat i.ian, the echoes of whoso speeches
against the bill were, still liuqering around
tho hall, was now to pi-opose it.s atloption ;
and hardened though he was, he felt
the enibarras.suieut of the situation. He did
not attempt to defend this change of policy.
The measure was intnxluced in Hileuco; the
second reading was moved in silence; ami
it was in Committee of tho Whole, where
the details alone are considered, that wo ob-
tained the first opportunity for discussion.
A single evening's debate proved so unsatis-
factory to the Minister that, he j)ostponed
the resumption of the subject until the very
last days of the session, when it was impossi-
ble to resist tho action of the Government.
The bill is certainly an immense improvemout

on the existing law, but it is by no meiuis •«
satisfactory aa it would liave been had tl»
free will of the Houho been allowed toonnate
upon it. It reijuires, and 1 hop<; will shortly
receive, serious amendment. (Checis.) Now,
.Sir, while tho strength of public; opinion, us
evinced during the elcttimiH, wuh forcing the
election biw upon Ministers, ruinoprs which
had been current for a considerable period of
on enormous jolt in connection with thi "'a
oific Railway grailually assumed conHisteiKy
and shape. .Many wlu» were uware of
suspicious tran.sactions in times [lant,
and l)elievcd that tlui°«) had lueii rorruption
in connection with the distribution of public
monies and public coutiiatH, were yet of opin-
ion that even if thti lii:d been Home wrong
(loiug as to the Pacilic, it would ho ns in lor
mi r years, impossible to ascertain Uie tiiitli
We kni.'W that, as a rule, those tiaiisu(;t.i>ri.i
are coiuluctcd iiialltht- obscurity, surrouudtd
by all the barriers, .niid doake)! by all the
devices which can be planned ))V the ingenui
ty of man, and that it is alwa\.s ditticult, und
frequently impossible, to establish thein; nor
do 1 wonder that even tliose who most ."(us-
pscted Ministers of such improprieties,
should have been very doubtful that they
could be proved. But the transactions w'ero
80 large, the interests so numerous, the con-
spirators so audacioiis, that the plans for
concealment were batlled, and shortly after
the commencement of the session, cirt inn-
stances became known to Mr Huntington
which warranted him in making, and since
they warranted, bound him in the discharge ot
his public duty, to in.ike the statement
which has created so much diacussion. T
need not repeat tho words; they are graven
on the hearts of the people of Canada: but
you will remember that he alleged his abil-
ity to prove certain high crimes and niisde
meanours against Ministers, and mentbeni of
the House, and moved for a Selpot
Cemmitteo to enquire into tlio iiiatt»^r.
It was a mighty issue. Its determina-
tion was to aflcctthe chaiaf+er of Canada and
her institutions for long _ , ars to coin*;; fr.r
It it be true that such guilt has invuded the
land, and yet public sentiment shall peimit
the culprits, adding crime to crime, io vio-
late the Constitution in their flight from
justice, and to escajio the just reward of
their accumulated guilt, we shall have de
gradtid ourselves in the eyes of the vorld,
and shall ha\ e prfniounceil our.seixcM iiiiei|ual
to the i>oiition of a heif governing people.
How was the motion met? It was met by
the Government with no word of ('eiiial, with
no word of explanation, with no word of re-
ply. AsMumiug ati attitude of injured itino-
ceme and otl'ended dignity, they i.allcil upon
their followers to vote it ihiwn, and tin ii- iol
lowers Avere equal to the oceaaion. (Chfera. )
The stej) was a bold one, but in theii- desper-
ate situation not unwise. Could they have
maintained their ground it would have boon
well taken; but thcj' could not maintain it
The reaction was almost instivntiineouH, and
witliin six hours it became olivious to those
who had the opportunity of observing the
turn of events and the dri^t of public
opinion, aa evinced within the walls of
Parliament, thpt a retreat must take
place and an enquiry be conceded.

The change was announced next v. *y, and
sliortly afterwards the Minister himself
moved tlio reference of Mr. Huntington's
statements to a select Committee. By that
motion, to which the House unanimously
aasonted, the Minister acknowledged lirst,
that Mr. Huntington had preferred these;
charges in a proper manner and upon a proper
statement, aud secondly, that he had proposed
the prcper mode of investigation — that same
trilmual which the Minister himself asked the
House to ad(.pt far the purpose. In tlic
discussion the Miuiatev aniiounced that
the motion was ii substance an im-
peachment. And iie was quite right.
It was not, of cc urse, technically an impeach-
ment, because in that Constitiition for which
hki ii. chiefly lespousiblc, with wonderful pre-
science, he was careful to make no provision
for the establishment of a Court of Impeach-
ment; but it was as he t-uid, substantially an
impeachment, and that for a high politi-
cal' otfences such as have always been dis-
posed of exclusively Viy Parliament.
In iiis motion he somewhat limited the en-
quiry proposed by Mr. Huntington; and he
added a clause giving the Committee power
to sit if need be (mark the words "if need
be") after the prorogation of Parliament—
a thing impossible according to ordinary
Parliamentary doctrine, which lays down
that the House cannot give to any of its
Committees a life longer than its own; but I
suppose, justified to hiii^-.^lf by the Minister
on the ground before alluded to, that this
waa 10 the nature of an impeachment, since
it is well settled tiiat not even dissolution,
machless prorogation, abates aiiimpeachmer.t.
That proposal was remarkable in another
particular, in that it indicates that then, at
any rate, the minister did not believe, or, if
he did, that he chose to conceal his belief
that the work of the Committee would
necessarily be unfinislied in May or .Tune,
the anticipated period of prorogation. TIic
proposal was simply, that " if need be" the
(.'ommittee should sii. after prorogation.
Therefore the work would possibly be fi-
nished, anA would, of course, be commenced
before prorogation. It is obvious enough
that he did not then intend the House to
understand that it was out of the question
for the Committee to examine a single wit-
iu'38 before prorogation. The motion was
carried, and the Committee was forthwith
.•jtruck accordiug to the usual plan, by which
each mem'oer gives a vote for one person as
member of the Committee; and thus, of
covrso, the (iovernment secured a majority;
having three votes to two from the other
side. Not long after the Committee had
been organized it recommended, in ac<x>rd-
anee witli suggestions thrown out by both
sides, the passage of whac is knov/n as the
Oathu iVill. The Minister professed doubts
as to the power of the Canadian Parliament
to pass it; but upon that (luestion he
at any rate was committed. As lea<ler of
the House ho had shortly before carriel
through Parliament and placed ou the
utatutt, book an act conferring upon the
•■■ i.,vt.% U\o other branch of the Legisia-
iiiii: tliMl i>i which you — sir— are a distingu-
iaiieii ori.ument — (loud applause) — the power
of ii/.<jQimateriug oaths at its bar. That mea-

sure is objectionable on precisely the same
reasoning as that which has eQV^eted the dis-
allowance of the Oaths Bill, and is defensi-
ble onli' on the same grounds on which the
Oaths Bill may be defended. If ono is con-
trary to the C'onstitution so also is the
other. Yet, for that Bill, the Minister him-
self is specially responsible. His opinion
then must have ueen that Parliament had
the power to pass such an Act, or he was
grossly derelict in his duty wlien ho pro-
moted its passage. Again, he was in other
ways committed. In two of the Local Legis-
latures, those of Ontario end Quebec, mea-
sures were passed by whicu those Legisla-
tures assumed to aiTogate to themseh'cs the
powei-s, privileges, and immunities of the
House of Coir.mons of England, as they stood
at the 1st of July, 1807. The Minister here
and the law officers of the Crown
in England all rei'orted against these
measures as being beyoii'l tlie ';om-
petence of the Ijocal Legislatures,
From that conclusion, the accuracy of which
I never doubted, and which I had myself
announced in the Legislature of Ontario, it
plainly followed that the Local'Legislatures
were unable to take to themselves the powers^
privileges, and immunities of the Canadian
House of Commons, which were the same as
those of the English House on 1st July,18G7,
In conformity with that opinion, these acts
were, under the advice of the first Minister,
disallowsd and struck oft" the statute books
of the Provinces, The powers of the Local'
Legislatures in this particular having been
thus determined to be more limited than those
the House of Commons of Canada, these
same Legislatures nevertheless each passed
an Act giving power to their committees to
examine witnesses under oath. It is the duty
of the Mini8ter,as he has himself declared, to
oonsider all acts of the Local Legislatures
and to advise disallowance of sucfi as are
beyond their competonce. He considered
those act's, but did not advise their disallow-
ance. He advised that they should be loft
to their operation, and they were so left.
Upon theseoccasions, therefore, it is perfectl}''
clear that t^ie Minister must have been of
opinion that the Local Legislatu }s, with
fewer powers and prif'ileges than .,he Par-
liament of Canada, had, notwithstanding, the
powei- tc iiass this v"'-^'^ Oaths Bill, in respect
to which he now p. jf esses to doubt the
power :)f the I'arliament of Canada itself,
(Chee. a.) But whatever his doubts were,
ho overcame them. As leader of the Ho-
vernment, it was his constitutional duty to
see that no improper legislation passed the
House, and as law adviser of the Crown, it
was his special duty to advise the (Joveruor
with reference to each Act submitted for
assent, as to whether the assent should bo
give^i or not. This measure he permitted to
pass, and he recommended the asseit, and
so it became law; but ii a without delays in
its progress, through your branch of the
Legislature and si'bsequently. These delays
had oxcited impatience l)oth within and
without the walls of Parliament; and before
the passage of tl Bill the (yommittee had
suirmoned a large uumbev of Mr. Hunting-
ton's witnesses, and had procured their at-
tendance, I having announced that unless the

Bill •*ere assented to at once I would propose
to the Committee to proceed forthwith under
the existing law. On the dey on which 1 was to
make this motion we wure informed that tho
Bill would be assented to on the Monday fol-
lowing, and wc adjourned to the Tuesday,
ordering the wknesses to be then once more
in attendance for the commencement of the
busintiss, already too long deferred. The
asscjnt Tvaa given, and on the appointed day
wc met, the House and the public exf»ccting
that at length, after so many prelimi-
nary dilKculiies, we were to be allowed
to begin, lining allthistimenohint liad been
dropped of furtlier obstacles — on the contra-
ry, the. speeches ot the Minister had all been
in the opposite sense ; but the e\nl day had
como at 'ast, and he was forced to
deveiopc those plans for stUl further delay
which either originally or in the meantima
had suggested theniselvt«to his fertile brani.
He appeared before the Committee and an-
nounced the absence of three individ aals —
hir George Cartier, Sir Hugh Allan, and Mr.
Abbott — and that there was no expectation
of their return until June ; facto of which we
had all been aware ever since the date of the
original motion. He startled us by the
statement that in their absence the Govern-
ment felt it impossible that the Com.mittee
should proceed, and he requested an adjourn-
ment until the 2nd July, in order that Allan
aiul Abbott, who he said were the only wit-
nesses of the Government, might be present,
lie ,"dso threw out a proposal that the Com-
mittee should be secret. A member of the
Committee following almost immediately
made a speech developing a striking coinci-
dence with the views that had just been
enunciated. He produced from his pocket
and proposed certain resolutions carrying out
those views. Agauist these resolutions
Mr. Doriou and I voted, but they
wore carried over an amendment proposed
by Mr. Dorion that Sir Francis Hincks, a
witness summoned and then in attendance,
should be called and examined. Well, sir,
the resolutions were reported to the House,
whose sanction was asked to them. A very
strong feeling was deve^o^jcd immediately
against the proposal that the Committee
should be secret (clieers), a proposal which I
do not hesitate to say was of a most scanda-
lous character. (Loud applause.) The mem-
bers of the Administration and their friends
liavo not unfre(|uently descanted, when it
served their turn, on the purely judicial
character of that investigation, and who, liv-
ing in a free country, is ignorant of the fact
that ono of the greatest securities for tlie
continuation of that freedom is the publicity
of judicial proceedings ? But, sir, that pro-
posal shocked the sense of the House, and it
was withdiaAvn. The proposal for ad-
journment wasc'.ebatcdohour sideatanyrot'\
the other side declining discussion, and rely-
ing on that power of numbers which enabled
them, by a \'ery c<msiderable majority, to
carry it. I never doubted that many gentk
men (\vlu> voted for the adjounmieui,
did so conscientiously, I always agreed that
tli<-ro were twosi<le8tothat(iucstiou, although
juy own view wan strongly adverse to the
proposal that the work suould not commence
till the 2nd of July. I was always of opinion

that any witness wanted by the Government
should be called, and that any adjournment
necessary for that puqjose should be gran-
ted, but I was aot of opinion that there exis-
ted at that time, and under those circum-
stances, a case for postponing the commence-
jnent of the encpiiry to the 2nd of July. The
Minister had stated that the work woultl last
from four to six weeks, and it was therefore
plain tliat a very great ifs of evidence
would have to be taken. It M'as also plain
that oxtrorae inconvenience was likely to oc-
cur, ]/■ the House were not to sit while th'
Committee was sitting. This mistake, it wa ,
from which all the other evils flowed ; but
for this mistake we should not have been hero
to-night, deploring batlled justice and violated
right. The presence of the House was re-
quired, first, in order that the Committee
might be able to apply to it for instruction
and guidance, in case of any difficulty in the
prosecution of the enquiry, and for the
interposition of its authority to compel the
attendance and the answering of witnesses;
anvi secondly, in order to give tlio members
of the House, who were to be the ultimate
judges of the case, the opportunity of hear-
ing and seeing for themselves tae taking of
the evidence. (Cheers. ) I should I'ke to
know whether any of you who have ever
beer suitors in a court would prefer tliat
the evidence should be taken down in writ-
ing, in the absence of the judge or jury who
were to decide upon a subsequent perusal ot
the evidcice, or whether you would not pre-
fer that the witnesses should be examined in
the presence of the judge or jury. (Cheers.)
Arc you not aware that the demeanour of the
witness, his hesitation in answering, the
difficulty in extracting replies, or, on the
other hand, a suspicious fluency, that a
hundred circumstances only perccptdile to
the man within sight and hearing of the wit-
ness—are most materifd, nay vital, to juries
in coming to a conclusion as to the honesty
or the accuracy of the witness, and the
weight to be given to his evidence. (Cheers. )
Therefore I felt that it was rig}ii that, if
possible, every member of Parliament should
be in court while the examination of w't-
nesses was going on. There we- c several
other reasons, but I will not now detain you
by detailing them ; suffice it to say that
the proposals of the Government were adopt-
ed, and as a necessary conbequcnco, in order
to keep ths Committee alive, it was arranged
that the Houi' should adjourn instead
of King prorogued ; but there was
another reason, unsuspected by us, why it
was important in the interest of the Govern-
ment that the House should not be pro-
ro^ed, but adjourned during the en-
quiry. It has since transpired that the
infamous Allan letters were in existence,
in the hands of Mr. Starnes, on terms
which were devised to keep them secret so
long as the session should last, but to
set theiu free after a prorogation ; and
who can doubt that tlio hope of the
guilty men was that by arranguig for the
prosecution of the cn(piiry before proroga-
t'^n, these documents might be kept con-
cealed, and so the evidences of their guilt
might bo suppressed ? But truth wr,8 to pre-
vail ! Mr. Huntington became aware of "the

existence anil custody of these papers, and
justly dromling their destruction, bo took
ktepa for sc curing them, to which I shall •
prtaently refer. (Cbjers. ) During the
various discussions which took place
upon tho omjuiry, the First Minister had
more than nuce indicated his preference of a
Royal Commission to a Parliamentary Com-
mittt'c; hut his suggestions were rtioi-ived
with tho moHt marked disapprobation in a
House, which iu nothing else had dared to
disapprove of anything he said. x\o voice in
Pailianieiit, s;ive \u^ own, was ever raised in
-iupport (li l.liis proposal ; aiwl the gentleman
who had taken the JUosL active part amongst
all his .supporters durijig the whole session in
sustaining his every view -the gentleman
who argued for him the West Peterborough
Case, who argued for him the Muskoka case
— the gentleman who hatl never hesitated to
come to the front on doubtful and desperate
issues in other instances — I mean the mem-
ber for Cardwell — even he (though not till
his leader had yielded) eimnciated in the
strongest way his disapproval of the plan of
a Commission, adding that he would have
declined to serve on a lloyal Commiosio'i
while the proper tribunal, a Committee, was
available. (Cheers.) The Minister, 1 say,
;yielded to tnis unanimous expression of
opinion, and professed to abandon his idea of
a Commission. Thus the House made choice
in the most marked manner of a Committee
in preference to a Commission, and to that
view every single member was an assenting
party. One alleged precedent alone did Sir
John Macdonald cite in support of his pro-
posal, namely, the Ceylon case. Mark
first of all, that this is no precedent for
the issue of a Royal Commission
without an address of the House,
for the Commission issued in the
Ceylon case was issued upon address.
But I shall show you in a very few words
that this precedent is wholly and entirely iu-
applicable. There had been an insur-
rection in Ceylon, in the suppression of
which it was alleged that Lord Torrington
and the local authorities had acted with ^reat
violence and brutality; and a select Committee
was ordered to investigate these charges.
The evidence was to be obtained principally
from witnesses living iu (Ceylon, and owing
to this difficulty the Committee did not get
very far, and towards the close of the session
recommended that a Royal Commission
should issue to enquire on the 8])ot into the
circumstances connected with the suppression
of the rebellion. That recommendation was
declined by the House. Thereupon the Com-
mittee reported, recommending that it
should be re-apppointed next session, and
that means should be taken in the meantime
for summonine witnesses from Cey-
lon, The Committee vas re-ap-
pointed next session, and in the prosecution
of < he enquiry it appeared that a proclamation
had bean issued, jnirporting to be signed by
Captain Watson, an officer serving in
Ceylon, to the eflfcct that any persons having
in their possession or knowing the where-
abouts of certain property, who did not de-
liver up or disclose the whereabouts of the
property, should be killed, and their effects
confiscated, (^aptain AVatson, who happened

to be in England, denied having signed this
brutal proclamation. Certain evidence to
the contrary having been tendered to the
Committee, they decided not to enter into a
question affecting the honour of an officer of
Her Majesty's Army. Subsequently an ad-
dress to the Crown was moved and agreed to
without Qebate, for the issue of a Royal
Commission, to enquire on the spot into the
circumstances conucitrd wdh lIic pivpcrs pre-
sented to the i'ommittee under ('a[)tai;i \Vat-
Kon's signature. The Committee itself proceed-
ed with the investigation of the charge referred
to it, in which the Inipi rial Coverumcnt was
only indirectly concerned, through the sug-
gestion that they had improperly a[)proycd
of Lord Torringtori's proceedings, but there
was no hint of the Government being in
anywise responsible in connection with the
Watsim proclama^'ion. The Committee re-
ported the resulc of its labours, and
once more suggested a Royal Commis-
sion to the House for certain pur-
poses, but no such Commission Mas ordered.
In the third session the House took up the
questi<m on the evidence reporteil by the
Committee, and finally disposed of the
charge against the Clovernnieut. This is the
history of the Ceylon case, and you will see
that 80 far from its lieing a precedent for the
enquiry by a Royal (Commission into charges
of high crimes and misdemeanours
preferred against IJinisters and members of
the House, it furnishes precedents
against that course, both by what was
done and by what was declined. Rut the
Ceylor case is a precedent upon another
point upon which the Minister did not cite
it. At the end of the session, during the
absence of Mr. Dorion and mynelf, objection
was taken for the first time to our presence
as members of the Committee, upon the
grounds that our position in the House was
such that we should have declined to 8?rve —
the Minister arguing that Mr. Disraeli
would have scorned to serve on such a com-
mittee against Mr. Gladstone — and on the
further ground that the speeches we had
made in the House showed that the Gov-
ernment could not expect to get fair play
from us. These are two separate points.
Upon the first I will cite the Ceylon case.
Mr. Disraeli, who was leading the Opposition,
was an active member of that Committee,
and in the House he moved motions, and
made strong speeches on the subject. (Cheers. )
Now, here is a precedent against the
minister, furnished in the very case he
cited, by the very person whom he cited.
But of course the parallel would not have held.
Neither my friend nor myself occupied the
position attributed to us and which
was occupied by Mr. Disraeli.
Neither of ns was leader of the Op-
position in Parliament. That position
was filled by my friend and colleague Mr.
Mackenzie. (Loud cheers.) You know, wo, that
the circumstances under which Mr. Dorion
was elected were such as rendered him least
of all liable to any such charge. He had an-
nounced his retirement from public life, and
his determination not to seek re-election. He
left for England on private business, declin-
ing to say that he would sit if elected, on the
contrary, deola,ring. that he must, in thi^l;

the
had
C5ov- .

r ])lay

.joints,
case.

isition,

nittee,

18, and

heers.)

st the

asc he
cited.

^eheld. -

ed the
which

)israeli.

le Op-
josition
^ue Mr.
oo,that
Dorion
m least
had an-
fe, and
ion. He
declin-
on the
in th^rt;

event, resign, and refusing to comply with
the request of his f ririuls to leave behind him
a declaration of ((uivlilication. Dining his
absence his friends were dotorniined that he
should be i'e-elcctcd,and they returned Jiiin to
T'iirliamcnt. On his arrival here ho Mas over-
borne l>y the pressure of his friends, and took
the siat so lionourably provided fvir him. ^\'.■vs
Mr Dorion, having so irome into I'arli;iHuiit,
an<l standing, as J believe he did, and docs,
higher than any other man in the esteem and
afVection of the House, uicapacitated by his
position froj)i giving a full and fair
consideration to tiie matters coming before
the ( 'onnnittee ? AN'as he, of all men, to be
bribed to injustice by the expectation of
oHice ? As to myself, you arc ])erfectly
aware that prior to the gcndal election 1 an-
nounced to my friends that it was impossible
for me, whatever might be the result of the

•election, to servo my country otherwise than
in tlie r^iuks. During my absence in Eng-
land Sir John Macdonald and his fricutfs
ma'de large use of this statement. They ac-
cepted it as true, and they di-ew from it the
false anil ungenerous inference that tlierc
was some split or dilliculty bctwi'cn my

' friends and myself. Tliat served their turn
just then, but a little later, and at tlie close
of the session, though 1 had in the nu>antime
une(jivoc;dly repeated my announcement,
it servol the purpose of the Minister to
allege tliat I too, as an aspirant for c.'Hce,
was ineompctoit to sit on the Conmiittec.
•Sir, I liad sat on Committees in \vhich
Ministers wcvc deeply concerned l)eforo. 1
was the ('hairman of Sir G. Carticv's Elec-
tion Committee, ••ind a mojulicr of the Com-
mittee on the Allan MacISiab purcliase, and I
appeal with conlidcnco to the part I took in
tiiosc investigations a'; proof of my desire to
act fairly towards Ministers, As to the
other charge, that my speeches during tlie
session on this Uxatter showed that the Go-
vernment could not expect fair play from me,
I shall not answer it save by a reference to
the records; and 1 ehallcngo Sir John Mac-
donald, his friends, folIoAvers, and satellites
to point to a speech, a sentence, or a word of
mine, while a member of that Conmiittee,
which justilies tiie statement. But the truth
is that at tliis time tiie (<overnnient saw that
the matter was becoming very serious,
and they M'ere emleavouring to ljreal<
the blow by assailing the adversary
and finding cause of complaint against
the Committee. Towards the ck)se of tiie
session Mr, Huntington found that certixin
documentary evidence was in daiu'er, and
looking to the aspersions that had been cast
upon him, and to the complaints which had
been made of liis former conduct, he pro-
posed to prove to_ the House that he had
cause for the motion he was about to make
to instruct the Committee to impound these
documents. He did not offer oral evidence,
but he proposed to rea(' the letters of Sir
Hugh Allan, the very man whom the Gov-
ernment liad described as their chief v.'it-
ness. (Cheers.) The proposed explanation
was defeated by the a. ,<itrary conduct of the
Speaker, but the temper tiiat was evinced,
the dismay exhi)>ited, and the earnest desire
shown to avoid those disclosures, eonvineed

' me, tliough at that time I did not luiow the

contents of those letters, that there must be
something there very unfortunate for Minis-
ters. The motion was carried, Mr, Starnes
was summoned, and the package was marked
and left in his hands. Then came the iast
scene, in which the Government made an
attempt, 1 think, of a most unfair character
to place their adversaries in the position of being
a])parcntly ungenerous to a departed fo^, or
of being untrue to their political principles
and opinions of many years standing, and
untrue, also, to the belief which they had
expressed, that the j)ending charges deserved
serious attei;tion and searching investigation.
(Cheers). The Government proposed that a
jmblic fune.al should be given to Sir George
Cartier,and tliat a monument should be erected
at the publi 3 expense in honour of him whom
they designated as a great statesman nnd an
cxecllcnt man. One precedent there was for
the prf>ceeding, but it was emphatically the
exception Avhich proved the rule — the rule
that no such honours should be conferred on
political characters. The motion was pro-
posed in a thin house, and upon the last day
(if the fsession, and so these men carried a
resolution decreeing a public monument to
him on whose grave they are now engaged in
heaping dirt. (Cheers.) The <mly authorita-
tive statement we have had from the Gov-
ernment as to tiie Pacific is one declaring that
certain documents and arrangements were per-
sonal to Sir Geo. (\artier, unknown to his col-
leagucs,for which they decline responsibility,
and the odium of which they seek to cast
upon him alone. (Applause.) Well, Sir,
upon the 2nd of July the Committee met,
as it was hoped, for business; but, as usual,
tlie Government was at work. The previous
day, the anniversary of C^onfederation, our
national holiday, these
ployed in issuing a
cdamation disallowing
That disallov/ance was
The first Minister himself

patriots had
Government
the Oaths
highly
in a memorandnm

em-
pro -
Bill.

improper.

prepared by him on the 8th of June, 1868,
had accurately stated tlie rule as to interfer-
ence by the Imperial (tovermnent with Co-
lonial legislation, I will read his words: —
" Of late years Her Majesty's Government
h is not, as a general rule, interfered with
the legislation of Colonies having representa-
tive institutions and Responsible Govern-
ment, except in the eases specially men-
tioned in the instructions to the (Joveruor,
()r,in matters of Imperial and^not merely Local
interest." Now this niattei is neit.ier men-
tioned in the instructions to the Governor,
nor is it a matter of Imperial or other than of
merely local interest. The object was con-
fessedly good, and if Parliament had not the
power to pass it, no one will pretend that
it should remam so powerless. The Imperial
Government, therefore, acted in a most ill-
advised manner in not leaving the Act to its
operation. The question of its legality could
have been decided in our Courts, and could
then have been brought before the highest
tribunal open to us, the Judicial Com-
mittee of the Privy Council ; but instead of
that, the Law OHicers of the Crown, not act-
ing under the responsibilities of Judges, and
without that prereipiisito of just judgment,
the argument of both siilcs, undertook to
wipe this law out of our statute

book. I call publio attention to the obsor-
vafcioi I Iiave just made, as bearing ctrongly
on the degree of iespcct you are to bestow
on thcjso decisions of the Law Ofliccrs.
None of you would bo satisHcd if, even in a
trivial case afTcctine; his own interests, the
question were merely stated to the judge,
and decided by him witliout argu-
ment on either side. (Applause. ) Our whole
judicial system pre-supposcs such argument
as a condition of sound judgment. Tliere is
an ancient maxim of law, as holy as it is an-
cient, which teaches that the judge who de-
cides without hearing the other side, though
lie may have decided justly, has acted un-
justly. (Loud applause.) Nevertheless on
such a decision this great question is said to
have been determined conclusively and for
ever. But how different a course has been
taken with reference to other Acts- I could
easily point out several objectionable statutes
on which this power was not exercised, and
you will all remember an instance in which
the Imperial power was used not in disallow-
ing but in contirming by Imperial legislation
an objectionable Act. Tlie Act authorizing
the Senate to administer oaths at its bar was
left to its operation. But in this case, on
which so much depended, instead of adopting
the wiser and moie judicious and constitu-
tional course which I have suggested, disal-
lowance in the most rigorous form was
adopted. But neitlier the views of
the law ofucei'S of the Crown, nor the
order of the Queen's I'rivy Council in
England, made that law less operative than
it was before. Its disallowance necessitated
action upon this side of the water, and by
the Constitutional Act the Governor-Cicneral
had the rigiit to take that action in one of
two modes — either by proclamation, which
he might issue at his convenience, or by mes-
sage to the Parliauient upon its lirst meeting.
Had the latter alternative been adopted, the
Committee could have proceeded Avith the
examination and the subse(|uent disallowance
on the meeting of I'ar] lament would not
have interfered Avith the Committee's labours.
(Hear, hear.) 1 his course might have been
followed without any inconvenience, but the
other course was recommended to the Gover-
nor, and the Act was disallowed by a procla-
mation framed by the First Minister of Can-
ad;., and countersigned by liim and tlie Sec-
retary of State, issued on the day before the
sitting of the Committee, and thus depriv-
ing it of the power with Avhich it was before
armed. Contrast this with the course taken
upon another Act — the Act of the Ontario
Legislature,^ — giving an additional allowance
to Superior Court Judges. That Act was
condemned as beyond the powers of the On-
tario Legislature by the Law Officers of the
Oown in I'ilngland and the First Atinister of
flinada. How did the Minister proceed in
this case? Why, he reported to the Gover-
nor that the Act must l)e disallowed, iiidrss
the liegislature, at its next session, sIiDuld
repeal it. He advised the Governor not to
•lisallow it immediately, but to leave it in tlie
meantime, and it was left until the last day
for disallowance, until the year's salaries liad
been paid under the Act, and tlicn at tlio
latest possible moment the dis.illowanco
was accomplished. I leave it to you to

guess why there was such a change uf policy
m the case of tho Oaths Jiill. (Cheers).
Notwithstanding what had taken place, Mr.
Dorion and myself were of oi>inion that the
Committee could proceed. I'hc CouiuiiLt.c
had been oonstitutod witiiout pov, or to take
evidence under oatli, with instructions to en-
(juirc into this charge. After the passing of
the Oaths Bill, whicli authorized Com-
mittees to take evidence under oath
in cases in which the House should
have rcsolvedtliat tliis was desin^blc,
the Committee was instructed under the
authority of tho Act to talcc evidence upon
oath ; our ojiinion was that the instruction
fell with tho Act, upon which it \\a8 based,
(hear hoar). Our opinion also was that our
major duty was the pursuit of the investi-
gation, that what we were called upon to do
was to make the enquiry by all lawful moans
in our power, and that by so doing we should
best fulfil the orders of the House and the ex-
pectations of the country, (cheers). Thatview,
however, was over-ruled, and the Committee
adjourned Uiitil the 13th of August. AVe
were offered a Boyal Commission, which we
declined, for reasons stated in letters written
at the time, by which reasons wo stand to-
day. (GJheers). I will discuss them shortly.
It had now become obvious that there was a
change in the situation. During the sitting
of Parliament, and wlicn the proposal av;is
m%de that the Committee should irioet
on the 2nd of July, a statement ha<l been
made by the Minister that all tlie evidence
would be taken and the report of tho Com-
mittee prepared before the 13th of August,
and that all the House would ha%e to do
would be to receive the repoi't ;oro forma,
and be prorogued. It has been said that this
was agreed to by both sides of the House. I
was nut in tho House at the time, but speali-
ing from the reports and from the informa-
tion given me by my friends, I say there was
no such agreement; on the contrary, Mr.
llolton pointeil out to tlie Minister that
he might not be in a po;-ution to advise a pio-
I'ogation on the l.'Jth of Acgust, and subse-
quently Sir John said, that if it
v-ero true that th<,y must have a quorum,
lie would be exceedingly happy to see Mr.
Holton lill his place in the same health, with
the same vigour, and with the same degree
of combativeness as he displayed at that
meeting. (Laughter.) Mr. Holt<m was
there, he was combative, and with good
.cause, but the enemy would not fight.
(Laughter and cheers.) But it was quite
clear, that even had there been an under-
standing, it could nut have been bind-
ing upon the Ilouao, whicli is, .lud must bo
free as air to (letcrmine u]»on its course
as the exigencies of tho State may ro-
([iiiie. It was also "dear that any such
understanding n'ust havo been based upon
the .statement, auppoHcd to be correct by all
parties, that tho C<mnnittce would have
couiplctcd its ]al)ours, tliat tho evidence
would liave been takini, that the work would
have biicii dom;, and only the final judgment
would remain to bo di.spodcd of at some fu-
ture period. No ni.in expected the proroga-
tion to take place with the evidence untakcii,
with the niatorials for forming a judgment
uncollected, with tho work undone, Tho

'riio

whole basis had vanisJicd upon the 2nd of
July, -n-htm tlio C/'ommittce was adjourned,
ami it follows that it was the boundcn duty
of those who had the power and responsi-
bility of advising his Jixcellency, to take
immediate stops to meet the new exigency,
and to arrange that Pai'lianicnt should hove
an opportunity of deciding what should now
bo done. (Clicers. ) That the situation was
changed has been practically confessed by
Ministers theniselvos, for they have them-
Belves acknowledged that in consequence of
the events since the adjournment, an October
session has become nccess.iry. Hovenuucut
should h-i\o made the necessary arrange-
ments for the session on the L'Jth, being a
business session; or if this season was peculi-
arly inconvenient for members, they should
have arranged for an adjournment to a
more siiitable period, although I maintain
that no consideration of jjrivate convenience
should have any ■weight in the mind of a re-
presentative of the people when, compared to
his paramount duty to the State in a tremen-
dous crisis like the present. (Great cheering.)
Although that was the obvious duty of the
Government, it was equally obvious, from all
the avadable sources of information, that
they intended themselves to remove this
cause fr(>m the Commons, to create some tri-
bunal of their OAvn devising, and to prevent
the House from meeting for business this
yeiii-; and so, tired of waiting, and taunted
by the Ministerial press with having made
baseless charges, Mr Huntington aiithorized
the publication of a portion of the evidence —
oidy a portion, however, as I happen to
know. (Cheers.) That publication at once
took possession of the public mind. It eoidd
not be slighted, for it consisted of the letters
of Sir Hugh Allan, confessed to bo au-
thentic by that person, the chief witness
for the Government, and the chief actor in
the transaction; and it was hoped by some
people, that the efl'cct produced by the publi-
cation would lead the Government to change
its views and adopt the policy I have indi-
cated. But it is clear that the determination
of the Government was ditto rent. The publica-
tion of the telegrams and rcciuisitionsformoncy
showed that further fatal secrets were to be
di8clo3ed,and the desperate decision was cou-
iirmcd to gag the Commons, to destroy the
(Jommittee, and to set up that mockery of
justice which is shortly to bo performed at
Ottawa. It was announced that His Excel-
lency would be absent from Ottawa, that a
Commission had been issued for the purpose
of proroguing Parliament, as thi. affair would
be purely formal. But Sir, that !\nuounce-
ment was ccmtradicted by the event. His
I'^xccllency thought, and thought rightly,
that his first and highest duty was to
be personally present, and to assume, hi his
own proper person, the responsibility of what-
ever course he might determine upon under
the cii'cumstances. He was there; 1^10 mem-
bers were there as well (clieers) ; and of thj
absentees a very groat majority were quite
accessible. (Hear, hear.) All the repre-
aontativcs from Mirnito'oa were there, and
Bomo twenty members from the distant Pro-
vinces ^f the Atlantic sea board ; and that
the attendance was not stiU Irrgcr was due
the fact that the Governuiont <Sd not ask

any of their supporters to attend, and that
to those who enquired of them whether their
attendance wjis desired, n negative reply was
returned. 1 say that with authority, because
I have the Ijcst measis of knowing its truth.
Well, Sir, under these circumstances, close
upon 100 members of Parliament met
for consultation, and they deemed
the situation so alarming, and the
crisis so unexampled, everything indi-
cating an imnrediate prorogation, as to war-
rant the determination — since they were not
likely to have an opportunity, in a strictly
Parliamentary way, upon the floor of the
House, of advising His Excellency on the
(juestion of prorogation or adjournment, or of
deciding what order should be taken for the
prosecution of the en(|uiry — that their senti-
menta should be placed on record, and that
His Excellency should bo approached in the
only way which his Ministers had left open
for approach. They signed and forwarded to
His Excellency a respectful, temperate, but
firm representation, stating that to prorogue
Parliament without giving it the opportunity
of taking order for the prosecution of the
cn(juiry, would create intense dissatisfaction
in the country. That document, which only
repeated views enunciated by thousands of
petitions already before His Excellency,
was adopted by more members than Mould
have made a majority on any division
during the session ; 183 men having voted
on the largest division, 92 may be fair-
ly said to be a majority in a full House.
The Government advised His Excellency to
reject that appeal, to prorogue the House,
and to issue a Commission, and he agreed to
follow their advice. He answered those who
had made the representation, as to manner
gvaciously indeed, for the manner was his
own; but as to matter most unhappily; the
matter was his Ministers. (Cheers. ) I sup-
pose that the reasonings even of a jViceroy
are not free from criticism, but had these
been the reasonings of the Viceroy himself,
I confess I should have felt some embarrass-
ment in the choice of an epithet with which
to characterise them. I could not call them
puerile because I^ord Dufferin is a mature
statesman; 1 could not call them disingenuous
because liord Dufferin is an honouralue man;
and I would have been inchned to abandon
in despair the search for an adjective which
might fit at once my sense of the proprieties
antl my conviction of the truth. But I am
relieved from any such embarrassment.
These" are the arguments on which his Min-
isters advised him to the course he took ;'the8e
are the reasons which they advised him to
offer to tlie memorialists and the public as
the justification of the course they recom-
mended; and I can have no hesitation in
dealing, fairly I trust, yet fh-mly and freely,
with the argument. AVhat then do these
men advise the chief of the State to say.
Kirst they say that because the signatures do
not constitute a numerical majority of the
whole House, therefore His Excellency
has lio assurance that they represent the feel-
ing of Parliament. That, sir, is true in the
letter, but false in the spirit; for the reason
already given that the imnibi r was a practi-
cal majority of the House; and for the further
reasouthat the vicwsof the House had already,

TIT

lii|S

■ if

^11

during that Beaaion, been plainly indicated
by its unanimous resolution that this matter
should bo prosecuted by itself through the
medium of its select Committee. Repeated
and anxious debates had taken place as to
the mode of the enipury, and as to the se-
curities for its being thorough and exhaustive.
So there was the best possible means for
knowing that the feebncof the Commons was
that the emjuiry ihould be conducted l^y a
Parliamentary Committee, and certainly the
signatures of so many members to the re-
presentation, afforded good ground for that
which, even in the absence of any cvddencc,
was the only fair conclusion, namely, that
the Commons had not changed its mind; nor
was there the shadow of a foundation for the
notion that the House was prepared to re-
verse its decision, to dissolve its committee,
to abandon the duty it had imdertakcu, and
to leave to others the decision whether there
should be an enquiry and what sort of en-
qniry thero should be. Again, remember
that the«e signatsries did not venture *to say
that any particular course would be taken by
Parliament. They simply advised His Excel-
lency to giv« the House an opportunity of tell-
ing him what it should determine. There
was no dictation as to the course of the
House; there was oidy the assertion that the
House desired to deliberate and decide on a
course to be taken; and who can doubt that
this was, as it ought to have been, the desire
of the Houae ? Let mo now turn to the
second argimient adduced. These men,
these incrmiinated Ministers, advised His
Excellency to say that to accede to the
representation would be — what? AMiy, to
declare them guilty of the crunes which
were charged against them ! (Laughter.)
AVTiat said the. representation? That
tiiere would be dissatisfaction unless
Parliament were permitted to take
order tor the trial of the charges; and
the ai'gument is, that to accede to this re-
quest IS to ac;ree that the charges arc proved;
that the accused are guilty; and so,of course,
to dispense with the trial altogether!
(Laughter.) Sir, for such an argument, the
words puerile and disingenuous are the fittest
epithets I know. (Loud ajiplause.) AVell,
Sir, a^ain they advise His Excellency to say
that his dilhculties would disappear if there
could be a call of the House, but that this
was impossible. AVhy impossible ? Tl-.o
impossibilities arc said to l>e physical — thi
great distances and the fact of the alleged un-
derstanding as to prorogation; but these
Sir,are difficilties which extend only to tlie
time of the call. They are not difficulties
in the way of adjonrnment. They are not
difLculties to be solved only by proroga-
tion. They are simply objections, Avhich
are to be met by fixing for tbo
adjourned session a convenient time,
having regard to the expressed views of all
parties that the enquiry should be prosecuted
at the earliest possible moment. An adjoiirn-
ment might have taken place iiven to tlio
day named by His Exccilency for the n<nv
session, although I should have thought that
a long time. The middle of October he
named as the period for the new session, to
which the faith of the Crown is pledged-; and
had a proposal for adjournment been made, I
am 'able confidently to affirm that

no objection would have been t raised.
Those who are responsible for the manage-
ment of the Opposition in Parliament, felt it
their duty on this occasion to assemble early
at the Capital, and calmly to deliberate and
take counsel together as to their course under
various contingencies. They thought from
the language of the Jiinisters and their
organs, that the absence of Ministerialists
would be alleged as rendering it unfair to
proceed at once with business, and the
unanimous decision arrived at was, that
while they felt Ministers had disregarded
their obvious duty in not having their sup-
porters there and being ready to proceed,
they should not stand upon that for an
instant, but should say, "Throwing upon you
the responsibility of sending back to their
lionies one hundred and thirty members. Me
agree to your proposal for an adjournment,
and leave you to name the day when we
shall meet in order to resume the discussion
of this question," That would have been the
attitude of the Opposition upon the point of
adjourni'ient. His Excellency has said that
the (jiicstion before him was one of very
great difficulty and embarrassment. Where
the Chief of the State so expresses
himself, and where there is not, as
here there is not, the slightest
imputation of partisanship or of designed
leaning to either side, I a^ree that his deci-
sioii is to be canvassed witfi tenderness and
respect ; but. Sir, Avhile tliat is the duty we
owe to the Chief of the State, to the State
herself we owe a higher duty still. (Cheers.)
Aiid while I declined on a former occasion —
at the time when the determination of His
Excellency was made known — to say a
single word upon that subject, con-
iining myself then to what is the main
and substantial issue here, the advice given
by his Ministers, upon which he acted, and
for which they arc responsible, I do not feel
at liberty to let this occasion pass wivhout
saying a word or two upon what my reading
of the Constitution would lead me to believe
was tlio true duty of His Excellency in such
a crisis. (Applause.) My belief is that
the spirit of the Constitution, properly intor-
ptetoil, would have led him to say to his
Ministers, " As your supporters are not
here,ask for an adjournment; if you please 1
will do that which is not without i)recedent,
1 will send down a message rccjueating an
adjournment; but either with or without a
message ask an adjournment. Take what
time 13 necessary, name the earliest conve-
nient day, and if the House decl nes to ac-
cede to the request, then m order to place
you in the same position which you would
occupy if an adjournmeiifi had been gi-anted,
1 will give you a prorogation, and
will call a new sesEion for the
(lay named ; but fu: cher tiian this I decline
to interfere with J'arliament." (Cheers.)
My belief is that this course ■would have
given to Ministers every advantage in the
way of their followers being present, and to
tlie absent niemboi-s ovorv advantage in the
way of facilitating tluir .li tendance in Par-
liament, which the course pursued has
given, and that it would have possessed
these enomnous adxantagos, that Parliament
would be left undisturbed in the prosecution
of the great enquiry, that the committee

auil
feol

lOUt

cling
elieve
such
that
iiiter-
liis
not
ease 1
edcnt,
an
lOut a
what
couve-
to ac-
place
would
anted,
ami
the
lecliue
heera. )
have
in the
and to
in the
11 Par-
d has
asessed
ianicut
3cution
raittee

wcukl not be destroyed bv the prorocation,
and that the conduct of the case would not
be wrested from Parliament, in order to hand
it over to otherii named by the accused. I
have every respect, Sir, for the doctrine that
the Governor is us a rule to be guided by the
advice of his responsible Ministers; but
.there can be no iloubt that the prerogative
of the Crown ma.y, and should, be exercised
under certain circumstances ajjainst that
advice. The coniititutional doctrine on some
aspects of the cognate (question of dissolution
is well settled. A Ministry defeated at an
early period, in a House elected under its own
auspices, has no right to another dissolu-
tion, and tlie constitutional rule is
that advice to dissolve under such circum-
stances should bo refused. On the other
hand, a Ministry formed out of a House
which has been elected under the influence
of the opposite party, is, as a general rule,
entitled to advise a dissolution, and such
advice ought to be followed. I do not say
that you can tind the line so clearly laid down
for the present case, but I do say that on
principle and analogy, this %v:»s a case for
refusing the advice to prorogue. Mark that
it was upon the advice of incriminated
Ministers, against whom the House of Com-
mons had commenced a process, which pro-
cess was pending; of incriminated Ministers
against whom a case had been made,
which they themselves acknowledge requires
explanation, that the Governor was asked
to take a step which would destroy the pro-
cess, which would nullify the proceedings,
which would deprive him of the advice and
counsel of his Parliament, and leave him un-
der the control, or the advice at any rate,
of those Ministers, upon a subject so mate-
rially affecting their fortunes tmd their fame.
(Cheers.) Mark, too, that the conse-
quence of his refusing that advice
would be simply this: he would have said to
the Parliament and the people, " Gentlemen,
I could not, under the circumstances, r«iverse
the determination arrived at by the House of
Commons, that a Committee of that House
should jjrosecute this matter; I could not,
under the circumstances, decline to bf. ad-
vised by my Parliament. I felt that it ■^^ . -; a
case in which my liarliament ought to decide
what was to be done, and I have declined to
be advised to dismiss you. I could not hesi-
tate when the choice Mas between my free
Parliament and my inculpated Ministers, 1
have elected to take the respoiisibility — of
what ? — of keeping around me in this critic al
emergency the great Council of the nation ;
and when an issue is pending between the
Commons of (.'anada and my Ministers,
of keeping intact the power of the Commons,
and taking their advice as to the extent to
which my Ministers fcliall be allowed to in-
terfere with the conduct of the enijuiry."
(Cheers.) Can you doubt what the answer
of the Parliament and tlie people of
Canada — of any man with a spaik
of freedom anel patriotism in his
bosom — would have been to an appeal like
that? From one end to the other of the
Dominion, 1 venture to say it would have
been affirmed that the i)osition was unassail-
able, (Cheers), that it was a just and propi r
use of the prerogative to keep Parliament to-
gether, and to seeKit." advice in the emergency.

and that His Excellency should be sustained.
(Cheers.) That determination would have
yeen entirely in favour of popular rights, and
-he people would have joyfully recognized
the use of the prerogative in the people's
favour. (Cheers.) Talk of the ad-
vice of responsible Ministers! Sir, it
is absurd to apply these high sound-
ing words to the matter ou hand. On the
plainest and most ordinary principles, it is
only in the case of overruling necessity,
where there is no other possible alternative,
that the advice of anyone, as man or Minis-
ter, is to be trken on a matter in which his
personal interests are at stake, and may ob-
viously be opposed to the interests of the
State in whose name he professes to advise.
Here there was no such overruling
necesaity, there was a ve»"y obvious
alternative. His Excellency h, J his
choice between taking the advice of
the Ministers and taking the advice of the
Commons. He should have declared his
Ministers incompetent to advise him in their
own case to dismiss the Commons, and he
should have resorted to the latter for that
counsel which they would have been pre-
pared to give. Although my opinion is, that
the true spirit of the Constitution points to a
conclusion opposite to that at which the
Governor arrived, vfcv that, after all, is not
the main issue befc r us, because his Excel-
lency, by accepting e advice tendered to
him, has placed the responsibility of that
advice upon his Mini&ters, and thev must
bear that intolerable burden. (Cheers).
And if it was, as his Er.cellency ha^ stated,
a serious and embarrassing situation m which
he stood, when he was called upon to decide
whether he should act under or against the ad-
vice of his Ministers, who can doubt what the
situation is of the Ministers who have so ad-
vised him — of the Ministers who have ad-
vised him to dismiss Parliament, to annul
what Parliament had done, and to form for
the prosecution of this enquiry new machin-
ery — machinery of which Parliament had
disapproved, and which I hope, believe, and
trust, at no distant day, I'arliament will un-
equivocally condemn. (Loud and prolonged
cheering.) But, sir, his Ministers advised
his Excellency to go further ; they jsut in his
mouth an opinion on the present state of the
case upon the evidence already given, and
I commend it to those, few in number and in-
signilicant in importance, who yet affirm that
there has been no evidence to touch the Min-
isters at all. (Laughter.) It is not a cheer-
ing expression of opinion, coming from the
lips of the accused; it is not at all cheer-
ing when we consider that it is the
judgment of those who are tliemselves upon
thcT trial. Listen toa fewof the words : "The
charges," His Excellency is advised to say,
"reciuire the most searching investigation;"
"the correspond«;nc3 has produced a painful
impression upon the public mind ;" and "cer-
tain documents have apj)eared in connection
with these matters of very grave signiii-
cance," in regard to which "the fullest ex-
planations must be given." That is the
statement tliey have put into the mouth of
His Excellency with regard to their present
position. "The fullest explanations must bo
given." Given by whom? Given by the
men|who wrote them, and signed them, and

arc reapaiisiblc for thorn! (Cheers.)
I trust the day will shortly como
for the giving of these explanations;
I may not say I hope they will bo, be-
cau«o I know tlicy cannot be, satisfac-
tory. But Ministers add a saving clause.
They say — " no proof has yet been produc-
ed which necessarily connects these papers
with the culpable transactions of which it is
asserted they form a part, however objec-
tionable they may appear in juxtaposition
with the correspondence." That is the sav-
ing clause. It is perhaps not as decided as
the Ministers would have liked to make it,
(laughter), but dubious as it is, I object to it.
I declare that if the do juments are genuine
— and they appear to be admitted as genu-
ine by this State paper — they conclusively
establish the guilt of the Ministers. (Cheers.)
They conclusively establish that Ministers
with one hand were signing assurances for
the giving of this contract to Sir Hugh Al-
lan, while they were signing with the other
hand requisitions for money to be
paid by Sir Hugh, receiving that money,
and distributing it to corrupt the electors of
this country. ( Loud cheers. ) That is what
is established by these documents, and I
know of no evidence which is required in
order to bring the conviction to any honest,
unprejudiced mind, that these transactions
had a connection. I repel with indignation
— I cannot seriously argue — the absurd idea
that while ministers were bargaining with
Sir Huph Allan about the contract, the otlicr
transaction, which was then going on, was
entirely kept apart ; that the right hand was
ignorant of what the left was doing.
(Cheer' and laughter.) Now, Sir, in
order that wo may fairly estimate the
enormity of the public crime which has
been c amitted in advising prorogation,
it will be useful to enquire why it is that an
impeachment, the procedure with which this
enquiry is in substance identical, is not
abated by a prorogation, or even a dissolu-
tion of Parliament, but stands in just the
same position when Parliament resumes as
before the prorogation or dissolution of the
House ? Why, it is for this reason, that the
security of tlie Crown and the security of
the people alike demand that the prei-oga-
tive of the Crown sliould not include
the power in any way to in-
fluence an impeachment. The rule
and its reasons wire fully estab-
lished in the course of the impeachment
of Warren Hastings, and largely on the argu-
ment of William Pitt, who demonstrated that
it was for the security of the Crown, because
otherwise the Crown might be advised
by Ministers, against whom or aprainst whose
influential fi-iends an impeachment was de-
pending, to make use of tlie prerogative for
the purpose of balHing the process, a course
which would result in the alienation of the
afifections of the people — those affections
which constitute the secure foundation of
the English throne. (Loud and continued
applause.) Just because impeached Min-
isters would, when guilty, inevitably
advise the Crown to prorogue or dissolve if
the eflfect of such an act would be to abate
their impeachment — just because it was
impossible that under such circumstances the
impeached Ministers could faithfully advise

the Crown, it wai determined th'it tleir
advice, if followed, should not bo operative
to abate the impeachment; and so the Crown
was rescued from a position of diiHcalty and
danger. The security of the people, too. re-
quired this limitation ; and for the same obvio us
reason, namely, that the exercise of this pre-
rogative by the Crown on the advice of im-
peached Ministers would render it utterly
impossible to bring great offenders against
tlie State to justice. Impunity produces
crime; and so the safety of the people
and the security of the Crown were alike sub-
served by this limitation of the prerogative.
Now the proceeding against the Canadian
Mtnistrv is accepted on all hands to be sub-
stantiallyan impeachment; not technically, so
so, it is true, in consequence of the defects of
the Constitution; but the technical difl'erence
leaves untouched the great considerations of
policy which we have been discussing, and
which apply to this proceeding. Let us
apply them. They teach us that the emiuiry
should not be broken up by a prorogation;
and as the Committee would be dissolved by
the prorogation, the result is necessarily that
the prorogation should not have taken place.
Every argument which is used against a pro-
rogation abating an impeachment in England,
is an argument against proroguing in
Canada, pending the enquiry, the re-
sult being just that which is condemned
in England. In England the prerogative is
limited, so that it cannot do the mis-
chief; here it does the mischief, and
therefore it ought not
Tliere was another reason for
being prorogued at that
Hugh Allan has been in
has, wo are told, made conditional ar-
rangements by which, under certain inodiH-
catious of the Charter,he may be a'ole to sell
tlie Company's bonds. We read in the
Ministerial organs a few days ago that there
was a meeting of the Pacitic Railway Com-
pany at Ottawa with the view of arranging
terms, and of submitting them to the Gov-
eiument of the day. Now I hope we all
agree that, whatever be the fate ci the
charges against the Go^'crnment, or of the
Government itself. Sir Hngh Allan must
not continue at the head of that enterprise.
(Applause.) I trust no one will say that the
man who has brought— whether his letters
be true or false — the prof oundest humiliation
on this country should he allowed to retain
a position, the most important and influ-
ential which exists in the community.
(Cheers.) The President of this great Com-
pany, the controller of its enormous
interests, will occupy a position pre-
dominant in this country for many
years. Sir Hugh has injured Can-
ada more than I should have sup-
posed a few months ago Canada could
be injured by any one man. What po-
sition do we occupy to day in relation to the
people of the United States ? We have been
accustomed to pride ourselves on the com-
parative elevation of Canadian morals, and the
comparative purity of Canadian politics. We
can do so no longer. With these letters be-
fore us, we cannot refuse to believe that this
man expended and found persons to receive
enormous suras for purposes which
would not bear the light; we are

to be used.
Parlianicint not
moment. Sir
England. He

a humiliated people, and he is om: of
the chief authors of our ehamc. Under
these circumstances, an important duty of
Parliament was and will be at the earliest
moment to see that no further stipulations
arc entered into, and that no further arrange-
ments arc made with regard to the charter ;
and yet for all we know even now the Gov-
ernment may be engaged in further compli-
cating our rights. Under all the circum-
stances I, for my j)art, can attribute the pro-
rogation of Parliament to nothing but the
desperate view that the position of
the(}overnment, being the worst conceivable,
it was in the turn of events that time might
mend it. But, of course, it was necessary to
preserve some slight appearance of fair deal-
ing and to resort to some device which might
appear to excuse the delay, and it was also
necessary to withdraw from Parliament, as
far as possible, the control of the enquiry,
which could only be done by providing some
other tribunal. It was not sufficient to have
a Committee of which three out of five were
selected by the Ministers; it was necessary
that every single one of the persons who
were to conduct the e luiry '\ould be nomi-
nees of the Government. So iv was deter-
mined that a Royal Commission should be is-
sued. Ministers knew perfectly well that nei-
ther Mr. Dorion nor I could accept such
a Commission, that Parliament had refused
to assent to it; they knew from the members'
protest oi.r public attitude; they knew from
the beginnirg that it was impossible for the
Oppositio... without violating the principles
tliey had laid down, to recognize their tribunal.
But it was thought some cry could l)e raised
and some feeble attempt made to keep up
appearances, wliicli might be successful for a
time. (Applause.) What was the pretence ?
There was hut one pretence— the disallow-
an«) of the Oaths Bill. Now there have been
l)ointed out ^ever;)! parliamentary modes by
which the oath may l)e administered. I shall
refer to one only, that which at the moment
commends itself most to my judgment. It
is the proposaltliat an Act should be passed
authorizing certain named persons, members
of the Committee or others, to administer an
oath. This would, in fact, confjtitute a par-
liamentary as distingiiished from a Itoyal
Many years ago, by sucli

Commission,
an Act in
tablished a
mto alleged
Commissioners
rerj aired them to
and to report

ICngland, there was es-

Commission of Inquiry

abuses in the navy. The

named in the Act, M'hich

examine witnesses on oath

to the Speaker, inade

that famous repoi-t which contained the
charges upon which Henry Dundas, then
Ix)rd Melville, was dismissed from his office,
removed from the Privy Council, and after-
wards impeached. So now here is a prece-
dent, and it is the one which seems most
suitable for adoption, in order to secure the
taking of the evidence under oath. Now,
this plan alone, leaving out all the otliers
which are open to us, and assuming what I
am not prepared to admit, tliat the House
of Commons has not itself the disputed
power, disposes entirely of the disin-
genuous argument that the Royal Com-
mission was necessary to obtain the oatli.
But this further observation is also to be
made, that if a Royal Commission were the

only course, there is no reason why it should
not have been a CommisRiou of members,
named by the House and issued on an ad-
dress by the House. That plan
I do not myself recommend, bat
there can be no doulit of its infinite
superiority to the plan adopted of defying
Parliament, and refusing to take its advice
altogether. Parliament might not have
acted wisely in passing such an address, but
at any i-ate it could not complam that by
acting on the address the Crown had wrested
from It any of its privileges. Besides, if the Cey-
lon case were applicable it is itself a prece-
dent for a Commission upon address; but by
no means authorises the Crown to take the
affair into its own hands without any signi-
fication of the will of the Commons. Uiuler
any circumstances, even supposing that the
only alternative was that the enquiiy should
take place without the oath, the Houfe should
clearly have had the opportunity of deciding
whether it would act by Committee or Com-
mission, and should have been
spared the outrage inflicted upon it
Vty the exercise of the prerogative.
To the Commons, from time immemorial, has
belonged the right to institute, jjrosecute,
and control proceedinjifs for the impeachment
of Ministers and others charged with high
oflFences against the State, and for enquiry
into charges affecting the honour and inde-
pendence of its own members. Nobody de-
nies this fundamental doctrine. It is one of
the greatest securities for liberty that
the peoples representatives, responsible
directly to them, and lialde to l)e
by them dismissed in case they fail in
their dut}', should have this exclusive right,
and be charged with this solemn responsi-
bility, thus preventing those who act as
advisors of the Crown from giving that ill
advice by which they and their friends may
be sheltered from justice. Let me troul)l!3
yon with a short cjuotation whifli very aptly
enunciates the views expressed by the House
of Commons at a very early date, and retained
by it to the present day. Solicitor-General
Lechmere, in 1713, on the impeachment of
the rebel Loi-ds, used this language: — "The
Commons of England would not j)crmit the
fate of those prosecutions to depend on the
care or skill of those who are versed in the
ordinary forms of justice. No instance ever
has arisen in English historv, where our
ancestors have pennitted a prosecution
against the chief offender to be carried any-
where but in full Parliament. In justice to
the King, as well as to the iieople, we ought
to take this into our own hands and not to
entrust it to any other body. It was the
greatest ease, security, and support of the
Crown, that no power should be lodged there
to prevent the Commons from examining
into the offence, or to defeat the judgment
given in full Parliament. And he took it to
be the greatest advantage to the Crown that
the Cons titution of the kingdom had not,
he thought, invested it with such
power; and, on the other hand, such
a poirer wa-i ntterly inconsistent with
the fundamental rights of Parliament."
And mark this, that the fuller the develop-
ment of the doctrine of responsible Govern-
ments iilie completer the control by Ministers
over the prerogative, the narrower the dis-

■-.•/■%

cretioQ accorded to the chief of the State
independently of his Ministers, the
more njiparent beconxes the necessity
of treating as an exception to the
general rule an occasion when the
personal poHition of the Minister conflicts
with the public interest, and renders hiir. in-
competent to give disinterested advice. The
prerogative of the Crown is now said to be
the property of the Minister — the projjcrty
of the unimpeached Minister perhaps, but
surely not the instrument whereby the im-
peached Minister is to thwart justice, and to
violate the fundamental right, oi theCommons
to control enquiry into Bnch high ofiFences.
(Cheers. ) Sir, the interference of any other
court of justice in the land with the high
court of Parliament, even thouuli that other
court be established by Act oF I'arliament,
is well settled to be a "high contempt." Tar-
liament has got, and I'arliament must be
allowed to keep, undisturbed hold of the
great cause. (Cheers.) For the accused
Minister, while Parliament is actually en-
gaged in the prosecution of the cause, to
turn it out of doors, in order that the trial
may cease, and then, forsooth, to
say Parliament can do no more, the Com-
mittee is dissolved, there is an end of the
investigation, we have no alternative noAV
but to take the control of it into our own
hands — was ever such a spectacle presented
since English history began ? (Cheers. )
No, sir, I defy those who search even into
the dark ages, unless perhaps they look to
the evil days which preceded the great re-
bellion, I defy them to find anything ap-
proaching the audacity of this procedure of
Ministers in breaking up their trial, while
actually progressing in the proper form, and
on the same day creating a tribunal to suit
themselves for their own prosecution.
(Loud cheers.) The appointment of this
Commission is a high contempt of Parlia-
ment, and you are not to listen to those who
tell you that the privileges and rights of Par-
liament are not important to you. The pri-
vileges of Parliament are the privileges of
the people (hear, hear), and the rights of
Parliament ai-e the rights of tlie people.
(Cheers.) It is for thote rights and in thoi^e
interests alone that we strive to-day. We aro.
not separate from you ; fi'om you we spring,
to you we return; in your interest and your
name alone we speak and act, and it is for
your rights that we are now contending.
(Treraendou3 cheers. ) Besides being
such a breach of the privileges
of Parliament in the general, this Com-
mission is a gross and glaring Vjreach
in the particular of its most important privi-
lege — the freedom of speech, and of debates
and proceedings in the House. .Sir, who is
there that does not know that freedom of
speech is liberty? (Cheers.) Not the great-
est security for liberty — it is liberty itself.
(Cheers.) Freedom of speech! — give me
fieedom of speech for a people and I will
undertake for you that this freedom of speech
shall secure for them every other freedom
— freedom of life, freedom of jisrson, and
freedom of property. (Cheers.) It is by
virtue of that right, not yet— thank God
! — annulled in Canada, that I am here
to-night — (renewed and prolonged cjieering)
—and it is by virtue of that privilege

that 1 expect when Parliament meets
again that we shall stand approved
before the people and the people's ropresea-
tativoa. ( Loud cheers. ) Sir, this charge was
made by my honourable friend in his capac-
ity as a representative of the peop'e on the
tloor of the House of C inmons, admittedly
in the proper place, and in proper language,
and followed by the proper motion. I'hat
language of his, that resolution of his, that
proceeding of his, is not, and cannot be cojj-
nizable in any other court or place in this
country. (Cheers.) We can discuss it at
public meetings, we can invoke public
opinion upon it, but no tribunal in Canada
already in existence, or which can
be devised by the Crown, has tiio right to
eiuiuire into the matter, or to investi-
gate whether the charge be true or false.
(Cheers.) The very instant the contrary 1$
determined, that very instant the British
(Constitution is changed — that very instant
the security thf..*- you have for liberty is
gone; because thia security depends upon the
absolute immunity of the peoples represecita-
tives from discussion uy any tribunal
outside of Parliament of any words by them
spoken in Parliament. (Loud cheers.) Sir.
in the hey-day of freedom will you abandon
the securities for liberty ? If you do, I know
not how soon you may fall upon evil days in
which, deprived of those securities, your
liberty may be taken from you.
I say to you that, at this • in-
stant, by the unconstitutional acts of
the present Administration, the C overnment
of this country has been seized into their
hands ; that at this moment, by their act of
prorogation, they have substituted an arbi-
trary and tyrannical (roveinment by
tlie Cabinet, for that Parliamentary
and popular Government which we have
hitherto enjoyed. (Great cheering.) Let
us not forget the history of the past ; let
us not forget what has been said, and done,
and suffered in order to secure for you the
liberty which the Commission impeaches.
Look at its language. It recites that Lucius
Seth Huntington, a member of Parliament,
in his place in the House made certain
charges against Ministers, and moved for a
Committee — that tlie Crown has appointed
Commissioners to cKjuire into and take evi-
dence, and report their opinions upon the
charges so made, and these Commissioners pro-
ceed to write to the member of Parliament
who, in the discharge of his duty, had taken
this stand, telling him that they, for-
sooth, had been authorized to en.iuiro
into it, and calling upon him to give a
list of his witnesses, and to appear before them
at the time and place they appoint — dese-
crating by that appointment the people's
House— (Immense cheering) — there to an-
swer and there to make good his charge. I
see in tlie Ministerial prints that in effect he
is upon his defence, and that the ([uestion
really to be investigated is luw in the world
these honest and honourable transactions,
which all these Ministerial gentlemen are so
glad came to light — (lau^litor) — did come to
light ? ( Loud laughter. ) The question is,
who got the letters, who gfot the telegrams,
and how in the world did so much hitldeu
virtue see the day ? (Roars of laughter and
ayplause.) Well. sir. let us refoj-to one ex-

of the
i . the
Jilleged
Jinl'vs

amitlo in Knglish hiatorj'. Ono of the nob-
lest, 1 will not say the nohk>«t, for there
are so many nobU men in English history,
bnt ono of the noblest of them all, was Sir
John Eliot lie was the leader
])0|mlar party in rarlianiciifc
evil (lays of the firat Charles. He
in Parliament th;it the ('oiiuoil ami
had conspired to trample under foot the
liberties of the Riibject. (Ai)plause. ) TliiH
charge, in general terms, another member of
Varliamcnt has recently made. It is the es-
sence of the charge made by Mr. iltintington
lately, that tlie liberties of the subject had
boon conspired agaii.st and trampled under
foot l)y Ministers. (Prolonged cheering.)
Well, Sir, Parliament was dissolved, and
after dissolution an information vas laid in
the King's Bench by the King's Attorney-
(ieneral against this man fur tlie charge ho
made. He pleaded to the jurisdiction, alleg-
ing that in J'arliamcnt alone could his wordsbe
noticed; and to show j'ou that I do not over-
estimate the importance of the question, let
ine recall the words in which tiie great his-
torian, Hallam. describes tlic i^sue: — "This
)>rought forward," says Ifallam, "the great
(|iiestiou of privilege, on which the
power of the Hou.sc of Commons,
and coimequoiOy tin; character of the
J'hvjUsh. ConxfiiiK'ton, seemed evidently to
depend." The character of the English
Constitution evidently depended upon
whether a charge 'nade by a member in
Parliament could be taken cognizance of by
any other Court. Well, the King's judges
deciiled for the King, and ordered that
Sir John Eliot should pay a fine of £2,000,
and be confined to j»rison until he made his
submission to the King. He who had occu-
pied the highest positions, who was the leader
of the popular party in Parliament, and filled
the important post of a ViceAdmiral was
imprisoned in the Tower. Atany moment, on
making his humble submission he would
have been released by the King. Had a
Parliament been called he would have been
released by Parliament. In those bad days
Parliament was not annually convoked, and
was sometimes also very suddenly proiogued
(laughter and cheers), and so, unable to ask
redress from the people, or to obtain justice
from the Crown, he lingered in the gaol. Let
me read to you some affecting words in which
during that close confinement which was
wearing out his life, he describes to you his
sufferings; "To be made poor and naked;
" to be imprisoned and restrained; nay, not
- " to be at all; not to have the proper use of
" anything; not to have the knowledge of so-
^' ciety; not to have being or existence; his
' ' faculties confiscate; his friends debarred his
" presence; himself deprive of the world; I
" will not tell you all this, suffered in your
"service, for you, your childi-en, and posterity,
" to preserve your rights and liberties, that
"as tliey were the inheritance of your fathers,
' ' from ycu they might descend to your sons. "
( Applause. )To wards the end of his life he wrote
these lines to the famous John Hampden: —
" My lodginjjs are removed, and I am now
where candlelight may be suffered, but
scarce fire. I hope you will think that this
exchange of places makes not a change of
mind. The same protection is still with me,
and the same confidence, and these things

can have end by Him that gives them being.
None but my servajits, hardly my sons, have
admittance to me. My friends I must de-
sire for their own sakes to forbear coniiiig to
the Tower."

He was in tli(> prime of life, not yet 41
years ohl, but the close confinement brought
on lonsnmptioii. His physicians advised
that to remain was <leath, and that to be en-
largetl for a time was probably life. He fci;t
in a potUiou to the King, etathig wl at
his physfoianH advised, ami reipiesting tu-
largenient. The Kii'g answered that it was
not humble enough. He then sent a second
petition. It is short, let me read it : — ",Sir,
1 am heartily sorry I have displeased your
Majesty, and havin<j' so said do lumljly be-
Boech you, once again, to set me at liberty,
that when I have recovered again I may re-
turn br.ck to my [)rison, there to undergo
huch punishment a.siJod hath allotted to me."
He was told that it was not humi.Ic enough.
He did not petition again. IJeing very near
his end he caused a picture to be made of hi,"
attenuated f<)r'n, and directed it to bo hung
upon the walls at Port I'liot, in order that it
might be preserved in las' family " as a per-
petual memorial of hi.^ hatred of tyranny,"
and there it still hangs beside another one of
tlie gi'eat leader of the Commons, taken
shortly .betore in the pride of his strci gth and
vigour. The contrast is one of the most
affecting f^pectacles which any man can wit-
ness, (."^en.sation.) Soon after, of that im-
prisonment, he dieil. His son humbly peti-
tioned that he might have his !>ody to be
burieil in his Cornish home. The ruthless
Let the body of
be bnried in the
church of that pari.sh wherein htj died,"
and he was l>uried in the Tower. Xo stone
marks his grave, but it has been well said
that " while freedom subsists in England he
will not want a mon;.ment. " (Applause.)
When next the necessities of the King
drove him to call Parliament, one
of the first Acts of the Commons
was to declare the judgment against Eliot
illegal, and a high breach of the privileges of
Parliament. Subsequently, that judgment
was brought up in the House of Lords, aid
was by them, as the Supreme Court of Judi-
cature, reversed as illegal and void (ap-
plause).; and at a later day, at the day of the
re-settlement of the British Constitution in
our present charter, the Bill of Rights, an
express declaration was inserted in these
words "that the freedom of speech
and debate or proceedings in Parliament
ought not to be impeached or questioned in
any Court or place out of Parliament."
That solemn declaration had been af-
firmed by many precedents ; it was
sanctified by that martyr's blood, and
it is this privilege and right, the violation of
which you are now called upovi to sanction or
condemn. (Applause.) Are we the worthy
sons of such sires as these ? Have we brought
to this sideof the world the true notions of Eng-
lish liberty, or are we in these palmy days of
freedom to forget what were the trials,
what the expenditure of time and pains, of
blood and treasure, by which our ancestors
secured those jewels which we are now told
are triflea to be flung away ? (Loud applause.)
Sir, 1 recall to you the position in those days

King replied,
Sir John Eliot

•33

of cild Lon<l()i), the city ttft«r which yourn in
Dftmed. Ihiriiig those trouhloUHtiineB, wlien
tlie King tried to arrcHt the live ineiriWra,
I'arliament waa iiracticaliy turned out of ita
houne by the advent of the King in person to
seek the olijocta of his M'ratli. Then
the city of Loudon wa8 found to ho the guar-
dian and protector of tlie pooi)h!'iii ibertios.
Jn the ancient City ifall, I'urlianient Rsaem-
bk'd and dolil)erated tinuer the guard of
tlie city traiubanda. 'I'Iiuh old London bore
a prominent part in making that struggle
a hucceasful one, !vnd I believe that aa you
have brought to this land the name, so you
will preserve the traditions of that famoua
city, and tiiat you will be amongst the fore-
most to rise ujt againat the infamovis attempt
which has in these latter days becax made to
violate your sacre<l rights. .Sir, 1 <lo not
X>retend for a moment that these lioyal Com-
iniasionoradtHign to jiunish, or could punish
Mr LLuutiiigtou fi>r the words he uttered in
I'arliament, but I point out to you that the
principle upon whiih the Commiai'ion is
issued is utterly incompatible with his se-
curity, or that of any other of your leprc-
sentiitives. The princii)le viohitcd by tho
Commiasion is that no tribunal can be con-
stituted which shall take any cognizance,
which shall know aupht of what transpires in
I'arliament, that the House alone can
deal with what its members say. If you
allow the violation of that principle by the
creation of !i triljiinul permitted, nay reiiuired,
to lake Muh <;ogni/.auce, how shall yon fall
back on iheoiii and sacred rule, when the dark
days come, ur< come they surely will, if you
permit the jewels of liberty to be wrested
from you '' (Cheers.) But the Commission
is, upon other grounds, in my judgment, il-
legal and void. In the first place it is con-
trary to the fundamental principles of justice,
that either the accusers or the accused should
have the creation or control of the tribunal
which is to do any material thing in the trial.
That commends itself to every man. Every-
one jfeels that it would be monstrous that he
should himself be tried, or that anything ijn-
portant with reference to his trial, should be
done by a body of men all chosen by his ac-
cusers. Which of us, in any private conten-
tion, would agree that the other party should
name the persons who were to take and re-
port on the evidence ? Would not each
of us say "No, it is an unfair ad-
vantage; let us agree; let one of
us name one party, and the other
name another, and let us or they agree upon
L vjiird." I cannot agree that either of us
should have the exclusive nomination of the
I>ersons who rre to perform such an import-
ant duty. But it is said that this is not a
material thing ; it is said, to be simply a re-
cording of evidence. Do not bo led away by
any such fallacy as that. I tell 3'ou that the
questiors which will arise before the tribu-
nal, however and whenever constituted,
as to the limitations of this enquiry, as
to the order in 'vhich the witnesses shall
be called, as to the mode in which they shall
be examined, as to the character of the an-
swers which shall be accepted as satisfactory,
are of the essence of the great cau -e. (Great
cheering ) I tell you, so strong is my con-
viction on this point, that 1 decided, that if
the Cca-.rnittcc cf wL'ch \ wr.r a zwixsj. er had

boon turned by the Houso into a cloae Com-
mittve, HO that I shouul not have had the
protection of public opinion and tho
light of iluy, to decline to sit upon
it au hour long<>r. ((Ircat cheer*
iiig, ) Tliat was n>t bocauao pub-
licity alone woul-l be a sutlicieut pro>
taction, but liecausc it would bu a
partial guard, at any rate, against ex-
treme injuatice being done by the majority
to the minority. Jf there Was that risk of in-
juatice with the Committee, where both sidi g
were repreaentcd, timugh unequally, hi»
the risk ceased with the Commiasion, which
rejiresents one aide alone '! W hy, sir, tho
whole foundation of our system of justice is
subverted ; tlio jury system is subverted ;
and the right of challenge is destroyed by
allowing one of the parties to name the per-
sons wlio shall be judges of the fact and of
the law! What rouson, what justice is thero
in it? Docs it not shock every honest mind
tliat one of tiio parties to the cause should
have the pfiwor of appointing tho Commission
charged with tho trial and judgment of t!io
cause ? The Commission ia given the same
jiowcra a^ were proponed to tho Committee.
We were told, v.liile that Committee w:\J
going on, that we hud most important powers,
that we were the judges, that some of ua
were utterly unlit to sit there, and could not
do our duty bocauso v,m were anxiou.-i
to get office, forsooth ! (Laughter.) We
were not told, however, that the chair-
man waa untit because because he had

happened to receive some of the money
(laughter); but that was not generally known
just then. However, Sir, those men who
criticised our position as committee men
asserted that our duty was very important, and
by necessary consequence must admit that th s
duty of the Commission is e<iurUly important
now. Sir, there is yet more, — this Coinmissioa
is authorised to report its opinions upon thi»
matter, and the Commissioners themselves
in their Chairman's letter to Mr. Hunting-
ton, have expressly stated that they are "to
enquire into and report upon tho inattei*
stated in his resolution." The obvious design
is to obtain a whitewashing report from thla
Commission, and afterwards to call together
Parliament and say to it, " These gentlemen
heard the evidence; they aaw the witnessea,
iuidknewexactlywhatdegreeof credibility was
to be attached to each: you did not see them,
and you could not judge who told the truth.
Will you not accept their opinions ? Who so
qualified to judge as the persons who heard
the evidence ?" These are the arguments .
that will be addressed to the House.
I fully recognise the advantage to the
judges of being present when the enquiry is
going on. I always argued that it should be
conducted while Parliament was sitting, so
that members could see and hear the wit-
nesses, and, for my part, I decline to accept
a Commission which the accused has ap-
pointed, which is itself to determine the
limits of the enquiry, to decide on the credi-
bility of the witn« sses and the weight of the
evidence, and to report on the truth or
falsehood, or the charges. Remember
again, that those who talk so much
to you about oaths and the superiority
of judges over a Parliamentary Committco,
lose .'i'.'ht of the ^i;':t ilst, while the Coiwti-

inr

'to-

ting, fo
the wit-
o accept
ha3 ap-
line the
le credi-
it of the
truth or
imember
( much
periority
mmitt'io,
Consti-

tntion provides a iiecurity that the juJcte
Bhall do fairly hiH judiuJAl work, in that
hv is sworn to do it honc-atly um<1 fearluHsly
withe t favour or partiality, tho«o
ge&tlomen w):o comprise thm Com-
iriission — two of whom are ju<1^«», and
the othtr an cxjudtjc are of courHc
unsworn in thiu invcHtigation, to which
their oaths of oliice do not in the
slightest degree apply; and therefore that
alleged Hecnrity of a judicial trihunal is not
given ainco the men who have to try,
though Home of them hapjicii to bo judges in
another cajiacity, are not in this one sworn
judgea. ( fl oar, hear, ) I do not attach too
nnich importance to that. Tlio Comi ttee
was not sworn, the new ( 'ommittee n y he
nnsworn; hut when you arc called upon to
contrast the position of the ('ommittee witli
the superiority of the judicial character and
the B.tcrcdnesH of tho judicial obligations, it
is well to remember that tiie safeguard wliich
the law declares to bo necessary injudicial
tribunals docs not extend to tliis particular
tribunal. (Hear, hear.) Again, this Com-
mission i.s not witliin tho reason of Royal
Commissions at all. Such Coiiuniasions arc
issued in order to inform tlie Cjovr.nment of
the day upon matters of which they are igno-
rant — to make en(juires into things of wiiich
the Government is nuawarc, in order that
they may be tho better able to determine
what the public interest requires in matters
of administration. That is tho legitimate
object of such Connnissions, but in this
matter who can say that the minds of Minis-
ters require to be informed ? (Hear, hear,
cheers, and laughter. ) It is the public mind
that requires to be informed by Ministers
thfmselves. They know ; We are igno-
rant. They destroy the machinery
we had provided in order that we
may inform ourselves, and they ap-
point a (Commission that they may find out
what they know already. (Laughter and
chv-crs.) Sir, this Commission is entirely
without warrant, cither of the common or
the statute law. The great master of Eng-
lish law, Sir Edward Coke, laid down that,
"a Commission is a delegation by warrant of
an Act of Parliament or of the common law,
v» hereby jurisdiction, power, or authority is
transferred to another court. All Commis-
sions of new invention are against law till
they have al'.owance by Act of Farliament."
(Cheers.) It is, in etlect, a Commission to
enquire into crimes and offences committed
by particular persons, and which, if Parlia-
ment chooses, can be dealt with by the
courts ; for the offence charged is a misde-
meanour, punishable by tho law. Now, sir,
commissions of this character have been ad-
judged illegal, because they interfere with
the ordinary course of justice, which is one
of the greatest securities of tho people. It
is your security and mine that there is a
general standing law providing the machinery
for bringing to trial all offenders against the
other laws of the land, and it is of the ut-
most consequence that there should be no
questioning of otrences cognizable by the
courttf; except under the authority of the
general law and by the tribunal constituted
for the trial of all such offences.
Kemember, what is done by Min-
istern to-day in respect of themselves

they may do tomorro-; in re«p«ot of
you. Ttememhcr that the (/'(mimission now
iKsned to enciuire into thesu charges against
Ministers is a warrant for the issuo
in future of Commissiona to vni|uire
into offences againHt tho law alleged
against yourKelves, atid tliat you may
be called, out (jf the ordinary courHe of law,
before a ( 'ourt of Incjuiry created by the ex-
ercise of the prerogative alone; tliat a rob«
bery of the mailB, for instance, moy bo
tried by a Commission instead of tiie rcgulur
courts of law. The security of the subject is,
therefore, grievously impaired by the issue of
tliis Commission, ihit it is said that tho re-
cent Act authorized its issue. Not so The
Act, in the lirat jilace, is framed not to an-
thori/o tho issue of a Commission, but to i)ro-
vidc that when the ( iovornmcnt, in the o or-
ciso of tho prerogative, chooses to issue a
Commission it may confer powers as to
Oaths on the '-'omiiilssioners. The Act
loaves the if.nio of tho Commission
to the prerogati\e. Again, tho general lan-
guage of the Act, can never be extended to
subvert fundamental laws and principles,
such as I have referred to — namely, that tho
accused shall not nominate tho tribunal; tliat
offences against the law, comi/ablo by the
courts, shall not be taken hold of by any
tribunal created out of the ordinary
course ; that Commissions are only
issued to inform Ministers on mat-
ters about which they require information,
and that Commissions arc not is-
sued to try or interfere with State offences
or questions raised in the House of Com-
mons. I have very shortly stated what, of
course, is a dry legal queation, but onewliich
the intelligent people of this country
must to some extent consider, inasmuch as
the rights of every man amongst us depend
upon the true apprehension of the princi-
ples, to which I have referred.
(Cheers.) Then there are certain

grave inconveniences connected with this
Commission. Witnesses are entitled to
refus") to answer criminating questions. The
Commons have the right, I believe, to com-
pel such answers. At any rate, provi-
sion may be made for that; but since by this
Act witnesses may refuse to say anything
that tends to criminate them, and since the
offcnce'charged is a criminal offence, it is
competent for the chief actors to decline be-
fore this Commission to answer many most
material questions. There are, indeed, many
other objections to which for want of time I
shall not refer. I am extremely averse to
discussing the personnel of the Com-
mission. It is always disagreeable to say
anything against those who are practically
precluded irom making a public answer, and
upon the whole I navo determined
at present to say only that I am
unable to acquiesce in the proposition that the
(Jovernment having undertaken the invidious
tii"k of naming their triers, have chosen men
in whose decision the country can or ought
to confide. (Applause.) Some other
day I may feel called on further to discuss
this topic; I abstain at present, only adding
that it was not in human nature that the
accused should, if guilty, act differently
in the choice of their judges. Upon the
whole, Sir, I believe that my fellow members

anil n.jself who signed that representation
to his p]xcellency, and announced our view-
that intense dissatisraotion would be created
if Parliament were prorogxied witho'^t
allowing it to provide machinery foi
the prosecution of tlie enquiry, must stand
by each other in defence of the Constitution.
(Cheers.) We must take the judgment of Par-
liameut and the country upon the ([uestion,
and therefore we must bide our time until
Parliament meets. An early meeting, you are
aw ire, i? promised. For that early meeting
the faith of the Crown is pledg-
ed., and at that meeting ^e shall
assert the principles wliich 1 have been ou-
<leavonring feebly to expound tb.is night.
(Applause.) We h 'I say what we should
I'ave said earlier li.ol the opportunity been
given us to criticise the proposal bef(ire the
act wa.^ committed, and we shall look
to the people to sustain us in fighting the
people's battle. (Loud and long-continued
cheering.) Am I heard, or shall my utter-
ances be read by any man who calls himself
Conservative ? Let me ask him to step to
the front with mc to conserve the Constitution,
to conserve those ancient principles of British
liberty which he can agree with me
are not newfangled, but are as venerable as
they arc just. Is it for anyone who calls him-
,self i Conservative to sanction, c* to do
ought but condemn tliis new and dai.gerous
course, sweeping away every well settled
principle upon which the Constitution rests ?
1 want to kno»v what is his function in this
countiy, it' it be aot to stand up for those
good things whii;h are established. /Applause).
Sometimes,! regret to say, it is deemed cause
enough to stand up for an evil thing because
it is established; and assuredly I hope to )'.ave
the support of many Conservatives
in tne maintenance of the established good.
(Cheers). You may be told we arc trifling ;
that although these jjrincipljs are unueniable
and these privileges uuquestionable, we are
not to scrutinize the means, because
the end is good. (Laughter.) You may
lie asked to adopt the degrading doctrine
that 'Hhe end. justifies the means."
Y''ou may be asked to say that be-
cause the object is investigation, which all
desire, therefore you should entirely overlook
the means. And yet these gentlemen who
tell you thac, with the same breath are pre-
pared to denounce my friend (Mr. Huutmg-
ton) because they suspect that in the attain-
ment of thatgood end, the truth, he has used
some unjustifiable means in getting e\'idence!
( Laughter. ) But it is said the matter is p
tritUng one. \\ as the few shillings cf ship-
money levied on John Hampden a trifle ?
It V70uld have been better these time servers
an i followers of expediency will tell you, for
him to have paid the twenty shillings than
to be vexed and harassed wiib suits, and

f'et upon that trifling issue were staked the
iberties of England. (Applause.) And
his name is held in everlast-
lasting remembrance by all worthy sons of
England, because he refused to pay that tri-
fling 8um, and pat fortune, fame, life itself to
the issue rather than desert what was his
country's canaa. (Loud applause.) Was it
a trifling matter to Sir John Eliot that he
should write a humble letter to the King,
»,aying, "I submit myself." Seemg that

Parliament had been disaolveci, that the e\'il
bad been done, that whate /er was wrong
and tyrannical had been accomplished, was
it a very important matter that he should
say, "I regret my error," and so escape for a
season, biding the good cime when Parlia-
ment should be called again ? Time servers
w. lid tell you .lir John Eliot ought to have
so acted. Thev would belittle the martyr's
fame ; they would lay his sufTeriugs should
fall upon his own stubborn head,
that sympaehy for him was entirely mis-
placed,' that there wai something utterly
absurd in the man not yielding for the time
and waiting until Parliament should redress
his • wrong. No, Sir ; no, >Sir ; these arc
doctrines we cannot ali'urd to hear broached
without denouncing thorn. We cannot per-
mit the most tritii'ng encroachment, upon
principles, the mvi(^lable pre.'iervati.ju of
which is our only security for liberty. Let
us agree that no object can justify our
l)arting with the least of the securities of
lib'jrty. (Cheers.) Let us agree that there is,
as all history teaches, danger, the greatest
dai.tj^er, in an evil precedent. I have seen
it in my swn brief experience. I never saw a
bad Act of Parliament passed but that it was
urged, and often successfully, as a precedent
for a very much worse act next session.
Such is the invariable result. Give the pre-
cedent, and it is always stretched and
stretched in the wrong direction. The trifle
of to-d .y becomes the monster of to-morrow.
The cloud no bigger than a man's hand in
the morning may become by night a deluge
sweeping away the veiy landmarks of freedom.
And let me say that you but ill repay the
sufferings which that noble man, a part of
whose story I have told, endured for you
and j'our children, as he tells in the letter
which I could not reaa, nor you hear with-
out emotion, vrhen you permit one jot or one
itttle of the sacr.a principles which
his blood has sanctified, which
his maityrdom has enshrined, and
which form, to-day the corner stone of
British liberty, to be impugned or infringed
by even the highest and mightiest with the
best and purest intentions, far, far less by in-
criminated Ministers, seeking through strata-
gem to escape from justice ! No situation ia
so secure but that the people's negligence
may make it dangerous. No situation is so
desperate but that the people's vigilance may
work out their salvation. Upon that vigi-
lance depends the preservation of your liber-
ties to-day. That vigilance I expect you to
exercise. Awake, then, to the magnitude of
the issue. The feeling of the people will be
the feeling of rarliament next session.
What you, M-hat the intelligent people of
Canada shUl have determined in the meet-
ings out of Parliament, is what Parliament
itself will shortly do in Parliament. Awake,
I Hay again, to the issue ! Let your voice and
weight be felt. By one stern lesson teach a
corrupt and audacious Ministry that they
miiy not, unpunished, trifle with your dearest
rights; and plant once more on foundations
broad and deep, on the foundations of public
virtue and constitutional liberty, the fair
fabric which your rulers are now shaking
to its base. (The honourable gentleman
resumed hia seat amidst thunders of ap-
plause, which were repeated several times. )