IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I »- m ■ 50 '""^^ m m 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 < 6" — ► Photograpnic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^^^s y MP< Ua CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproducdons / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Motes techniques et 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. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il iui a et6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-^tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduita. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normaie de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. r~~n Coloured covers/ i\/l Couvarture de couieur I I Covers damaged/ D n D Couverture endommagie Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou peiliculde □ Cove Letit D D itre de couverture manque Cover title missing/ Le titre de couve Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques 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/ Reiii avec d'autres documents r~p! Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion !• long da la marg? int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 4tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iti filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurees et/ou peiliculdes C2 D D Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^color^es, tacheties ou piquees □Pages detached/ Pages d^tachees 0Showthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies./ Qualiti inigale de I'imi pression nigale supple Comprend du materiel supplamentaire r~~1 Includes supplementary material/ Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure. etc.. cnt 6t6 film^es A nouveau de facon a obtenir la meill«ure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26k 30X J 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X Th* copy filmed h«r« has b««n raproducad thanks to tha ganerosity of: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University. L'sxemplaira filmi fut reproduit grAca i la gAnirositi do: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University. Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha baat quality poaaibia conaidaring tha condition and lagibiiity of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spacificationa. Laa Imagaa suivantaa ont At* raproduitas avac la plua grand soin. compta tanu da la condition at da la nattati da I'axamplaira film*, at an conformit* avac laa conditiona du contrat da fllma^a. Original copiaa in printad papar covars ara filmad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or iiluatratad impraa> sion. or tha back covar whan appropriate. All othar original coptas ara fiimad beginning on tha first pag« with a printad or iiluatratad impraa- sion. and ending on the laat paga with a printed or iliustrated impreeaion. The laat recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^(meaning "CON> TINUED"). or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever appiiaa. Laa axemplairea originaux dont la couverture an papier ect imprim*e sont film*s en commen^nt par le promier plat at an tarminant soit par la d«rni*ra page qui comporte une ampreinte d'impraeaion ou d'iilustration, soit par le second plat, seion le cas. Tous lee autraa sxemplairaa originaux sont fiim*s an commenpant par la pramidre page qui comporte una ampreinte dimpreasion ou d'llluatration at an tarminant par la darniira page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un dea symboiaa suivRnts apparaitra sur la demi*re image de cheque microfiche, seion le caa: le symboia — ^ signifie "A SUiVRE ', le symboie ▼ signifie "FIN". Mapa, platae. charts, etc., may be filmed at differont reduction ratioa. Thoae too large to be entirely includcKl in one expoeure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, aa many framea aa required. The following diagrama iiluatrata the method: l.ea cartaa. planchee. tableaux, etc.. pauvent *tra film*e * dea taux da reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seui clich*. ii est film* * partir de I'angle sup*rieur gauche, de gauche & droite. at de haut en bea. an prenant la nombra d'Imagea ndcaaaaira. Lea diagrammea suivants iilustrent la m*thode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 r\ ! I li^ I X ^ #' DEFENCE OP SIR CHARLES METCALF BY THE REV. EGERTOxN RYERSON. R13MARKABLE AND CELEBRATED 1POKZTZCA& XBTTZSRS ! In defence ot Sir Cbarlea Metcalfc-Loy- «lt]r-«nd BrttliH Principles I BT THESK LETTIRB •THETonOMTORiaFOUM ASSOCIATION (The Nest of the Canada Rebellion,) Was Entirely BLOWN UP! Ana the Elections in Canada (In 1844,) Secured for the CHii-ernmeut AOAIKIT COiriBIWED AKROOANCi: AMD TKCIACHEHr. mXRODUCTORy ADDRESS. By the Reverend Kgerton Ryergon. Fellow Christians akd Fellow SdBJBCTS of WEgTERN CawADA i Permit one, the study of whose life has bwn the welfare of his native country, to address [you a tew wo ds at this portentous crisis of our provincial history. By the event, of 1837, and the s&fety and welfare of your families, 1 warn you to pause before you tie yourself any closer to that knot ofacertainclass of lawyers, who, with the Wecoy of two or three honest stool pigeons, fi- K'^'2,'i'^^°'^"*° ^^f"'-" Association. U lu :J ^*^® * '''"''" warninsr .hortly flor the then called " Constitutional Reform |*.sociation was established in Toronto. In iea7, my warning: predictions were realized . '■"'"/'^^'nanr and the misery of thou- "I- What took place in 1837 was but a hnds. Breface of what may be witnessed in 1847. r Uie principles of the Association of 1844 are Ponstitutional: so were the principles of the lAisociation of 1834. r r •" "w iJu? P'^*^"' Association includes names of |U>e highest respectability; so did the former ■AMociation include the most respectable as peuas roost laarned names of that day. if i former Association, with the profession the health and stability of Colonial Govern- "'"'• rl'JSl* ''!Lr«'°ped itself in the convul- s.ons of 1837. The proseni Associntioa with, the avowal of constitutional principles and the assertion of sound waxirns, breathes in it« recent «' Address to the People of Csnada," the deadliest hatred against the Represent., tive Ox Sovereignty, and the darkeB^ insinua. tionsago mat all the exercises and ramiftoations of Imperial and Colonial Governmtnt— en- gendering and exasperating a spirit which may be neither under self control nor Isiiml control before 1847. *^ In 1834, I stated that 1 did not believo there was one out of one hundred of the mem- bers and dmciplea of that Association who contempkted any thing beyond what was lawful and constitutional, but there ware uc- tive and leavening elements in their proceed- ings, which lihe the use of spiritous liquors, or the indulgence of the sensual appetites would urge them to deeds and to projects at which they then shuddered. I say the same in regard to the supporters jof the present Assocdtion. But the spirit of the former Association was only a shade of the virva which circulates throughout several of the speeches and the recent " Address" of the present Association: Aiid if such a man, for example, as Mr. William Hohe BLAKx-Quecn'e Professor of Law in King's College-who, two yeara «Sro, spoke against accepting the Solicitor- Generalship of Canada West (should it b» ottered to him) because he would not be in a government with such men as Messrs. Sulli- van and Hinoks, can now not only orsramse . with such men, but hold up Sir Charles Met- calfe under the character of Warren Hasting., and exhibit the Kirfg and Government, and even People of Great Britain, in colours of the deepest depravity and barbarism : what pay not he and others like him be found do- ing against the British Sovereign's Represen- tative in Canada two years hence .> I therefore solemnly warn all who have tho •afety and best interests of themselves and fa- milies at heart, to >pause before they enlist under the banners of the «« Toronto Refarm Association." And I warn those who have been drawn into it, to disentangle themselves Dt>inrA thou ha.>nni« :_.._:_!. J .r .■ ■ ■ ' 3> ■ ^ 'f Bound principles, distiuid and breathP^Tu'l K r " .r" i"*° "' *° disentangle them«.l 1 f ; t-ii' ^ to«icalion, and an enlliu«iasm of political as well as religious Mil. LERiBM ; and there \» oh much danger of the world coininjf to tin end in 1844, as there is of the Responsible Govern- ment coming to an end unletit perpetualod by the Toronto ABSoointion. I have hitherto been a silent but deeply at- tentive spectator of passing events I accord- ed with the general ineasares of tlie late ad- ministration. I entertained for some mem- bers of it the esteem an ^ regard of personal friendship. Their resignation introduced •luestions which I had not investigated in the pages of history^ 1 viewed it with regret and concern. From their explicit aud earntst ex- planations 1 believed they were right. I felt that on the question placed by them before the House of Assembly, it came to the only con- stitutional decision. I believed Sir Charles Metcalfe had mistaken his way or been advi- sed into error; yet the peculiar character of his written statement, and the conscious inte- grity it evinc;d, excited a belief that some- thing still remained unexplained, and my cu- riosity was awakened. Statements of certain members of the Assembly, who voted with th majority and whom I saw after the prorogation satisfied me that all had not been told. 1 at length observed in Mr. Sullivan's explanato- ry speech— evidently written out by himself, and first published in the Montreal press, statements omitted by Mr. Baldwin, and equi- valent to what the Governor General had as- serted as the real ground of difference between him and his Council. 1 subsequently saw a more explicit statement to the same effect by Mr. Hpncks. I was convinced that the fund- amental question at issue between the Gover- nor General and his lato Councillors had not been brought before the House ; that he was a misrepresented and an injured man. But I supposed the ordinary means of public discus- sion would elicit the truth ; and I trusted that a mutual understanding and reconciliation would follow. I was at one time inclintd to suggest that remedy, and what appeared to me an honourable and feasible means of ap- plying it. I desired to remain on terms of amity with both parlies. The organization of the Toronto Association by one of the par- ties concerned, damped my hopes of such a consummation ; its subsequent proceedings have extinguidhed them ; its last address has put neutrality out of the question. While God gives me a heart to feel, a head to think, and a pen to write, 1 will not passively see honorable integrity murdered by grasping fac- tion, and spotless chdracter and generous humanity hewn down by party combination. I would not do so in 1838, when an attempt was made to degrade and proscribe and drive out of the country all naturalized subjects from the United States, and to siigmatise all reformers with the brand of rebellion, — as much as 1 have always disliked th-» peculiar institutions of the United StateK, andns much as 1 had then been recently maligned by many Reformers, — although there were then no |uif..j».g B.,^, J ,,,;•« oj.(! ifjj..../;. vv.'ji! raxtld fir dare Bjieak for them, and no Mr. Sullivan, who mould speak for them. I relieved the name of an injured James 8. Howard from the obloquy, that hung over it, and rescued the character and rights of exiled Bidwell from rutjilt'ss invasion, and the still further effurt to cover him with perpetual infamy by expel- ling him from the Law Society. In behalf of these classes and individuals, every mem- ber of tlie Toronto Association was as silent as the grave and as powerless as he was silent. 1 will not see— to say the least-ran equally noble character in the person of Sir Charles Metcalfe branded with all that is base and in- famous by a kindred combination. Hii ex. alted station does not strip him of the rights of justice; nor hi.s being the representative of royalty deprive him of the allegiance of hu- manity. I have surveyed every step of the ground involved. I have weighed every ar- gument and examined every fact. I know the country whom I address, I know the men yrith whom I have to do; and formiduble taough they be, I fear tliein not. Justice has more power over the human conscience than p?>rty combinations ; and one smooth pebble of truth possesses more virtue than a thousand Goliah spear? of political Philistinism. I was about entering upon the peaceful work— a work extensive and varied beyond the powers of the most untiring and vigorous intellect— a w ork down to this time almost entirely neglected— of devising and construct- iug (by the concurrence of the people, through their District Councils) a fabric of Provincial Common School Education— of endeavouring to stud the land with appropriate school- houses— of supplying them with appropriate books and teachers— of raising a wretched employment to an honourable profession— of giving uniformity, simplicity and efficiency to a general system of elementary educational instruction — of bringing appropriate books for the improvement of his profession within tiie reach of every schoolmaster, and increased facilities for the attainmBnt of his stipulated remuneration — of estaolishing a library in every district, and extending branches of it into every township — of striving to develope, by writing and discourses in towns, villages and neighbourhoods, the lat<8nt intellect, the moat precious golden wealth of the country— and of leaving no efl'ort unemployed within the limited range of my humble abilities, to make Western Canada what she is capable of being made, the brightest gem in the crown of her Britannic Majesty.' Such was the work about to be assigned to me ; and such was the work 1 was resolving, in humble de- pendence upon the di\ ine aid, to undertake > and no heart bounds more than mine with de- sire, and hope, and joy, at the prospect of see- ing, at no distant day, every child of my na- tive land in the school going way— and every intellect provided with the appropriate ele- ments of sustenance and enjoyment- and of witnessing one comprehensive and unique syslom of education, from the a. o. c of the child up to the matriculation of youth into the Provincial Univerc-itv-. which like the vaulted arch of heaven would exhibit au identity ot ,*,' chMftctor throughout, and preser.t an aspect of equal benignity to every sect and^ party upon the broad basis ol'our common Christi- snity. But I arrcit myself from fluch a work- leave it perhaps to other hands, and the glory of its accomplishment to deck another's brow, niid if need oe to resign every official situa- tion; and iinsolicited.unadviged by any human l)«ing— inwardly compelled by a conviction what is due to my sovereign, to my country, to a fellow-man, 1 take up the pen ofvAidica- lion, of reasoning, of warning and appeal, Rcainst criminations and proceedings and im- pending evils, which, ifthey be not checked and arrested, will accomplish more than the infamous Ostracism of an Jlristidcs, render every effort to improve and elevate Canada abortive and strew in wiue-spread desolation over the land the ruins of tha throne and lU Government. In this momentous matter, 1 ask you not to take my word for one particle of what may be asserted. My appeal throughout will be to unchallenged documents and mdisputab e published facts, which cannot be successfully denied by numbers or resisted by combina- tions. 1 know of old what party assassination of motives and character is. 1 have inet it. I have lived it down. I can do so again. 1 heed it not. Long before any one of the lo- ronto Association had a political existence, as a public man in the ranks of civil rights, 1 battled the cause of equal privileges, from the ri.rht ofabit.of ground to bury cur dead, to tlui full recognition of religious equa.ity ; and if need shall require, 1 trust in God I shall be found doing so again, when that Associa- tion, like its kindred predecessors, w'l" <•"«" Mackenzie townships auxiliaries, shall be mouldering under the funeral piles of the in- Burrections of which they have been the pri- mary cause. Of the need of such an advocacy there can nov be a moral possibility while Sir Charles Metcalfe hold the sceptre of the goyernment. He has spent his forty years of public lile m a colony, and has therefore all the habits and feelings of a colonist. He has spent all that time not in the atmosphere of an exclusive ecclesiastical hierarchy, but in a country where equal civil and religious rights are re- cofftiized, and has therefore all the habits and feelings of religious equality— and adaptation of exp^erience and views for the government of Canada not possessed by any other stales- man of his rank in the British Lmpira. Anc I am as satiafied as I am of my own o.Mslence that no one of the Toronto Association has a more fixed desire and determination to employ his utmost power to place the University ot Kine's College upon terms of equal advantage and looting for all Trinitarian churches than Sir Charles Metcalfe himself, bir ^-haf'^^ Metcalfe's spirit, like his chanties, is Inuited to no one sector party, but expansive as tlie wants and interests of humanity ; and if hk C iNNOT QOVEUN CaNAPA, i,Djn yijru/a h? held- Bnd thc HAlflfZR in which he mad* certain appointments, and ' •(I r«ierTed a certain bill ; which riewtand natt' ner of inakiriif «ppointinenu, are alleged lo bo *' inooniistent with the princ iplei which had been iiHroduced into the adininiitralion of «ffairi,"_ihat in, the principles of Rcsuuniibla Oovtrnment. Be it observed, furthdrmore, that it is not Whether Sir Charlo* Metcalfe a Coniicillor», are the most judicial and beneficial ; but are MS Exeelttney'seietos and arts cons'.itutional orMBconititiitional > If his »iew5 and «c/i are not unconstitutional, then i< ho an injured as well ai an innocent man, and as such deserves the ocqailtal and sympathy and support of all good men. If his views and acts are unoon- Btctuiional, then would he, if a Soveroi.rn, in- stead of the Representative of a SoYe'reirrn be dethroned, either by decapitation, as was' Charlei the First, or by forced abdication, as was James the Second ; but as it is he must be dethroned by removal. It is not then upon thtir own views and acts that the late Councillors have come before the country, but upon the views and acta of the Oozernor Central. They have cor,.? forth in the two-fold capacity of accusers and witnes- ses against the Representotive of their Sover- V^"Ai. '^}^^y allege, that in their own persons, air Charles Metcalfe has both by avowals and acts, violated the established constitution of the people of Canada, and they claim protec- tion i^nd support from the people in defenee of their invaded rights and privilojfes. The Uovernor-General pleads not guilty on AorA counts, and (to use his own words, in reply to the late Councillors,) " protests against its being supposed that he is practically adverse to the working of the system of Respon.sible Ooyernment which has been established— which he has hitherto pursued without d«\ria- tion, and to which it is fully his intention to adhere. In denying the charges preferred against him.His Excellency allege.* that which he resisted was unconstitutional— that he is the protector rather than the invader of the constitutional rights and privileges of the people of Canada. * Suci. are the allegations on which the Ca- radian public are culled upon to decide ; and It IS to the testimony by which th jse allega- tions are sustained, that I invite the attenuon ofthe reader in the following paaes. Asa man he is bound to do to another as ho would be dor<> bv in similar circumstances. As a juror It IS Ins duty, whether sworn or not, to render a verdict according lo evidence, with- out "fear, favour, or affection." This is all 1 ask in ihe present case, and this I am per- suaded will not be refused. In this investigalion neither the reader nor the writer has any thing to do with the motives ot merits of the pailiea concerned; but with U\ejacts at issue between them. We are not fathoming motives, or comparing characters, but weighing -evidence and drawing conclu- sions. I am hostile fo neither party ; I im- puga the motives of neither parlv ; but I have a duty to discharge to my Sovereign and my country. A living American writer bail rnrnarUoH jiH7l,__ -° •■ — s-rsvo, '- Tj n;ju a« jilca is aavauced, wo do not stop to inquire the intention of him who propound! it, but we regard the idea it- sell intrinsically, and d'^tormine its character accordinjfly, irrespective of the assertions or proteKtations of its author." And it ia »„ equally just observation of an Knglishperiod- cal writer, that "good intentions are nojmti hcation for indiscreet conduct, which may bring scandal on a great cause, and which must inevitably place a sharp weapon in hos- tile hands." Nor is the prevalence ofthe impressions in favour or against one party or the other, to be taken into account. First and even general impressions are not always correct. After ihe insurrection of Id;i7, unfavourable impressions were made fir and wide against the late Post, master of Toronto and Mr. iJidwell. But subsequent investigations corrected those im- pressions. The former has been appointed to oftice ; and Sir F. Head's proceedings against the latter has been cancelled by Sir C. Met- calfe. If impressions have not been made'ar and wide to the disadvantage ofthe Governor General, it is a most extraordinary phenome- non. His accusers, respectable in standing and considerable in number, made their state- ments in the Assembly, without any one pre- sent authorised or qualified to correct or reply to them; they have held public meetings torinod organizations, made and published and circulated speeches to the extent of not less than several hnndred pages, and all to the same effect; while the very position of His KxceJlency precludes him from the power or the privilege of defence, except through his advisers in Parliament, all he can do, is, as he has done in his replies to addresses, to deny the charges, reiterate the assertion of his views and complain ofthe injustice done him. Nor do I in this publication pretend to write a defence of His Excellency— though I do .irofess to defend him, as far as an examina- tion ofthe evidence adduced against him will authorise me to ao so. II is defence, properly speaking, must be left to other hands, and for another place. In the following pages 1 propose to shew— 1. That the proceedinffs of the late Coun- sellors in their resignation, and against Sir C. Metcalfe, ure informal in every respect. 2. That they have failed to establish the allegations which they have made against His Excellency. ;r That the statements of His Excellency are fully sustained by the testimony of his accusers and adversaries, especially that of Messrs. Sullivan, Hincks, Boultonand Brown — Editor of the G/o6e newspaper. 4. That the question at issue between the late Counsellors and Sir C. Metcalfe, accord- to the statement of several of themselves and others on different occasions, is not that which Mr. Baldwin stated to the House of Assembly and on which the vote of the Assembly was predicated. 5. That Sir Charles Metcalfe's statements of his views of Responsible Government in- volve all that is contained iu the Resolutions of* '.e House of Assembly, September 3, 1841, ami that the criticiimi of SUntrn. Baldwin, llinck., Brown, on certaino( hii Kxcollcncy'H repliei tie unfair, and unjust. re repudiated, and which must prove injurious to the intellectual and moral improvement, the happiness and best interests of the people of Canada. 8. That the proceedings of several lato Counsellor!', since the prorogation, have been unprecedented— enervating, if not destruc- tive of legal government— calculated, Ihoutrh not mtended, to weaken the connection b'e- tween Canada and Gre-.t Britain. 9. That in at least seven different instances have the late Counsellors departed from Brit- ish constitutional usage— that the prenent course of hostility against the Governor Gen- eral and her Majesty's government, by some of them, must be attended with injurious if not fatal consequences— that it is the duty and the interest of the peopl/of Canada to mumtain those views which they have always professed, and which Sir Charles Metcalfe has most explicitly and fully avowed. NUMBER ir. TnK first proposition that I propose to es- tablish in defence of Sir Charles Melcalfe is, that thr. piucetdings of the late Conncillorg, in their resignations, and airainst hit Excellency, are informal, or technicallij uneonslitutional iM enerij respect. The importance of adhering to established forms and usages, (however arbitrary in tliem- selves) will be readily appreciated by every jurist and man of experience in civil or eccle- siastical courts. It will be equally appreciated in affairs of state by every man acquainted with parliamentary usages, though it may not h» so strongly felt by one who has little know- ledge of the science of government and legis- lation. In such a proceeding us that of the resignation of Ministers, and their accounta- bihty to Parliament, an adherence to establish- ed usage is of the very last importance, as it IS an essential security of the crowns of Sove- reigns, and involves the characters of Kings and statesmen, and the peace of nations.— The responsibility of ministers for executive acts IS peculiar to the British constitution ; and the correctness of procedure in case of their resignation must, therefore, be determin- ed by British practice. Had that practice been observed in the late resignations, the perplexity in which the matters of difference are now involved, would have been prevent- ed, and the foundation of our government would not have been shaken. That every reader may fully understand this question, let It be observed that the power of the Cabinet Council, as distinct from that of the Sovereign, is uukuowu in the Biilisli cou- ■titution, which coniistg cf King, Lordt, and Commons only— that the Sovoreitfn, not po»- ■esiing the inherent attribute of ubiquity, acts through instruments, the chief of whom, con- stituting a cabinet, are calKid ninisters and aro responsible to Parliament for the acts and measures of the Executive. And they are justly responsible ; because*they are incu:n- bente of office hy their own consmt, and are consenting parlies at least to the acts and measures in the execution or adoption of which they are viiuntary instruments or advisors. «« It is true," says IJe Lolme, •' the King cannot bo arraigned before Judges ; be- cause if. there were any that could pass sen- tence on him, it must be they, and not he, that must finally possess the Executive power, but on the other hand, the King cannot act without ministers ; it is therefore thosa minie- '"*— that IS, those indispensable instrumrnte, that the Commons attack. If, for example, the public money has been employed in a manner contrary to the declared intention of those who granted it, an impeachment may l,e brought against those who have the management of it. If any abuse of power is committed, or in general anything done contrary to the public weal, they prosecute those who have been either the instruments or the adviser* of the measure."* " It was upon these principles," (adds Do Lolme, in a note,) " that the commons, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, impeach- ed the earl of Orford, who had advised the Treaty of Partition, and the Lord Chancellor Somers, who had affixed the great seal to it." By referring either to SmoUet's Hirto-y of England, or to Burnet's Historif of his oien Times for 180\, the reader will find that as Orford did not advise the treaty at all, but eonscnled to certain parts of ii-that Chancel- lor Somers, of the Privy Council, had advised against it, but as Chancellor he had obeyed the royal command in affixing the great seal to it. Yet the Commons held both Orford and Somers, responsible, and declared that "by advising His Majesty to conclude the Treaty of Partition, whereby large territories of the Spanish Monarchy were delivered up to France, they were guilty of,« high crime and misdemeanor." Now, though in point of fact, neither Orford nor Somers knew anything of the Treaty until after it had been determined on by the King— though both of them objected to it as a whole— yet they were held responsible even as advisers, upon the constitutional evidence that they both rerr.ained in office, and one of them affixed the great seal to a blank, which was afterwards filled up by others at the com- mand of the King, with the articles of the Par- tition Treaty. And such has been the doc- trine of ministerial responsibility in England from that time till this. It will be seen in this case, that the Com- mons did not enquire or care (and has not done so for ISC years) whether the King de- termined upon the measure before or after * Constitution of England, cliap. viii, pp 81, 6a— Hughes' JiJitioa. • n > ttking advice of his ministers ; whether th«y had or had not an opportunity of tendering him advice before he decided on the measure ; with the conduct of the King, or his mode of intercourse witli his inintsters, the Commons had uotliing to do; it was enough that the ministers assented to an act or measure by vo- luntarily remaining in office. George the third would scarcely allow of any ministerial interference with his exercise of ecclesiastical patronage — especially the appointments of Bishops— though ministers remaining in of- fice were responsible. George the fourth made two military appointments while the Duke of Wellington was Cabinet Minister and at the head of that department, and of which the Duke know nothing until he saw them announced in the papers. Yet neither the Duke nor Mr. Pitt ever came down to the Lcds of Commons with an impeachment against his Sovereigi; that he entertained views which led to acts "inconsistent with the prinnple whioh had been introduced into the administration of afTairs" since IGSS ; and therefore that the Parlicment must either sa- crifice that priiiciple or support them. Nei- ther house of Parliament would have suffered Buch an impeachment of the Sovereign to be made within its walls ; and such a manoeuvre on the part of any minister to excite sympa- thy and strengthen himself, by damaging hia Sovereign, who might not take or ask his ar(- Tice, would cauie him to be spurned from e- very hustings in England, whatever might be his merits in other respects. But more on this subject hereaft r. Having stated the responsibility of ministers, let us now consider the grounds of their re- signation, and mode of justification before Parliament. They may resign on various grounds. For example, they may fall in a minority in one or both houses of Parliament ! then the ground of their resignation can be ex- plained without divulging any secret. Some- times one or more ministers may resign on account of a difference with their colleagues ; then almost any mode of explanation may be safe, as both parties are in the same house, and on the same footing, and are equally re- sponsible for their statements and opini'jns. Again, ministers may resign because of a dif- ference with their Sovereign. That differ- ence may be evinced by the Sovereign's disre- garding their advice, either by rejecting it or by deciding without it. This ground of re- ■ignation involves matters of more delicacy than either of the former; and, accordingly, British usuage requires the usaofmore form and precaution in explaining it. Jbivery Minister is sworn to secrecy, except in as far as he may be released by his Sover- eign. Any minisier who would divulge the councils of his Sovereign without permission, would be liable to prosecutioi for perjury. — One of the many reasons for this obligation to ■ecrecy, is, the security of reputation, if not the very Crowr., of the Sovereign. If in- censed or disappointed ministers could tell what they please about the opinions and acta of their sovereign, they might then expect such haired against him as would lead to his dethronement; or, if a Representative of a Sovereign, to his removal, and thereby inflict upon his character indellible disgrace and in- famy. The Sovereign's character, as well as his Crown, should therefore le sacred. An oath is essential l^ ais safety, especially in so many hands. No Minisier, thea, can lawfully divulge any thing that has transpired in the councils of his Sovereign, without the permission ot the Crown. Should the Crown refuse to per- mit a resigning minister to explain the grounds of his resignation, then is that minister pre- sumed to be blameless upon the fundamental maxim of British jurisprudence, that every man is judged innocent until he is proved guilty. The Crown's refusal, therefore, to a retiring minister of the privilege of explaining the cause or causes of his withdrawal from the government, would be tantamount to ajustifi- cationofhim, and wonld be so received by Parliament, and if with such a permission, a minister should refuse to answer for his con- duct, parliamentary judgement would go a- gainiit him by default. Why, then, it may be asked, cannot a min ister state his case without the permission of the Crown.' || answer, not only on account of the safety of the Crown, but in order that Parliament may form ajudgement on the case, the nature of which is such from the facts in- volved in it being secret, that no witness can be admitted or produced on either side. Every case of ministerial resignation, when brought before Parliament, must therefore be, what in common courts of law is called "a case of facts" — that is, a case on the facts of which the litigant or differing parlies admit — draw- ing them up and staling them in order by mu- tual consent — leaving the court to prononnce judgement in the case according to the facts thus mutually agreed upon. When a minister resigns the ofHcial connex- ion which had existed between him and his Sovereign, it is dissolved by mutual consent, and the cause or causes of it to be stated by the same consent. As the Crown is not re- sponsible, and as the minister is responsible, the latter must appear in the position or capa- city o{ defendant, answering for his conduct in the shape of what i;i called explanation — that explanation consisting of facts agreed up- on between his Sovereign and himself, and stated by him, under the sanction of his So- vereign — leaving the high court of Parliament to judge of hia condnct according to facts thus stated. These essential preliminary remarks bring us to the proceedings of Sir Charles Met- calfe's late Councillors in their parliamentary explanations of the causes of their resigna- tion. That I may do them tho fullest justice, and give them every possible advantage, I will examine the case on the broadest grounds — say nothing about the real or alleged dif- fditiueo about Kespotitiiuie uoverniricn: in s, colony and in a sovereign state ; but assume Sir Charles Metcalfe to be Sovereign of the British Empire, and Mr. Baldwin and Mr. tuld lead to his esentative of a i thereby inflict lisgracs and in- .cter, as well as e Bucred. An egpeciallj in so ffully divulge n tha councils I permission ot n refuse to per- ain the grounds t minister pre- iie fundamental ice, that every I he ia proved therefore, to a re of explaining Irawal from ♦.ho >unt to ajustifi- so received by I permission, a er for his con- it would go a- , cannot a min permission of ly on account t in order that ;nt on the case, m the facts in- 10 witness can erside. Every when brought ore be, what in !d "a casa of facts of which admit — draw- n order by mu- . to prononnce g to the facts ifHcial connex- 1 him and his utnal consent, ) be stated by wn is not re- s responsible^ sition or capa- r his condact explanation — cts agreed up- t himself, and on of his So* ofParliament g to facts tliua smarks bring Charles Met- parliamentary iheir resigna- ullest justice, advantage, I adest grounds r a'.leged dif- t'Tniric-ni in s ; but assume "reign of the vin and Mr. Lafontaine to be Sir Robert I'eel and the Duke of Wellington, and the Canadian Le- gislature to be the British Parliament. They are now British Ministers in a Urilish Parlia- ment — and their prooeedings must be judged acoording to liie law of British ministerial and piirliamentary jiractlcc s-iiire the revolution of ](i""8. Juijyed by that law, I shall sliow that tliyy liavec()iinnil.teil errors whioli involve not (jiily the violation of Iho principles of Res- lionsible Governinent, but, if successful, the pulitical ruin of on(! of the noblest characters 111 tlie Billisli Ein|)irG. Did, tlicn, ruir Cmadian Sir Robert Pool and Duke ot Wi'llinijtoii come before I'arlia- mcnt with wiiat lias Jieen above definrd to bo a case or cases of facts, and with the myul ])crmission to state those facts .' If so, where is the proof? The answer is their assertion. But no man, or company of men, can be wit- nesses in their own case. Their assertion, thrreCore, is no proof ; and the roiteriition of it a million times leaves it assertion still — does not transmit it into proof. In all cases of dis- pute or difference, the plaintiffand defendant, whether I hey respectively ocnsist of one or many individuals, are assumed to be on nti equal footing. Their mutual statements are equal, and therefore balance each other — amount to nothing — are not tftken into the account. It will be admitted thattiie Crown ia at least equal to its advi&ers. Where then is the proof that they had the Crown's |)er- mission to make those allegations ? Without enumeiating particulars, 1 will notice, as an example, two of those cxjilunulory allegations. The lale Counsellors, assert that the Crown holds views incompatible with the constitu- tion, as established by the resolution of Sep- tember, 1841, and that in its acts, it has de- viated from liiat constitution, as thus estab- lished. The Crown protests against the sentiments and acts thus ascribed to it. As- suming then for the moment, contrary to all precedent, that the Crown, instead of be- ing incapable of dninc.' wrun:^, is capable of violating the estublished constitution, both theoretically and pracli'ally, and ca.j le ar- raigned for it before a Canadian Legislature, where ia the /;j-0(^ of its niiili? If a Iiorse- ttiief or murderer is entitled to be ■idjui!;^ed innocent until he is proved guilty, is not iho Crown entitled to at least an equal privilege .' Would a jury convict an alle!.fed thii'f or nuir- derer upon the assertion of the CVomh, who is the prosecutor in .such eases? And is the Crown to be convicted upon the assertion of its prosecutJTS. Ai.d would the Crown give permis-iion to accuse itself— and to accuse itself of opinions and acts against which it protests ? And where is tho'r permission to state those facts .' But this is only the commencement of what i have to say on this e.vtraordinary bu- sim'ss. To make tliu rase more [ilain, and perfectly intel!ii;i!)le to every reader, 1 >vill selet:t Hriti.-.h. nreceiient — the verv last wllicli has occurred in Knglaud, of a minister resign- ing on account ot ditference of opinion with his suvai'ign. 1 allude tu the resignation cf Sir Robert Peel in 1S.33, (for Lord John Rus- sel and his colleagues resigned in 1841 on ao* count of their differenee witii a parliamenta- ry majority, and not on accountof any differ- ence between them and their Sovereign. > And here, to remove every obscurity front the question, I beg to make a preliminary re* mark on the mode of official conimunication letweon tlie Crowr, and its servants, or be- tween [lublic ofiiiers and individuals. In all sueh cases — in all cnligiilened governments — no coinniuiiiciilinn is considered oflicial w hich is not in icriiing. Cabinet consulta- tions, ordinarily, may be verbal, for the Cabi- net is a bo('y not known in law. It is with the acts of the Government, and not wiihthri modes of intercourse among its members, that the Parliament has to do. And of those acts, v.ritteri documents are the only legitimate proof. Jf the reader, for example, were to have even interviews with the Sovereign or his ministers, on any subject, all this would bo only preparatory and preliminary to official correspondence and action. It would be ne- cessary for him to commit the material parts of his verbal statoujents fo writing, and get a written answer ; and nothing more than what was witten would ever be recognised as ofK- cial or binding. If private conversations were admitted as official, endless misunderstand- ings and confusion would ensue. When Lord Ashburton came to America to negotiate on the boundary question, his Lordship and Mr. Webster had several day's private conver- sations, and learned each other's views, and agreed on every material point, before they I'ven commenced their official correspondence on the subject. Their private conversations were for tiiemselves alone ; their written cor- rt'spondence was for the public as well as themselves. The conversation of official men are otten reported through the press, and are sometitiu's referred to in official correspon- dence ; but tliey are of no authority any fur- ther than the parties to wlicm they are attri- buted choose to admit. This mode of olliciul intercourse is the dic- tate uf prudence as well as usage, and espe* cially in any matter wliicli may by possibility become liie sut>jecl of public discussion and otTicial proceeding. How then did Sir Robert Peel proceed on a similar fccasion, only one more simple, and thereforo requiring less precision and expli- citness ? He does nut ask his Sovereign to come to any understanding with him as to whether she .vould in lulure make or "not mako apiiointm 'iits prejudicial to his in- lluence" — he leaves each case to stand upon its own merits and to be decided as it might occur ; but he advises Her Majesty to remove certain ladies of her bedchamber. She decli- nes, and asserts her right to rciain them — a rorlit which Sir Roiiert does not question. — Ho then rcsppctfully declines accepting a seat ill her Majesty's councils. Hut does i.B litop there ? No. British practice and common sense required him to do much more. He then reduced his verbal advicy to writing, with the reasons for it, and tranBmitted the whole to tier Majesty, so that ehe might examine and weigh every word and « reaion, and that there might be no miscon- ception on any point, though the whole case was a very simple one" Then Her Majesty replies in writing, as follows : " Buchinskam Palace, May 10, 183D. " The Queen having considered the propo- sal made to her yesterday by Sir Robert Peel, to remove the ladies of her bed-chairiber, can- not consent to adopt a course which she con- ceives to be contrary to usage, and which is repugnant to her feelings." Sir Robert Peel then applied in writing for permissioh to explain his conduct to Parlia- ment. Lord Melbourne wa.s commanded by Her Majesty to convey her compliance with Sir Robert's request. His Lordship wrote a note to Sir Robert to that effect. Here then was the whole negotiation between Her Ma jesty and Sir Robert Peel in wrilinjr — consist- ing of four papers — all of which were read in the parliamentary explanation, stating Sir Robert's proposal and the reasons for it on the one side, and Her Majesty's refusal and the two reasons for it on the other, and the per- mission of Her Majesty to have the whole laid before Parliament. And be it observed, that Sir Robert communicated his Sovereign's sentiments in her own words, by reading her own note. And after Sir Robert Peef had ttompleted his explanation. Lord John Russell, who had been taken back into Her Majesty's Counsels, concluded his reply by saying, tliat he " had not the slightest ground to complain of the statement made by Sir Robert Peel." Such then is the British practice of Res- ponsible Government — a practice which the late Countellors have said was the uUimatuni of their demand for Canada. Have they adhered to it ? Have they respected it in any one particular ,' They ha 1 a long personal interview with his Excellency the Governor General on Friday, in which they stated their views and heard His Excellency's objections. They proposed another interview the following day, on the sdme subject. Now would it not have been not only according to British usage, but courteous and fair towards His Excellency for them, in the meantime, to have committed to paper their remonstrances and proposals, and transmitted them to him, so that he might not r..isunderstund any one of the various points at issue— that he might weigh them, and make up his judgment de- liberately upon them ? Apart from usage, — apart from his position as the represcntatrve of loyalty, was it giving His Excellency any Uiore than fair play for them to have done so ? They then had a second long interview with His Excellency on Saturday, in which all the points of difference wera again discussed at great length, and which concluded with a determination on their part to resign. Now, would it have been anything more than re- spectable, or decent, or fair, for them to have iS on Saturday evening v,-hat they ougiil have done on Friday evening— to have to embodied in writing the substance of what they wished His £«ellencjr to understand us the representations and proposals whrch ihet had made in the long conversations which they had had with him, and on which they had desired his decision .'' But neglecting again to perform this act of courtesy and jus- tice towards His Excellency on Saturday evening, ought they not, in common fair- ness, when they resolved to tender their resignations on Sunday, to have accompanied these resignations with a fall and explicit statement of the grounds of them, and which they desired permission to state to Parliament ? Why throughout the whole of this protracted and extraordinary ministerial negotiation, did they not furnish the crown with a single scratch of a pen, that would tangibly, and permanently, and truly, indi- cate their views and intentions .' For such a proceeding they can plead neither British usage nor common justice — though parly mancEUvering may be pleaded for it, as I will hereafter prove. Should it be alleged that they have had lit- tle or no experience of Bri.ish practice ahd usage in such cases, I admit the plea. 1 ad- mit that public men in Canada ar :• entitled to indulgence in their mode of working the new system. 1 admit that the late Councillors ap- pear to disadvantage when compared with Sir Charles Metcalfe, in affairs of Govern- ment;— that they have not, like him, been born and educated under the British system of Responsible Government ; — that they have not, li^e him, mingled with British statesmen of all shades for nearly half a century ; that they have not, like him, worked different systems of colonial government in both hem- ispheres ; and that their acts are, therefore, entitled to an indulgent interpretation. But do they ask it .' Will they allow it.' Nay, they ask, they demand approbation: they claim support and reward. Tiiey even refuse to come before the country upon the merits of their poticij—lhey claim exclusive identity with the principle of Responsible Govern- ment itself, the same as some parties claim exclusive identity with loyalty, and apostoli- city ; they declare that Responsible Govern- ment has been assailed aud stabbed in their persons, and that that system lives or dii-s with their victory or defeat; for as Mr. Bald- win expressed it at a public dinner in Toron to, December 28, 1843, » he well knew that no victory could be obtained, on the present occasion, over himse/f and his late collea- gues, as public men, that would not in effect, both by friends and enemies, be treated as a victory over the principle of Responsible Gov- ernment itself." Now, who can believe this.!" Who does not know that whatever persons may be in the councils of the Crown, the principle of Re- sponsible Government must and will be acted upon? It requires but little reflection and foresight to perceive, that whatever passions Mr. Baldwin and his colleagues may lash into a teiupesl iur a moment, the illusive and i'u- bulous pretensions on which they have made war upon the Ciown, in the person of Sir Charles Metcalfe, will and must issue itt their tvm confusion, if not in the misFortuno of in- cautious hundreds exasperateel by them, p,s in the dismal transactions of 1837 and 1838. — But of the obvious and le^ritimate conao- quencea of the present proceedings, I will treat hereafter. As thtj late Councillors, ! icn, take their stand upon the British practice of Responsi- ble Government, why have they disregarded it in every preliminary step of their resigna- tion and espliination ? As one erroneous step, if unretracted, leads to a course of error, «o the late Councillors, commencing wrong, have fallen into a succession of errors, each ensuing one more serious than its predeces- sor. I hare shown that they provided not the necessary materials ; that they took not the necessary measures to prepare a " a case of facts" for their explanation ; that their mode of proceeding was the reverse, in every res- pect, of tiie proceeding of Sir Robert Peel in a much more simple case of " antagonism," with his Sovereign. 1 will now proceed to prove that tiieir explanation was unauthoriz ed in every respect, and is also fraught with dangerous consequences. (a the course of his explanation (Nov. 29,) Mr. Baldwin stated in reply to Mr. Viger, that " he had the permission of his Excellen- cy to make the explanation which he offered to the House, mid if he had not, he should have come down to the House and told them that he had been refused, and called upon them to construe everything in his favor and nothing against him." That Mr. Baldwin was sincere in making this assertion, I nave not a shadow of doubt. But the very liabili- ty of his statement to be challenged (as it was by Mr. Viger,) shows the culpable impro- priety of his not having reduced to writing the whole of the negotiation with his Excel- lency. The present question, however, is not what Mr. Baldwin thought, but what is the /act ? Mr. Baldwin's verbal application, and the Governor General's verbal reply, must of course been intended, and ought to be inter- preted, in the ministerial or official sense of such communications — as preliminary to their being committed to writing. That such was his Excellency's understanding, is obvious from the fact, that he directed the substance of the intended explanation to be laid before him in writing. VV.iy did he require this, if t were not tiiat he might express his appro- val or disapproval of it .' Upon any other supposition, his Excellency might, with equal propriety, have demanded beforehand the sub- stancA of any speech or speeches that Mr. Baldwin and hia colleagues intended to de- liver on any subject. The written explana- tion which they laid before his Excellency was, of course, the intended "case or cases of facts." Did his Excellency consent to it ? Nay, he more than prohibits it — to use his own words, «• the Governor General protc i. against THE explanation which those gci tlcmen propose to offer to Parliament," &c. Now, Mr. Baldwia gave ia bis ipeech the substance, almost verb-tim, of the explana- tion which he and his colleagues had laid be- fore his Excellency . Mr. B. says he had been authorised by his Excellency to make that explanation ; his Excellency protests against that explanation ; and according to Mr.Hincks, his Excellency's protest had been received at least an hour before Mr. Baldwin made ex- planatory speech. To make the case, if possible, more plain, I will suppose that you, Mr. Reader, are a Go- vernor of a Town, or City, or Province, and that I come to you as the representative of a portion of the people whom you govern, to procure your assent to measures relating to the roads, schools, or churches ; that you do not accede to any of the proposals or applica- tions laid before you ; that I request your per- mission to explain to my constituents what has taken place between us on these subjects ; that you say yes, but desire me to furnish you in writing with the substance of what I in- tend to state in explanation to my constitu- ents; that I do so ; that you, on readir.g it, perceeve that 1 have given a very different version of several points from what you think is correct ; that 1 attribute sentiments and acts to you which 1 declare to be inconsistent with the rights and interests of my constitu- ents ; and that I owit what you conceive to be the very grounds of dissent from several requests made to you; that you forthwith send me a written protest against my intend- ed explanation, generally, and point out seve- ral particulars which you think are essential- ly inaccurate ; yet I with your protest and statemtnt in my pocket, give that identical explanation against which you protest to ray constituents and then inform them, in con- clusion, that I have your authority for the ex- planation which 1 had made— would you, Mr. Reader, say that I had treated you justly ? — that my statement was authorized by you .'' — that it was true ? The exact parallel bet weea this imaginary case and the real case of tha Governor General and his late Councillors, can be readily perceived by every reader. I infer therefore that the explanation given by the late Councillors, was, both technically and morally, unauthorized, and was therefore unparliameplary and unconstitutional. "The only proof that Mr. Baldwin has ever appealed to that he had authority to make his explanation, is this " protest" of his Excel- lency. How far this proves his authority the reader can judge. But in this reference Mr. Baldwin blinks the real question, which ia not whether his Excellency intended that Mr. B. should give an explanation, (this his Ex- cellency desired as much as hia late Coun- cillors,) but whether he authorized the ex- planation which Mr. Baldwin gave. Against that his Excellency protests; and therefore he could not have authorised it. Mr. Hincks, in his reply to Mr. Viger'a pamphlet, argues in the following worda and in italics : " It is true that no diaclosurea can be made without permiaaion ; but whenever a difference arises between the head of the Gor vernmeat and hia miniaters, parhiuneut and the public have a riglit to iho ruITost informa- tion. Whnt '\f Mie object of making pxplaiii- tions at all ? i hat the puhlio iii;iv1)ti able to judgo whetlicr the retiring ininislrv liavo act- ed right or wronir. They are tlie parties up- on trial ; an:i they Imvo a rijrlit to e\;it>e:t per- mission III ulale eccrijthivir ntcnsdri/ 'for t/irir covipltlcjuslljlauiuii. It'wonl.l ho an uiipre- cedenteJ as it would bu usflcss for tlie sover- eign or his roprosciitativo to limit Ilia crpla- nations of Minister^', because any attempt to do so would bo invariably mot, as Mr, Uald. win declared in the House he would hdve n:et it, viz., ' by a refusal to say one word until the required permission should bt- irrauted.' " Now, with this reusonina' f entirely a^ripe as far as it (roes ; 1 ut it omil.t the very priiril i at issue. Wo are ;iot enquiring what ouoht, to be in the abstract, but what was {.hafacVm the case .' To prove wiiat ()«;-•/;< tn ),c and what iras, are two differ.iU ihings. It is with facts, not with C7-pr,liritri/, lliat we have to do. This fallacy of shifting the ground argues badly for the cause in vvhich a is employed. But there is still anollier fallncy n thi.s at- tempt at reasoning— anotiier bh'il'tinir of the ground— another sfiir/.-inir of the (|uestion. ! t is not whether niinisters'ou the nn- tenableness of tiie proceeding of the late Councillors. I am now enquTring— D; Crown even a consenting to their " case of fints"— their parlinnienlary exphination— can they al- lege that they n'lrarded its prerogative much in any thing else ? ^ If tliey claimed to use the authority of the Crown as a " tool" to sanction a party as well as an rxparte explanation, can they prove that they did not seek to u^e it as a " tool" for the promotion of other party purposes .' If ihey practically asserted their right to do as they pleased in regard to their " "explan.i- tion," regardless of the protest of the Crown, is it improbable that they asserted the right of equal discretion in regard to all other acts, whether the Oown consented or protested ^ If they jiractically asserted the right to deal With the character of the Crown asUiey plea- sed— to attribute to it what sentinients or acts they i)leased in the teeth of its own solemn protests— is it unlikely they sought to dispose of the patrovugc of the Cro'wn .' The greater includes ti.o le.'ss- and wiio will not say that character is greater than patronage.-' I state these questions not as facts but aa legitimate inferences, and aa subjects for se- rious rellectiou. The facts at which thty point will be hereafter examined. And what are the conscijaences involved in such a precedent and j>rocoedings .•' Does it not remove from the Crown tlfe only safe- guard of its jionor, and strip it of the last wea- pon for the defence of its character.' Sup- pose the Governor to bo the reader, and the reader to be one of an association of 7 or 8 employed in deliberatio.T on public matters ; that differences arose, and the reader stood alone; that a dissolution of their association .n-.r-wed; tiiat the other 7 siiouid didW up a statement for publication of those differen- ces, and in it ascribe various execrable sen- timents and acto to the reader, which h» Chancellor So- wholly disclaimed; yet they persist and pub- lish, and reiterate. The reader might thun be beaten by numbers, and party exer'.ions ; bat would nich a proceeuinjr bo just before God, or before man? In thiU case an indi- vidual would be ruined; but =n the present case, more tlian the life of a Covernor— liig character— is involved. If hi) cntifuiential advisers c.ni become {ua accusers — ajjaiiist hi» own solt-Min protests — llieu is the oatii of secrecy a mockery, and (lie prero^rative a bau- ble ; then in point of fact (and no forms of phraseulnyy can make it oilu'rwi-se) Is the Go. vernor Eubonlinate, and the Council .supreme, and lii.i charactor may at any time be made a football forth'.u-ijratification. Ilemnycnino to Canada with a most angelic reputation of filty yiar.s^rrowin^r brilliancy; and in twelve months, it may be, invested with the attri- butes of the worst Asiatic despot, and at length, ass;\iled by his confidents, sink down pierced with more wound; than those under which Cicsar full. And what have we witnessed in Canada during the hist few montl^s, and what do we now see hut a pracJcal illustration of the truth of these remarks? The voluminous fipeechea of the "Toronto Reform Associa- tion," are so many witnesses of the melan- choly reality which I have imagined. Within the last few days, I have read an *' Address to the people of Canada, by the Reform Association, adopted at a general meeting, held at Toronto, the 16th day of May, J 844," and said to have been written by one of the late Councillors. After reading this most calumnious address, 1 asked my- self, if this address be true, what is the real character of Sir Charles Metcalfe — the man in all past life lauded more lor sincerity, love of liberty, and justice, than any other Gover- nor in the British Empire.'' if this address, be true, the world has been deceived in Sir Charles ; for he has, after all, proved to bean enemy to the British Constitution- -a tyrant — a hypocrite — a deceiver— a liar — a more outrageous invader of Con.>titutional rights than Charles the First, and a more daring despot than James the Sccoud — and were lie a Sovereign, instead of a Governor, would forfeit his Crown, if not his head ! And whence the auUwrUij I'nr these awful charges and denuneiilions ' We answer, his Excellency's late confidential and corstitu- tional advisers'. And this address and the kindred spi eches cf members of tlif same Aa- sociation, are the early results of dis';K)surej which those advisers declared they made under the authorily of the Govermr-Gene- ral ! Disclosures against every part of which, allecting his own snire even his Counsellors ions of 1841, ig the Tiewo Mieral before the Imperial erefore may lave nothing a direct blow of the Reso- )low against a with Great al can bo ar- gislature for Dt bo " res- '" at all, for ' The very ws and con* fore the Co- 3endcnce of all. It as- ly oyer the itructic:; of For, aa Da 3ted in the imielf caa- ftot be arraigned before judges; because if there were any that could pass sentence upon him, it would be they and not he who must fi- nally possess the Executive power." The ar- raignment of the views and conduct of the Governor General before the House of As- sembly assrnnes that thoy are liis "judges;" or in the words of De Lohue, that they, and not he, possess the Executive power." |f, therefore, the late Counsellors did not de- sire to be supreme themselves, and make the Governor subordinate, their proceeding involves his subordination to the House of Assembly. Such are the inferences which flow irresis tably from their anamalous proceeding. Such is the first anamoly it presents. Another is the nature of the defence. It consists, as the House of Assembly seems to have understood from ihe resolution introduced by Mr. Price, which was adopted in their bel'alf, of a charge against the Governor General that he had de- nied " their right to be consulted on what the House unhesitatingly avows to be the prero. jjativeof the Cro.vn— appointments to office." They place themselves before the House and the country, not upon their policj of govern- ment, (which Sir Charles declares to have been the point of difference,) but upon " their right to be consulted," which tiis Excellency denies to have been the question at i8suo,and of which he says to them in his repiy to them that he " is aslonislied at finding tliit the re- signalion is now ascribed to an alleged differ- ence of opinion on the theory of Responsible Government." T.iey keep out of sight of the House the new policy of Government which they had been urging upon the Governor Ge- neral, and claim its vote in their behalf, by alleging that his Excellency had invaded its rights. A new mode, indeed, for a defendant to claim an acquittal and even approval of a jury, upon the ground of a general charge against the plaintiff, supported by the evi- dence of the defendant's own rtsjer^on. Who would not prefer the position of the defend- ant, to that of the plaintiff, according to this mode of proceeding ? But what appears more anamaious still, it the nature of the charges which they prefer against his Excellency. They &re general. — Tliey contain no specifications which can be met. They throw upon his Excellency the onus of not ouiy proving a negative, but of proving a general negative. Mr. Baldwin, in his •' explanation" ascribes to the Governor General certain anti-Responsible Govern- ment doctrines and alleges against his Excel- lency certain anti-Responsible Government acts as proof that he held these doctrines: but Mr. Baldwin specifits no acts— not even the names ot the parties to whom they refer. As- suming that his Excellency, instead of Mr. Baldwin, was on his trial before the House of Assembly, and that Mr. Baldwin was a legi- tiniate witness in his own case, and that his i^icclleney was periiiitted to ccrijc to tho bar and answer for himself, how could he dis- prove the charges against him when the spe- e{/(cau«»» inoluded in those general charges were not stated ? If ihe reader were arraign, ed as an mfidel anil a robber— an infidel not in the doctrine ef Responsible Goverrtlnent but m that of the Divine Government, and a robber, not of apotber's property, but what ie more valuable, another's rights— the rights of many others ; and suppose the only testimo- ny agamsthim was the assertion of his accus- er ; and suppose that nothing was stated ei- ther in the indictment or in the evidence aa to tho specific nature of his scepticism, or the time, place, or even parties in relation to which his^robberies were alleged to have been cominitte'd ; but that it was stated in general terms that he had committed robberies, and that on certain occasions he had expressed sceptical sentiments ; how could the reader rebut such charges ? How could he prove an altbt ? How could he prove that the facts al- leged as robberies, were legal transactions, and not wrongs against any man ! All this he might do, were specifications on each count of the indictment stated. But accordinir to the procedure supposed, he could no more save himself from condemnation, however in- nocent he might be, than the selected victim could escape the Inquisition. How then could the Governor General defend himself, or be defended, against the general charges alleged by Mr. Baldwin .' He could only do as he has done, deny them in general terms, by declaring that he " subscribes entirely to the resolutions of 1841," and that he has ne- ver deviated from them. And under such circumstances, how could the Court of Parliament decide against him .' If a man can bo arraigned and condemned on general charges, and on the evidence of his accuser's assertion, what man's character, or liberty, or even life, is safe .' And is the high Court of Parliament to condemn the Gover- nor General on an indictment which would not be entertained by any Magistrates' Quar- ter Sessions against the humblest individual in the land ? The Resolution of the Assem- bly expressing "the deep regret felt by the House at the retirement of certain members of the Provincial Administration on the ques- tion of their right to be consulted on what the house unhesitatingly avows to be the prero- gative of the Crown, appointments to office ; and further, that their advocacy of this princi- ple entitles them to the confidence of the House," involves most unequivocally, that his Excellency had invaded that "right" and denied this " principle," against his own most positive and solemn declaration—and repeat- ed declarations — to the contrary. Had Mr. Baldwin come down to the house with what I have heretofore shone he should have done, a *' case of facts," and had any one or more of those facts involved the fact or facts on which the resolution of the House of Assembly was predicated, then upon that evidence — the mutually admitted statement of the differinff parties — could the resolution havs bsen iairly and justly adopted. Bui as it was, the house had before them nothino- but the assersion of one of the differing par- ties against the aiier tioa of the other ; and I for them to have decided in favour of the one or the other upon such evidence, or rather «uch absenoo of all evidence, was aa unpre- cedented as it wai unjust, and wn» sucii a de- cision ag no inferior Court in the hud would have been disposed or dared tfc make. It lta« been slated that one of the movers of the resolution in question, Iins said, ihdihe saw the House wavering, and that he pressed it to a vote before the members had time to draw back. It is not surprisintj; that a llror- ough " party man"— a man who prefers par- ty to justice— should pursue auch a course, and exult in its succcas. Nor i< it surprismj^ that the House was"' wavering" under such circumstances ; it would hav^i been surpris- ing had it been otlierwi.-- '• As liic case was a new one, and as the members of the Assem- bly could not possibly have acquainted tliem- selves with the min\ite of IJritisli Parliamen- tary practice in such cases, it is not surpris- ing that they were led on by pr.rty to adopt such a course. But it will be burprising if, hfler a calm review of the whtle all'iir, and a minute investigation of nil llie facts of the question .hey do not waver back to the posi- tion of doing justice between man and man — cf doing to the Governor General as they would be done by in similar cases — of acting in harmony with the practice of British lles- pon:.ible Government. It bus been said, " to err is human, to forgive divine /'those mem- bers of t!ie Assembly who have in this case done what is " human," are not asked to do what is " divine." No crime has been com- mitted ; no forgiveness is sought or needed. But they are asked— and 1 have no doubt but a just and honest country will ultimately re- quire it to be done— to retrace what is " hu- man" so far back to what is " divine" as to do justice to an upright, a generous, and aa unjustly implicated man. tope has said, for a man to acknowledge his error is only to acknowledge that he ia wiser to-day than he was yesterday. What is true of individuals ia true of collections of individuals; and I ana niuch mistaken if the members of the llouae of Assembly — after the lapse of so many days — will not bo wiser neit session liian they wero tiie last. 1 am also inclined to believe that several, if not all, of the late Ccunsollors — alter their unexpect- edly long retirement from the cares and per- plexities of office— will bL> found more judi- cious, more experienced, better (juaiifitd, aiid more disposed to appreciate and adhere to the British principles and practice of Responsible Government, than they were last session. But there is another iinomaly still in this proceeding — another prima ficio evidence that the late Counsellors have failed to cstab-. lish the allegations which tlicy have maJit a- gainst the Governor General. It is the per- plexity — the futtle-fish muildincss — in which they have iny ^ived the whole alFair. Who in Canada, for weeks after their resignation, could comprehend the'r real dilfereuces with she Governor General' nnd Jirtt n few still unable to define them. The " Toronto Re- form: Association" has echoglcd ita pupils to_ Icrably well into the mystery — at least so far aa ringing the changes on certain words and jjhr.ises, and vociferous denunciations, evince proficiency; butevcn with such a school of public instruction on the siibjict, many are unable to perceive anything more than coii- fuajd and undeliiied images of East India na- boLism and West India negroism — the staple elequenco of the Association. Now such obscurity — such confusion — is never witnes- sed in any question of defined and proved ."j-cts. The inference, tl'.erefore, is inevitable, that their iiicta were neither specific nor pro- ved. That such was the light in which they were viewed, not only by unexperienced Ca- nadian minds, but by the most acute and ex- perienced statesmen, is obvious I'rom a recent letter written by the honble. Josuph Howe, of Nova Scotia, and publ'slied in several of the Canadian papers. Mr. Howe was reported to have said in one of his speeches in the Nova bcotia House of Assembly, tliat " the difficul- ties in Canada h;ui arisen from n. hunglinirail' 7ninislratiun." Mr. Howe, in a letter addres- si'd to Mr. Hincks, and dated Hiilifnx, April 29, 161-1, explains as fullows: " The conflict- ing statements put forth by the Governor General and his ex-C^Jounsellors, rendered it difficult for some time to judge what the real points at issue were — the facts of the case, upon which alone an opinion could be formed, not being admitted on both sides. It was in reference to this cor.trariely of statement that I s^d in answer to some speaker who sought to ,aow that the Canadian and Nova Scotia cases were strictly analagous, that the matter had been so " bungled" in Canada, that it was difficult to say wliethfr such an inference could be fairly drawn. This is all that was said or intended ; and the observation was only meant to apply to the then involved state of the controversy, and used without any desire to charge blame upon either of the par- ties whose opposing statements rendered it difficult at the moment to form a correct de- cision, and most desirable to keep the simple fact upon which the retirements were b(>3ed, fre(.> from any theoretical dispute about gene ral principles which it did not necessarily in volve." Now, if the acute mind and practised eye of the father of ResjiOnsible Government in Bri tish North America, could only discover in the Canadian " case of lacts," " conilicling Btatements," — " opposing statements," — » " matter so bun^rled" — " theoretical disputes about general principles," could even /le have discovered any ^;ruo/'of the allegations against his Excellency ? Yet u|)un this case of" con- flicting statements," and a " matter so bung- led," do the late Counsellors demand a ver- dict of the country a;;ainst Sir Charles Met- calfe as an enemy of Re.sponsible Govern- ment ! Would the reader, as a juryman, con- vict a known pickpocket ujion such "bung- led" and " opposing statements.'" much less the llrprfaetii.iiive nt' his BoToreigu against his own declarations Fiom the fyregoing reaaoningl infer, there- fore, that not I late Counsollo tofore shown that upon ever table practice, their allegatioi So much for us now examit: ther difficult, a gelher. I will tw'i or three frc to bo — as slate( natory speech- tained a widely duties and resj Council, from ' ed office" — tlia Resolutions of Such is the f amine its impoi and involved in Mr. Baldwin di the high court Sir Charle's " the late Counc taches to the r ent" as orthodc assured that Mi than one quesli ly adjusted thi from it ia " w different" as to There are aa terms " widely ent intellectual ists now-a-days of ecolesiaslica and a fact as which exists bel an.d who is is ci not hold that tl, pinion Gonatiuti tween Respons ponsible Govei lialdwin does n spects Sir Char! the " position, the Executive reader were an holding a treasi of a subject's al inculcating tree CPR, and that M neral or Queen that Mr. B. had indictment tha widely diftereni and responsibili that which was giance and reqi and suppose tht were to ask the etteat the prisoi taught a view o enjoined by the Mr. B. should tlemen, his vie\ court were to n ferent? And't ply again, '♦ k fore, thai not onlj ii ths procwdin* of the late Counsollori anoiiialoui— at I hav« here- tofore iihown it was unconstitutional— but that upon every principle and h-ga! and equi- table practice, they have failed to eatablish their allegations nijaintt Sir Charles Metcalfe. So much for tlieir charjfes in general. Let Ui now e.Tamine them in detail. This is ra- ther difficult, as they are so " bunylid" to- gether. I will, liowever, attempt to separate tw'i or three from the mass. Tlif firsL nppenra to bo — as slated by Mr. Baldwin in his expla- natory speech — " that his Excellency enter- tained a widely different view of the posilion, duties and responsibilities of the Ex^ciitiv* Council, from that under which they Accept- ed office" — that is the view expressed in the Resolutions of September, Ib41. Such is the first ciiarge. Let us now ex- amine its import, and tne principle asmiined and involved in the mode of its presentition. Mr. Baldwin does not condescend to inform the high court of Parliament to what extent Sir Charle's " view" is difiVrenl from that of the late Council: nor wliat meaning he at- taches to the rr.lalice terms '• widely d.ff'er- ent" as orthodoxy iind heresy. And who is assured that Mr. Baldwin's " views" of mora than one question is not so squared and nice- ly adjusted that a hair's breadth deviation from it is " widely different"— so " widely different" as to prevent co-operation ai all .' There are as many idfaa attached to the terms " widely ditT'rent" as there are differ- ent intellectual constitutions, Some reliijion- istfl now-a-days regard a difference in the loriii of ecclesiastical polity to involve a "view" and a fact as " widely different" as that which exists between a church and /locliurcii ; and who is is certain that Mr. Baldwin does not hold that the least deviation irom his o- pinion constiutcs the " wide difference" be- tween Responsible Government and no Res- ponsible Government ? Then again, Wr. Baldwin does not inform the court in wknt re- spects Sir Charl 's is lieretioal in his view of the " position, duties and responsibiliii»s uf the Executivo Council." Suppose that the reader were arraigned before the ass zcs for holding a treasonable " view" of the doctrine of a subject's allegiance, and in consi'ijuence inculcating treasonable doctrines and practi- ces, and that Mr. Baldwin were Attorney Ge- neral or Queen's Counsel in the case; and that Mr. B. had slated in the ftr:>i count of the indictment that the reader " enlertained a widely different view of the posilion, duties and responsibilities" of a subject's duly, lro;n that which was involved in the oath of alle- giance and required by the laws of the land; and suppose the Judge or the Jury, or both, were to ask the counsel for the C'rown to wliut extent the prisoner at the bar had held and taught a view of civil duty different irom tliat enjoined by the laws of the land? and that Mr. B. should reply, " My Lord and gen tlemen, his view is icidtly different" — and the court were to rejoin, in wliat respects is it dif- ferent? And the Crown Counsel were toie- ply again, " Kiddy different^ my Lord and Qenllemen"- what would be thought of fueh an indictment ? And what would be thought of such a Counsel for the Crown ? And wuat would bo thought of a verdict of oujltv on Buch a charge ? Yet such is the charge oa which the verdict of the Province is demand- ed against the Rfprenentaiive uf the Sover- eign— a verdict wliich involves (to use the words of Captain Irving, for which he receiv- ed the '♦ loud cheers ' of the Toronto Atsooi- alien, to whom he addressed them) " hi* £x» cellency's retirement in dear old f]ngland icitert tyrants have no power. (Loud cheers.) But what is the principle assumed and in- volved in this charge ? It assumes and im- plies, that any view which Mr. Baldwin may ple«se in ijeneral terms to declare " widely dilFijrent" from his viewof the " posilion, du- ties, a'.d responsibilities of the Executive Courcil," is to be adjudged heretical and un- constitutional. Allliouith the real or full im- port of his prescriptive declaration may, like the secret doctrines of the Greek philosophera or Egyptian priests, be confined to his own b^som, or cunnnuiiicated to none but the in- itialed, 1 think the Canadian people are hard- ly prepared for such political vussalage as this, and that Mr. Baldwin is loo modest a man to assume the prorogntive of political Pope of Canada; and thai after the due cnniiideraiion, therelore, he will abandon his mode of dealing with the character and rights of the Repre- sentative of his Sovereign. Hud Mr. Baldwin confined himself to/ae/J, " free (as Mr. Howe says) from any theoreti- cal di''•'"": been favorable to their objects, we should doubtless have had them in detail. But the indefinite and iropoiing terra, " afpoipt- MkNTii," ser^ than the spe ral and start lunily of ten effective tha facts. On t carried ; on could bo ex| the Governt rogative, mu I have not I have shew its injustice, ciuUB charac cry and the vented it. 1 the impossifa ill his painpl gays — " Eve as well awai is ' physical Terences to I comes up fo les' reply to did any of I should be pi ernor, howt his Secretari responsible with the pol he is a mem Governor oi importance the Secreta: cial to the a sake he wot hold him re Such the I working in ment, by tl themselves. officially ini cepl throug a member adviser of 1 not — any i; can talk w eyes, The of the Proz mission mu Lord Chan Seal of Stt office is th official app Secretary i necessary made. Now, su; to send an him to affi: sion for an Council hf which the their advi( courses be disobey or resignatio appoint B( act; or he advise ac 1 thtt Ut* Bdent nnd could in- he Hover- iamentary iflioe, and )f an ofl'er luld a pri. an official g short of official in lie then of lis proprie- insellors a- Excellency ig his lata ng their ad- Jted, is the :ies against , therefore, • even to go vngue, and flefs. Tliey an oppoTtu- -vvhetlier it 8 or ten mi- leir meeting pling them- oneof tlieni lor do they jhat kind of e—who were rs state not ould render rebut thoir like to have lit with? 1 r even elec- would dia- aa frivolous irlant politi- SB, which, in 1 vitiate the re been pre- observe the ; proceeding been ground nation in re- well under- »le, had itap- rality of ap- stated, outof b had taken had transpir- Counsellors jtrating witli to each but he Governor subscription 16 late advis- t, upon any uive justified re, kept them 4i — «r (Urt *»» null V - I, we should ail. But the , «» ArFOlPT- Mkntii, " served the purpose of party better than the specification of cases, and the gene- ral and Hlartling phrase " without an oppor- lunity of tenderipg advice," would be more effective than an unsophisticated stateincnl of facts. On the former, a party vote could be carried; on the latter only an honest verdict could bo expected ; and thus the character of the Governor General, no lexs than his pre- rogative, must be secondary to parti/. i have not, however, dune with this charge. I have shewn its indefinitenesa, its unfairness, its injustice, it destitution of proof, its suspi- cious character ; yet it ha>' been the rallying cry and the watchword of the parly that in- vented it. 1 will, therefore proceed to prove the impossibility of its truth. Mr. Hincks, in his pampiilet in reply to Mr. Viger, p. 13, gays — " Every member of the late council was as well aware as tlie Governor can be that it is ' physically impossible to make tbnnal re- ferences to the council of every matter that comes up for decision ;' " (quoting Sir Char- les' reply to the Gore District Council^ nor did any of them desire that such a system should be practised. Every act of the Gov- ernor, however, must be communicated by his Secretary, and that Secretary, should be a responsil/le miniiter, thoroughly acquainted with the policy of the administration of which he is a member, and capable of advising the Governor on every subject not of sutficient importance to be referred to the council. If the Secretary recommends any step prejudi- cial to the administration, which, for hisowB sake he would not do, his colleoguea of course hold him responsible to them." Such then is the exposition of the practical working in detail of Responsible Govern- ment, by the party of the late Counsellors themselves. Now, can an appointment be officially made by the Governor General ex- cept through the Secretary of the Province— a member of the Leaislature, a responsible adviser of the Crown .' They know it can- not— any more than the Governor General can talk without a tongue, or see without eyes. The Provincial Secretary ie the keeper of the Provincial HeuL, with which every com- mission must be stamped— the same as the Lord Chancellor is the keeper of the Great Seal of State in England. The Secretary s office is the viediam. through which every official appointment roust be made ; and the Secretary is, (to use De Lolme's words) "the necessary instrument" by whom it must be made. Now, suppose the Governor-Geneial were to send an order to the Secretary directing him to affix the Provincial Seal to a commis- sion for an appointment respecting which the Council had never been consulted, and on which they had no opportunity of tendering their advice, the Secretary would have four courses before him. He could not possibly disobey orders : but he could tender his own resignation, and request the Governor to appoint some oliier per.*on to perfunu tuai. act; or he could go to His Excellency and ad VIM and remonstratd against it; or ha could affix the ofiiotal seal to it forthwith, for which he would be responsible to his col- leagues ; or he could inform them, and they could either consent to it, or go in a body, or send one or more of their number to the Go- vernor, and tender their advice against it. Taking, therefore, the extremcst and least favo: ble view of the Governor-Oeneral'a mod. of making an appointment, it is impoi' aibU jr him to do it without giving his Coun- cil opportunity of tendering their advice according to the very working of the fystem of Responsible Government, as above ex- plained by oie of the late Couaiellors. What is impossible cannot be true. Their charge, therefore, against the Governor-Ge neraf— their great charge— their charge re- peated ten thousand times— is shown to b« not only undefined and unproved, but utterly groundless and .alse. But it has been alleged by Mr. Hincks and others, that his Excellency has carried on correspondence with individuals in the Colo- ny, even on public affairs, through his Pri- vate Srrretary, and not through his responsi- ble official Provincial Secretary. To giv« the adversaries every advantogo they can ask, let this charge be admitted in its full ex- tent; and will the legitimate conclusion from their charge be but a proof of what Sir Charles has complained of, that the late ad- visers made demands incompatible with the invincibleness of the prerogalive, and calcu- lated to reduce it to the office of a party tool. Had not each of the late advisers a private as well as an official correspondence .' Did they not carry on their private correspon- dence, either in their own handwritinj} or by means of a private secretary .' Did not that private correspondence otten relate to public affairs-to offices, colleges, .tc? Did not that private correspondence sometimes con- tain declarations, or, in common parlance, pledges of what they would do in relation to particular appointments or measures, to the utmost of their power ? Had they not a ritrht to this private correspondence— and that on any subject, public or private, they ohoose to write about ! They might exer- cise that ricrht indiscreetly— as a man mig.it eat and drink indiscreetly— but the right was there, and the exercise of it was a matter ot their own concern, although it might some- times prove inconvenient both to the writer and his colleagues. And has not the Go- vernor-General a right equal to one of his advisers* Is he the only member of the Government who has no right to express hia personal views and feelings on any subject r If any member of the Council can even pledge himself to a particular act or measure to the utmost of his power, cannot the Uo- vernor-General do the same— although the power of the latter, as well as the former, may be limited by constitutional restrictions? Can any Counsellor write to whom and through whom he pleases, without the sanc- ,:„„ nj. i,na,.vlsdge of the Governor-Generali* andiias liiV Excellency no right to corres- pond with any body on any matter relating to Ihf rountrj, •xcept through thtm * If to, then in this rniprct nlin, hm well ai in nthcn that 1 have itiited, they cJAim to l)f> itipreme, tnd makn hi* Eznellenry mibordinato And tliim is not all, 'I'lipy thrreby drprivt every wan in ('/tnada of all ppminUry com- munication witli tlio OovvriiDr-Gpncral, «t- ttpt ikmuifh thems'!rrs. 1( nven u stray let- ter ihuuiil liBpfPn to find its wiy to the ^o. ▼eminent lioiiite, without stnppiri;? Tor exami- nation as to its orthodoxy, at the Sfpfretary's office, il would liavo to go there f.)r acknowlpdi;. ment, and consequently for ct-naorship. Here ■Ijain theirsupreiniicy woiiM appear, both over the Governor and over everv mm — ami cvi-ry man's bnsini'sn in the country. And this usurpation on the one hand rn.i dncrradati.Tn on the other of every man in Canada as well as the Governor-General, is dijinifu'd with the absurd name of " llesponsilile Govfrn- ment," and vice-regal non-c; kiiovvlfdijuieiit or it IB culled an invasion of coiisliiulional liberty ! Nor even is this all. The cliaiiman of the Toronto Assoniation, at a im-etinj; iicld 25tli March, exclairm'd against persons not sup- porters of the udininistration havinjj inter- views with the Governor-CJeueral, and a- gainst any but the " ietiding nicmliers of the majority tif the Legislature'' advisincj with his Excellcney ; and ccmcluded by declaring that " hu miintaiiied l!ial no pe.rsnn had a right to be contultcd by the Crown but llie adminisiration." It lia.-t been seen that the right of epistolary communication between the Governor-Generiil and any inhabitants of Canada, except throutjh the Counnellors, has been denied. The rijjht of personal in- tercourse between them is now intiTilictcd except through the same channel. Thus the Governor-General, like the Grand Lama of India, may be worshipped, hut he must be approached by the permission of the priests who have him in custody, and give fo:ih an- owers of their dictation ; or, like an inmate of the Kingston Hetiitentiary, communica- tion neither verbally nor by wnliiifj with any person, except by the permission and through the medium of his keepers. If thin does not imply an oligarchy— and an oligarchy of the worst kind, over botl» the Cmwn and the people — I know not what an oli^arciiy means. Mr. Dlack — an able and consiitnlional lawyer of Quebec, end represenialive of that city — argued in f vor of tl;e Governor's re- ceiving the advice of the Council upon the iame ground that a judge should hear both ■ides of a case. Mr. liiack naid that the (Jo- vernor would receive abund-int inlormation from various quarters on one side of a case — especially one involving an appointment — his Council could give him tlie neces.sary information, on the other side. But the doc- trine of the late Counsellors would preclude and prohibit Ins Excellency from receiving any information, cither verbally ur v.-rilu-i!, except what they might please to Iny bef >re tiiin. He would thus ot necessity, and Ihere- r fd in fact, \}* a '* taoV io the hands of hia advisers. liut even all this does not reach the full demands of the Toronto Associnli(' i at : death-blow would have been givm (. lir: p.-insiblc Gri vernment, and wl; ;. :ii r>udres; would have home forth from ihe Toronto Association! Why, Lord John llu.fsKi.L himself — the pracliciil and profjund statesman, the patri- arch of civil liberty — is but a novice com- pared with these giant expositors of the To- ronto Association — he is a more hopeless heretic in their political creed than Sir Charles Metcalle himself In tho late debate on the state of Ireland, Lord john Russell leferred to her Majesty and her instructions in the following v\ords: 'i'he Sovereign i have served— and a Sovereign more anxioua for the benefit and happiness of the Irish pfup'x", it v.'tjuid be ir:jpo55i.jie t-s SrFVr "-ev- er did I RECEIVE, when I was in tho office of SesreUry of Btate for the Hom« Department, THE SOVK equal regard I'rotestant, I rian." Hen Ttceieing ad\ as of givin " rr.rtieing ii and of recei respect to an sped to the p ment of all I The truth all parlies, hi regard for th ings of the S mination to i'uards of thi the Sovereis politic'il oppi he must not •' leaders of! vernment He can send for of sixty mile go to a minis lend the Sov to a minister press a want but those wh md the leng' be the interei And this we Government calfo will no! impeached ai constitution ( back (to use Irvin? amid ciatiOD,) " ii land, ichere t " he will writ t^at is ever in those who disi happiness of, on the rights vnforlunaleli Cheer; .] There are fered to in th lors, which V the next nun the propositi( ly, " That tli are fu"y sust cusers and a Messrs. Sulii (Editor of thi I wil concl ral remarks. 1 have judg< Metcalfe out given their s own words, < application, ' most obvious pie* of true ii J 4L_* __. . ttlXU til-'.. VU 1 be unproved Tbe aecon incU of hit ch th« full li(r, :iiiil Ritv- wliat Uipy hy tlic Go- I'psrlmentf, to be done, i) h;id been eel, durinfr bill he had King g'>iiig to what he the Minit- 's, I propoao ;', and then lUfd by tbo minjr-street Sovureii^ns, 1 the Sove- ctions aa to lave known lo the iiv.n- ftsiuciation. ing to send uJ liends of n order that ed. I onco d of depart- i-n I arrived :old that the ip duwii to don ! 1 re- rumour in ! Governor- Lvn to th» Jian Down- of depart- li! necessity ■ overriment ■never they •anted to bo eneral com- < learn what dealh-bh)W maiblc Gri wuuld have (ciaiion I liinself — the n, the patri- rjovice com- of the To- e hopeleM I than Sir ' late debito ihn Russell tnstrtir.liona iovereiun 1 >re anxioua f the Irish tn» in the the Horn* D#p»rl!nent, any INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE SOVKREIGN, but luch Bi beipoke an equal regnril tor all her Irish lubjer'n— for rroteslanl, for Catholic, and for I'leabyte- rian." Her" Lord John RusHell opeaka of Ttetieing advice from his Si(:y» rjarties. but that wan wliat led to the d'i^srup'tioii— the Heat' of the Government pro- testing against 'the explanation,' ""' *' gainit the «xi«tence of any fact stated by Mr. Lafontaine— cellency's ei that the ansv Councillors, nations bein mtnts made i colleagues." Now, 1 w senre— nay, what the " e of the late ad vf facts ; ani "explanatio but a denial late adviser that they n yet they tell planation, ia stated by th( Mr. Hincks ments," we tion of the I of syllogism planation ol Metcalfe pn ployed in th explanation sisras — they isms — that tempt to enl Mr. Bald 1 views of th disruption.' no disruptir difference o the questio firsl, wKat e lency consi make ? I h of these ai them to m made, and authority i? quences. statement shewn in tl ther prove* is his Ext have adduc as wilnesst of FACTS. Were I s m a court ( the whole ( the jury o I will proc Metcalfl's those of hi: general sts ing words "The G the explaii pose to ol tirely the ces which conveying of his senl no found ai less his rel of the Prei of the Head "ul ppriiR3l ot at no discn- eged in that Mr. Viger's iiients of tlie Councillors, ?itli regard to " lliere is an ince between late Ministry ' which He- re been a re- it during the ed when the other points Baldwin and ; of the cor- s'a statement .a adinitit that •en Sir Chas. lors as to the 10 lustily de- ists and their other points alleged har- f fads by the e advisers is isideralion. — who has pe- urnber of my statement of itions against [ have shewn {cellency, but They now was no ditTer- thnse of Sir Ihey not only jme the unin- sses of the in- ns lompany with [it of iacts, is larges against his statement conviction of institytionality }ceedin!.'s, did their facts and 1. The exist- '6 shown in a le particulars, ce. The late condemned, Hincks hava n between the ?nts of Sir C. s and their re- ins and argu- ' There is in- ews of the re- vhat led to the vernineat pro- ition,' not a- l stated by Mr. Lufontaine— we also protest against H s Ex- cellency's explanation." Mr. Hinck« says, that the answer of his Excellency to the ex- Councillors, " is not a protest against expla- nations being' made, but against the argu- ments made use of by Mr. Lafontaine and his colleagues. " Now, 1 would ask any man of common genre— nay, any boy that can read English— what the " explanations" and " arguments" of the late advisers consisted of but a. statetnent of facts ; and what a "protest" against that "explanation" and those " arguments" was, but a denial of that statement of facts .' The late advisers have asserted long and loud, that they resigned upon certain facts, and yet they tell us that a protest against their ex- planation, is not a protest against any fact stated by them ! From the sense in which Mr. Hincks appears to use the word " argu- ments," we are left to infer that the explana- tion of the late advisers consisted in r string of syllogisms (curious materials for the ex- planation of facta '.), and that Sir Charles Metcalfe protested against the materials em- ployed in the explanation, but not against an explanation being made. It is by such sole- sisras— they do not rise to the rank of soph- isms—that the accusers of Sir Charles at- tempt to enlist the public against hi:n. Mr. Baldwin says, the " dit^'erence in the views of the respective parties led to the disruption." No one doubts this. Of course no disruption would have taken place had no difference of views existed But ihat in not the question. The three-fold question is, first, wKat statement of vjews did his Excel- lency consent that his lata advisors should make? I have shewn in the second number of these articles, that he did not authorise them to make the statement which they made, and that their doing so without such authority is fraught with dangerous conse- quences. The second question is, what their statement of allegation proved.' I have shewn in the third number, that it was nei- ther proved, nor true. The third question is, is his Excellency's statement correct.' 1 have adduced Messrs. Baldwin and Hincks as witnesses to the unexceptionable accuracy Were 1 addressing the jury of twelve men m X court of lustice, 1 might confidently rest the whole case here ; but addressing, as 1 am, the jury of the coi ntry through the press, I will proceed further, and notice Sir Charles MetcalfL's statements in detail, as I have those of his late advisers. His Excellency a general statement is contained in the follow- ing words ; — . "The Governor General protest? against; the explanation which those gentlemen pro- pose to offer to Parliament, as omitting en- tirely the actual and prouiinent circuimtan- ces which led to their resignation, and aa conveying to Parliament a misapprehension of his sentiments and intentions which have no foundation in any pari oi Uis conduct, an- Icsa his refusal to make a virtual surrender of the Prerogative of the Crown to the Coun- cil for party purposes, and his anxiety ia d« interp're.ulion of Mr. Hincks.which I quoted in the last num- ber and according to other authorities, which 1 shall give in another pace,) requires, that he shall consult a Responsible Minister In the second place, they demanded what no Ministers or Minister, of the Crown have ever demanded of the Sovereign sincothees^ FilnT'"' t ■m'^C''''^ Governmentfn England, „, JGd8. They cannot adduce an ms.ance of a Minister ever hanng a.ked the Sovereign to give such a pledge or assurance as hey demanded of the Governor-General. Indeed, in all their st.-.toments and speeches and declamation on this suiject, they have not, to my knowledge, adduced a single pre- cerfe«nn justification of such a precodure - I hey assert many things, but they proye no- thing. - J t- ' - »- In the third place, their demand implied the eonfessjon of what the Governor-General dti- •na of thft Qdf. 'd by him) in « relative to their ling irrcvalent 13, " pubhc m- "•a fell into the ove mentioned le upon a nate- •ty, and ihere- aiiy evidence, nioned fallacy. t«," they are of fallacy. To s 1 now invite It it was impos. I to make ap. e principle of Would you accede toit ? or would you tell him that if your past conduct did not afford him sufficient assurance of your integrity and ho- nesty, you had no security to give : and be- cause you would not agree to such an insult- '"# j"!^ degrading proposal, would he be jus- tified in representing you as a calumniator and a rogue .' So, the late Councillors go to the Governor General and making a demand or proposal that he would agree fo what he declares " he has hitherto pursued without deviation," and because he refuses to comply with their demand or proposal, thoy represent him as adverse to the system of Responsible Government, and ask a vote of the house and of the country to support them for such " ad- vocacy of that principle." But, let the reader take a well-known fact, instead of a supposition, as an illustration.— There is, perhaps, not an old resident in Can- ada who does not well remember the celebra- ted Alien Bill— a bill whi'jh required all per- sons who had settled in Canada since 1783, to take the oath of allegiance with twelve months, on pain of forfeiting their privileges as British subjects. What was the people's mterpretation of the demand or proposal con- tained in that bill ? Would they accede to it .' They were told that no good subject would object to takinir the oath of allegiance to his Sovereign as often as ii might be required— that it was necessary on several accounts. — Did they believe such reasoning.' Did they not declare, with an ardour and an enthusias- tic determination which defies description, that they would never take an oath which im- plied that they were all aliens to a govern- ment to which they had already sworn and long professed allegiance— that they would never submit to such a degradation of their character and rights? Did they not make their voice heard :icro3s the Atlantic, to the disallowance of the bill ' And is Sir Charles Metcalfe to be denounced or l-.onored for act- ing upon the same principle i" He is called upon to express, in a peculiar and unprece- dented form, his allegiance to a system which he avows he " has hitherto pursued without deviation, and to which it is fully his intention to adhere;" and his refusal thus to degrade hischaractei- and office, is interpreted as prac- tical hostility to that system of Government. How did the opponentH of the alien bill like such an interpretation of their refusal to comply with the " stipulations" of that measure .' It m by such a fallacy and such a proceeding thai the htc CouncilioiH have sought to per- suade the people of Canada that the Governor General is an enemy of the cstsblished system of Canadian Government, and that they are its patriotic defenders ! Whereas, m resist- ing such a causeless and unprecedented de- mand he consulted what is due to the charac- erand rights of the Soverign, as much as did those who resisted the causeless and unpre- cedented demand involved in the Alien Bill consult what was due to the character and rights ot the subject. Then as to the "actual and prominent cir- cumstances which led to their resignation," which His Excellency says his late advisers had entirely omitted. He says, they demand- ed " that the lists of candidates should, ia every instance, be laid before the Council." Ihey say nothing about this demand in their e.Tpianation. Did they make it ? Mr. Hinoks in his reply to Mr. Viger's pamphlet, confess- es that they did make this demand. He saya 1 he reference to the list of candidates was called for. The object was that these lists should be deposited with the responsible Se- cretary of the Province, and not with the Pri- vate Secretary to the Governor." la there anything in the resolutions of September, ia4l, which authorizes such a flemand.'' Can a precedent for it be found in British history ? Is the name of any individual the rightful pro- perty of the Council, unless that Individual choose to make it so ? Is the Governor-Gen- eral any more than any other man of honour, at liberty to make use of the name and com- munications of an individual, to any greater extent than may be authorised by that indivi- dual .' And may not many an individual, for many reasons, not wish to have his name brought under the notice of the Council at all except by the sanction of the Governor-Gen- eral .' May not many individual desire that hi.s name may not be brought before the Coun- cil, or under the notice of the Governor, un- less recommended by a certain Councillor, to whom he may address a private and confiden- tial communication ? Whatever may be said of the convenience of such a practice, it is not a sine qua noji in Responsible Government ; and that such a demand could not be acceded to without the sacrifice of individual ri/htsa- part from any considerations of Prerogative. Here is a demand which, beyond doubt, " called upon the Head of the Government to enter into a Ktipiiiation as to the terms upon which a provincial ministry may deem it pru- dent either to accept or continue in office" — a demand which the House disclaimed in a negative form, in the words just quoted. This demand also pointed to the assumption on wiiioh 1 dwelt in the preceding number, that the late Councillors wished to cut otf all the communication between the Governor-Gene- ral and any individual in the Province except through themselves ; thus making the Crown a " tool," and infringing on individual rights, As the statement ofsuch a demand did not an- swer their purpose, they omitted it in their " explanation." Again His f\xcellency says that " He ap- pealed to the number of appointments made by hrm on the recommendation of the Council, or the members of it in their departmental ca- pacity, and to in.slanres in which he had ab- ■1 1|l M •tamed from referring appointments on their opponents, as furnishing proofs of the consi- deration which he had evinced towards the Council in the distribution of the Crown "_ Here the Governor General states several'im- portanl facts. Messrs. Baldwin and HiX admit his statements oi facts. Yet not one of these facts IS even alluded to in their "expla- nation No -such facts were rather incon- venient as weU as stubborn things, in thttr explanation. They did not therefo e, consi^ der them (to use Mr. Hincks' words) » neces- sary for their complete jurtiiication." From these facts It appears :-lst. That the princi- ple on which the patronage of the Crown ought to be distribu'ied, waf a promLntTo IZ lA aT"°" '"T^" "'^ Excellency and \^}a^ Advisers ; whether it should be con- fined to one party, (the old exclusive council- ors ) or whether, as Mr. Howe, of Nova Sco- t^a, declares good, without reference to party." But this vitally important question-ihe very essence of the first "antagonism" between the St KM ?^"":?' ^""^ ^''^ ''^"'' Councillors, r^L^^''\^^'^^^'''. P''"^" °"' "-^ tl'eir own mou hs-this question, on which they now dwel with the strongest emphasis-tliqueT tion so argely debated between the Governor General and them-they did not even .nen- t.on .t in the.r explanation-they kept i en- tirely ou _,t was not necessary for their com- pletejustification"-it might have causTdS comple . condemnation. 2d. It also an pea I from His Excellency's statement, that he had ^Vu^f «^>f utmost regard to thei;reco„ men dat.ons of the council in making, and in ab staining from making appointments " the ms ances in which his own' judgment 'com! pelled h.m to d.ssent from their advice an- yet all this did not satisfy the demands of party ambition, so long as a Mordecai. not pS the desired homage, could now and theVfi^d admittance to some subordinate clerkship- the whole hated race of opponents and rivals rnust be e:ccor,ated from all hope of a morsel at the hands of the Executive, not only by the constilut.onal checks of advice and VLnl of L°a"!hroL'^- ''\l ""institutional ToXg" of the throne, in the form of a " stipulation'' or understandmg, that the inflnence of o„e rrifuK?"' P"'>.^«i"g judge) should be tK» rule ot Royal action,-thus pulling from IS head the crown of its own free ngenfy an^ then told that it might exercise a discretfon ^v.thin, of course, the limits of its ow^ e„sla * v.ng engagement to the contrary. .3 1 ,- iii hereafter demonstrate. But these facts no being necessary for the complete ustmca cation of the late Councillors, aUhSh es" omi ted by them in their explanation. 3rd 1 Lastly, ,t ,s clear from His Excellency's ,H muted statement of/ac,,, that tifj e were two method, of making appointments to office- hat those two methods were pursued with the concurrence of the late councillors I o one " on occasions nf «r).n,,,. " " /°"' "'.'^ iO' the reeo,umendat,on~;;?-;ie ::^:^!!^:^^ the other, not "on occasions of adeiiuau u„. H?' 1 ' u'*^ "'* '•econ^nendation of i„divi dual members of the council, in their deo« ' mental capacity :" a distinction which Ts." made by Sir Charles Metcalfe in h^i r.„l ! the addrsss of the Gore DisTri t C u"^ L'" distinction which has ever since been t".e 70 position watchword of the Toronto A, oda tion party-yet a distinction on whicl the late Councillors themselves acted. h/ I T ^ .* *'"^^ ^"'"e time objected as he always had done, to the exclusive distrib" tlin./r""°"*^^ T'^^ P"'^' »iews, and main tained the principle, that office ought, in eve ^ '"f "". to be given to the ma? best qua ified to render efficient services to the State and where there was no such pre-eimnpnn»' asserted his right to exercise hirdiretfo„^? Me srs-^Xl^ " '«"?«-.''«T'^ "« admi£ by Messrs Baldwin and Hindis. Let the read thai" ti" '^V' •'"'Pr'- T''«y P'-^inly i" ;?; that " the exclusive distribution of patronage liis Lxcellency " objected" to it-which he Tnd "°0 r h""**' Y f'^^^^ •'eerio £ mantl. Of this demand, also, the late Advi fn^^^^attn^ "P'-at.o s, ga^e th J H^oule 'n'j iniormation. This statement, likewise an one already quoted, clearly showsThat'the principle on which the patronage of the Cro vn should be distributed, wasalefding.Tfnot the lending topic of discussion between the Gov ernor-Generaland his late Counc"l ors I o„" which they observed a death-like i J^ '^ tlu'ir explanation, speaking only of their rLlu in aiiterent terms, but alwava aiminif ot ihB SeS"S h'"",; '" '- opinion,"! a^ccom! Mr^£kr;s;^^';L'Sr;^^^^;-s tl'is paragraph, and fou'ndson it ihe following "'"8"'", conclusion : " Nothing c_. Ire clearly show that the ministers were not^erj Sns ''"'T *"' "'°P.^"" of theirown Inl Mr II I . appears from these words of Mr. llincks, that the late advisers Jiad the a- maz-ng liberality to propose three distinct pro posi ions, and even in different terms, provi- pose S ^nh.""'^ accomplish the self-same^ pu - pose of obtaining " a virtual surrender into Z tt«° '''^ ^^--ilof thepr/rogltrif I next solicit the readers attention to the J«ci* contained in the following paragraph of the Governor General'^ answer to hi,i iato Councilor, :"J„ „ie .ourse of theconversl? .ons which both on Friday and Saturday fol garding the palroiiaim of »ii» n^ .u.. j some'o& "'""f °" "'^ co„sT;uctio'n'"rut"by Zn M ^ gentlemen on the meaninrr of Re- spoasible Oo vernment, diflerent opinions were I olicitc define a subj opinio: the G( sationi that he of the which hithert which i I h^ stated be it re by Mes fuct refi the thit place ' cussion mand ir ironage that tha tion pu meaning shall hei cd fact • a long hangs, Governt Partly ft plained constitu« ral cause into the — an elei pretend 1 or parcel with all 1 always « clothes it exclusior buie of (( and impa jesty's su troductio; Metcalfe the wave' he retain! Sir Charl in the resi is compat England, mont whi gative of] which ma —an instr instead of completed to make tl )>lain and make foui this new c vernment " antagon and his lal old and lo It is not heard of " tlcmen on vernment; itidation of indivr- iil, in their depart- nction which was »lfe, in hia reply to 'istrict Council— a since been the op. Toronto Associa- 'on on which the I acted. Itewise, the follow- le time objected, a« exclusive distribu- y riews, and main Ece ought, in eve- he man best qual- ices to the State ; ich pre-eimnence, le his discretion." 'd are admitted by js. Let the read- 'liey plainly imply ition of patronage 1 deinanded ;" lor to it— which he liere been no de- >o, the late Advi- :ave the House no ent, likewise, as y shows that the lage of the Crown leading, if not the etween the Gov- Councillors,— on h-like si o-nce in •niy oftheir right overnor-General irthermore, that ropositions were igarn, sometimes 8 aiming at the pinion, if nocom- irtnal surrender I of the preroga- another fact ad - nd Hincks, but the explanation, r. Viger, quoted it the following ling en more s were not yery if their own sug- these words of isersjiad the a- ree distinct pro 't terms, provi- ! self-same pur- surrender into prerogative of Ltention to the St paragraph of er to hi,i iato ftheconversa- d Saturday fol- »ho Council re- • •• rv •!, mat, uc- ruction put by leaningof Re- opinions were ^IfinnH " "'" ''^'*'"*''' "'««■"/ orthat Still un. defined question, as applicable to a colony 1 a subject on which considerable difre?ence'of oprnmn ,s known every where toprevai"; bu the Governor General, durin-r these oonvGr sat.ons, protested ngai^st its belng'supposed that he ,s practically adverse to the wofkfn^ h- h ."^l'"" °^ Responsible Government which has been here established, which he has l>!therto pursued without devMonandta winch zt is fully his intention 'oaZ;J^ " I beg the reader to mark distinctly the facts sta ed ,n the paragraph thus quoted-£ be .t recollecced, which have been ad.nuS by Messrs. Baldwin and Hincks. The first /«ci referred to by the Governor General for the third time (and which he says in ano her place 'became the ;-rt«c,>/e topic of dis- ma„'d°?,^lrK^?."'^^"y'> '» " 'he explic t de, mand made by the Council regarding the pa- .?„?r.°y''" S'""'^"" The second /ac7i'. bat that demand was "based on therJn,^«' m«l^"' ^^ T' °^"'« gentlemen on the meaning of Responsible Government." \ shall hereafter show that in this first mention- cd fact ' involved all the mysttry which for a long time hung, and to some e.xtent still bangs, over the questions at issue t etween the ?ZuT ^'".r"' """^ '■'• '^'« Councillors lartly from a "pressure from without," ex- plained ,n Mr. Parke's letter to one of his constituents, and partly from other conjectu- ra causes, they have introduced a neio element into the system of Responsible Government -an element which I will prove they did not pretend twelve months ago formed any part "' Jl^^nlu^'i""" element which invests it with all the danger which its opponents have a ways ascribed to it-an element which clothes It with the character of old hiused to anni- hilate the statement of the Governor-General. Mr. Hincks says, "The vole.s of the e.x-min- istersforMr. IJoulton's resolutinnj wliich was seconded by Mr. Lafontaine, afford the best evidence that can be offeretl, that they did not required "stipulation," in the ordinary ac- ceptation of that term." (Riijily to Mr. Vigor, p. 11.) The last part of tliis sentence is sig- nificant on another point— it implies that the late Councillors did require h " stipulation" in some acceptation of tliat term.— Uut more on this point presently. Mr. Baldwin says: " Again, au attempt has been made to mislead the public into the belief that the disruplioa turned wholly on a demand by ll.j ministry fur a slimddt.ion — as it is called— of an uncon- stitutional character. (Hear, hear.) Hut he (Mr. Baldwin) thought that hib learned friend, Mr. Lafontaine, liavin^j seconded Mr. Houl- ton's addition to the address, was a sulficient proof that all they asked was that mutual un- derstanding which Mr. Boulton's resolution not only recognised, but indeed declared tube absolutely necessary. (Cheers)" {Toronto jtssocialion Speech, 25nal (jiiestion, leave to dis- ?sire that the be called up- s to the terms stration may . or continue , which is 08- government, are under- the preroga- onsiitiitional llepresenta- i." hich Messrs. upport of the rs had not re- vernment an to the terms listration had 1 oifice. Let says nothing ijbut of what t issue invol- uncillorsdid, Iduce relates ought not to eceived in a 1 10 be recei- ht it be recei- Id the reader IS opinion, or tion of what lony as to a ! Councillors liber. In re- d ought not i7G comber. — ent proof ;'" ethatcan ha X oflered" by Messrs. Baldwin and Hincks ; but their ^^bett evidence" in this cas'^ does not deserve even the name of evidence. Now, during the week of their resignation, the late Councillors might have found— as 1 have reascn to believe they did find— that the House would not sustain iheia inany uttempt to extract even an understanding, n.uch less .1 formal "stipulation", as to t'le terms upon whici- the administration should in future be conducted. They therefore found it necessa- ry to place tliemselves upon as strong ground as possible in respect to this pcint. Hence when it was pressed upon them, they made a virtue of necessity, and agreed to support a general resolution expressing their " desike" as to what "should be," and should not be : and this " negative" disclaimer of " desire" they now appeal to as the " best evidence that can be oU'ered" as to what they had not done. The statements of the late Councillors, and any inferences which those statements might authorise, would be entitled to the greatest respect under ordinary circumstances, and when no other parties but themselves were concerned ; but when they adduce any state- ment of their own to commit the Representa- tive of their Sovereign with having stated what was untrue, their professed evidence should be carefully sifted and weighed — «nder this process it is seen that their evidence, in the present case is in all respects, " lound wanting." Thus much then for their own evidence, or rather the absence of the very sliadow of evi- dence in support of their assertion. Let us now consider the evidence in support of the Governor-General's statement. In the first place then, what did Messrs. Bald- win and Lafontaine go to the Governdr-Gen- eral for ? What did they go to him two tiays in succession for .' Was it to resign ? No.— Was it merely for advice ? No. Was it not to make a demand .' Was it not to come to an understanding as to the terms upon which they might " deem it prudent to continue in office .'" And was not such a jiroceeding at variance witli both the letter and spirit of Mr. Boulton's resolution, to which tiiey appeal in their own justification .^ And does not such •1 proceeding go i'ar to establish the truth of the Guvernor-General s slalcment ? That such was the object of their waiting upon his Excellency we have ample truth in the- testimony of many of their own support- ers, and even of theiiiselves. Two witnesses and one fact will be sufiicient on this prelimi- nary point. Mr. SuUijan, in his explanatory speech, November 30, alleges " the impossi- bility (of himself and his colleagues) staying in olRce ajUr understanding his Er.ceUencrfs views." It appears then, that before under- standing his Excellency's views it was possi- ble for them to have remained in oftice ; and that it was upon " his Excellency's views" that the late advisers resigned. And how come they to know his "views.'" Wuy MeBSis. Baldwin and Lafontaine wont to as- certain them — views, which (as the conclu- ding phrase of Mr Boulton's resolution ex- presses It) " a due respect for the prerogative of the CroiAi, and proper constitutional deli- eacij towards her Majesty's Representative, F'JUBID THEIR UEINO eXPRKSSED." Again, the Editor of the Examiner — oner. 'the secre- taries of the Toronto Association— has the fol- lowing words and italics: " When waited up- on by Mr. Lafontaine, in behalf of himself and colleagues, in order that they might come to some understandinir as to the principle upon which the Government was to be conducted, as far as regards appointments to office, his Excellency positively refused to recognize it as a constitutional principle that he should consult them at all upon this important de- partment of the administration of public af- fairs ; evidently claiming its patronage adli- bitum without the advice, counsel, or con- currence of his responsible advisers." — [iMarch 13]. With the latter part of this statement I have at present not||ing to do. I have heretofore shewn its falsity, and proved that it was impossible for the Governor-Gene- ral to make any appointment, without the con- currence of at least one " responsible advi- ser," and liiat His Excellency has denied that the right of the Council to advise him was a subject of dispute between him and his late Councillors. But their demanding a declara- tion of His Excellency's views even on that subject, was as unconstitutional (according to Mr. Boulton's resolution,) as their demanding '■'■ some understanding" with His Excellency, as to the future policy of appointments, or on any other subject. They were to remain, or to retire from his councils according to hia ACTS, as they were responsible to the Legisla- ture not for his views, but for his acts ; and they had no more business with his views, as to what might be or should be, than they had to do with his purse. To seek "some under- standing" with him, as to what his views were or might be, was, according ..o Mr. Boulton's own resolution, unconstitutional ; to represent these views to parliament — especially in the teeth of his Excellency's protest — was not only unconstitutional, but unjust and danger- ous as I have shown in the second number of this argument. Then, as to the fact — a fact trumpet-ton- gued in its import and bearing on the charac- ter of the present crusade against Sir Charles Metcalfe, — the fact is this :— The late Coun- cillors admit they would have remained in of- fice had the Governor-General's views (which they went to ascertain) as to his future policy accorded with their demands or wishes. This is, they would have assumed the responsibili- ty of his past acts, had he given them assu- rance or pledge, or " stipulation," as to the character of his future acts ! I Can such a proceeding be paralleled in *.he entire histo- ry of England, since 1688 i Had the Gover- nor-General's views of future policy proved orthodox, according to the " terms" of the late-born expediency creed of the ex-Councili lors, then— can it be believed ?— all his past UC13 WOUiu nave UKCIZ UClcllUca tjy tw"! — ;«9 very acts they now pronounce unconstitution- al— acts which extended over a period of m m % \ r M2 monlhs-HCts whinli they now vocyferaf e from Eiiex to Gaspe— those very acta for condemn- ing which they now demniid tl:e support of the Province,— yes, those identical acts, (and ihe roaervalion of the Secret Socielif-s' Bill among th- lesf,) would have been while wnsh- ed— would have been assumed as constitu- tional—would have been aefended as worthy of the support of the Province, had the Gov- eriior-Oeneral only "come (to use the Era- miner's words) to nome undi^rstanding, to the principle upon which the government was to be conducted aa far as regards appointments to office!" Now, does not this single fact prove to a demonstration, that they violated the last part of Mr. Boulton's resolution? Into the pit which they dug for another, have they not fallen themselves ? And I appeal to the ho- nest reader of any party, whether their resign- ing or not re%ning can change the nature of the Governor-General's acts which were per- formed before they resigned ? And whether they are not, in all honor, and consistency, and truth, and decency, bound to defend those acts out of office as well as in office? Their continuance in office was (to use a figure in Mr. Boultop's Toronto Association speech,) an endorsementof every note in the shape of a government, act, — during the period of their in- cumbency they were the only endorsers known in the law of Responsible Government— as long as they remained ia the emoluments of office, they excluded all other endorsers ; and, it appears by thtJir own confession, that they would have continued to have endorsed every note of the Governor General's past acts, had he consented to have endorsed their notes, (which they presented to him,) of " some un- derstanding as the principle upon which the Government was to be conducted as far as re- gards appointments to office." And, because he would not endorse in advance for them, they have repudiated wliat, by their continu- ance in office, they had endorsed for him.-- Every note of his Excellency's acts would have been as good aathe Bank of Responsibil- ity itself, had he consented to endorse the " stipulation" note for them : but his refusal to do so has made him a heretic in theory and a despot in practice, and that too for months while they were his voluntary and paid en- dorsers ! ! Now, statute-law will not allow an endorser to repudiate his name from a dis- counted note, whatever may become of the drawer of it; nor will responsible law allow advisers of the Crown to repudiate notes which have been discounted, while they vo- luntarily continued in the office, and received the pay of constitutional endorsers . They are not, indeed, liable to imprisonment -.butrcpM- diaters oia\\ countries will receive, as they have always received, the repudiation of the moral world. In what a humilifiting contrast does this proceeding of the late Councillors stand to the conduct of every English statesman who has ever retired from the councils of his Sove- reign ! How painfully does it contrast with the honourable and constitutional conduct of the px-Councillors in Nova Scotia ' Hear the commencement of Mr. Howe's erplanatorij Hpeech, as reported in the Nova-Scotia pa- pers :— " Mr. Howe rose and opened his ad- dress to the house by rr.ndin^ his note of re- signation of the offices of Executive Council- lor and Collector of Excise, addressed to hia Excellency the Lieutenant Governor. He therefore stood relieved from the weight of responsibility which had rested on him for the last three years an-d a half. He spoke in the highest terms of Lord Falkland's courtesy- it would always live in his grateful remem- brance. He conceived while a Councillor he was bound to support the government, and regard the interests of the country. The res- ponsibility was great and weighty ; but he had other responsibilities — to his constituents- to the country— to this house. He would now endeavour to discharge his duty, so that his position would be understood. He would support Lord Falkland's Government up to the time of his resignation— that act also he was ready 10 defend." Thus far, then, as to the fact that the late Councillors demanded an understanding or "stipulation" from Sir Charles Metcalfe as to his future conduct. 1 think this fact can bo rK) longer doubted. I will now adduce testi- mony to show that the demand they made did involve what the Governor General alleged " that the patronage of the Crown should be surrendered to the Council for the purchase of parliamentary support." This is clearly implied in the passage in the speech of the chairman of the Toronto Association, which 1 quoted in the last number. He maintained that the Governor General should consult v.ith no other parties than the "administra- tion," or " the leading members of the major- ity"_and that their advice should be hij rule of action. Thus excluded and thus included he could only be a " tool" in the hands of his keepers. Mr. Sullivan, in his explanato- ry speech, while he denies some of the state- ments of Sir Charles Metcalfe, which I have shown to be true, defends the very policy which his Excellency says v.-as the point of " antagonism" between him and his late ad- visers—the d'stribution of patronage. He says. "As to that part of His Excellency's letter which mentioned the injustice of giving office only to persons of the same political opinions with the existing government ; he said he had watched the course of dift'erent administrations in Canada for the last twenty years : he had been a member of the admin- istration for the last;*ighl years, and yet during the whole length of that time, he did not remember ever to have seen any of The many different parties in power pa- tronising their enemies : in fact, if the pro- position were made, he had no doubt it would have been laughed at as a piece of childish folly." Here Mr. Sullivan (and the only one of the late advisers that did so in explanation) admits and publicly cvows the " principles" on which he ana his colleagues had contended with Sir Charles Metcalfe that the government should be conducted, " as far ns rcga.ds ap] Excellency a( not have been tronage of the Council for pi historical ina marks which but one party ring the last I or four yearHi gard especial! been the sul strance by thi the people in and has been sion of the Sullivan and thertoackno\ justice to all les Metcalfe vernment fo; avovf the old nominations examples of office. But ]ilace. In a pissai paper, it has admitted tha " stipulation acceptation c resolution cc expressed un term. Let i be my witn " The syster vernor had 1; calculated ti the ministry monstratf!, a Ids Eicellen only point o misundersta neral and tli the "stipui long since I responsible lieve there The ministr the Govern could not a^ ministratio] ments prejxi continued. " stipulatio any one pr( bung perfe the Goverr not to be ir sidcrations Viger to fo with perfee ther such w ministerini be out of hi tana? T lion" in al plenty f>f lions" oft Mr. Viger lloarllie Tjdanatorij Scotia pil- ed his ad- lole of rn- e Council- liied to hia ^rnor. Hf weight of hitn fortlie uke in the courtesy — ill remem- uncillor he iment, and . The res- but he had ituents — to vould now so that hia He would nent up to ict also he at tlie late itandinj or Hcalfe as to "act can bo Iduce testi- •y made did >ral alleged jwn should he purchase s is clearly ;ech of the lion, which maintainf^d uld consult administra- if the inajor- 1 be hii rule us included e hands of i explanato- ^ftho state- hich I have very policy Llie point of his late ad- Dnage. Me jlxoellency's ice of giving ine political rnment ; he of different » last twenty ' the admin- »rs, and yet at tiratt, he e seen any n power pa- , if the pro- no doubt it s a piece of van (and the at did so in J i.vowB the is colleagues Metcalfe that cted,"asfar nsrcgn.ds appointment to olRco." Mad Ihh Excellency agreed to that principle, would it not have been virtually surrendering the pa- tronage of the Crown into th» hands of the Council for party purposes ? There is an old historical inaccuracy in Mr. Sullivan's re- marks which I must correct. There has been but one party in power in Upper Canada du- ring the last twenty years, until the last three or four years. The policy of that party in re- gard especially lo appointments to office, has been the subject of complaint and remon- strance by the U. C House of Assembly and the people in every variety of representation, und has been-alleged by many as one occa- sion of the insurrection in J837. Yet Mr. Sullivan and his colleagues repudiate the hi- therto acknowledged reform doctrine of" equal justice to all classes," and denounce Sir Char- les Metcalfe as an enemy lo Responsible Go- vernment for maintaining it, and they now avow the old high ultra doctrine of party de- nominations and party exclusiveness, as the exaviples of their policy in appointments to offioe. But more on this subject in another jilace. In a pissage quoted in a former part of this paper, it has been seen that Mr. Hincks had admitted that the late Council did require a " stipulation" of Sir Charles Metcalfe in some acceptation ofthattertn, though Mr. Boultou's resolution condemns a required stipulation or expressed understanding in any sense of the term. Let Mr. Hincks explain himself, and be my witness more at length. He says— " The system previously pursued by the Go- vernor had been very unsatisfactory, and was calculated to destroy the political influence of the ministry, and they were compelled to re- monstrate!, and come to an understanding with his Excellency on certain points. Almost the only point on which there is even mapparmt misunderstanding between the Governor-Ge- neral and the ex-ministers, is that regarding the "stipulation." That, however, would lonir since have cleared up had there been a responsible minister in Parliament. We be- lieve there is no reni difference between them. The ministry have never denied that they gave the Governor General to understand that they could not afford him any assistance in the ad- ministration if the system of making appoint- ments prejudieial to their influence was to be continued. This may be termed requirinff a " stipulation." We deny that it is so. Will any one pretend that if at the present time, it bwDg perfectly well known to every one that thl Governor has avowed his determination not to be influenced in any way by party ccn- sidcrations, his Excellency were to invite Mr. Viger to form an administration, hemight not with perfect propriety ask his Excellency whe- ther such were his viems as to hts mode of ad- ministering the governmcnl, as if so, it would be out of his power to render him any assts- tanci ? There surely would be no " «,l'Pula- lion" in all this, and we could very easily lind _i i- -f Vnirllo»> nrfredrnta for " stipula- lions" of this kind. Now, in our judgement, Mr. Viger, if called upon, as we have suppo- ijcd, woulU have not only been justified in ta- kinst such a course, but he would neglfcCt his duly to the country if he failed to do so. — If then a gsntleman called on to form an ad- ministration would be justified in coming to an understanding with the head of the Govern- ment as to the views of public policy, »are\j the members of an administration are equally war- ranted in doing so, especially after a change in the head of the government, and when they have reason to think there is a wide difference between him and them as to the policy to be pursued. As to the other points their is no dispute." [Heply to M. Viger, p. 11.] In this extract, Mr. Hincks has admitted the whole fact in language that cannot be misunderstood ; and in the passage I have ital- icised, he contradicts the whole doctrine of Mr. lioullon's resolution adopted by the House of Assembly, and substantially asserts what the Governor General resisted and what the House disclaimed. Mr. Hincks says he " could very easily find plenty of English precedents for the kind of" stipulation" which the late advisers demanded of the Governor General. 1 defy him to find one. SirRobert Peel neither in 1839 nor in 1841, demanded any " such stipulation" of her Majesty— all he knew or asked to know of her " views of pub- lic policy," was from her acts, in acting or not acting upon his advice. According to the doctrine of the late Councillors, as stated by Mr Hincks, the Sovereign must explain his political creed at the formation of every new ministry, and of course, at the very oniiti. must square I'y explicit "understanding," " his views of public policy" with theirs ai to the mo;!e of administering the government," or they would inform him, that " it would be out of their power to render him any assis- tance !" What a Proteus would the Sove- reign thus become under a succession of mi- nistries ; and what a degradation wouW thu» be stamped upon the very name of royalty.— And how does such a doctrine appear when compared with Mr. Boulton's resolution ? Again, Mr. Hincks says that the late Coun- cillors went to his Excellency not only to '• remonstrate" (that was their right and duty, if they deemed it necessary) but to "come to an understanding on certain points." It is also clear that one of those " points" relative " to the policy to be pursued" was, as to whe- ther he would " come to an understanding" with them not to " make appointments preju- dicial to their influence." What is such an " understanding" but a " stipulation ?" And what is the effect of it but " the surrender of the patronage of the Crown to the Council for the purchase of parliamentary support ? This is the doctrinal demand of the late Coun- cillors (Mr. Hincks being witness) ; this ill the allegation of the Governor General ; and the former proves the truth of the latter.— This is what I undertook to establish. _^ . Under the operation of such a" stipulation or " understanding," the Councillors could say concerning each of eleven candidates out of twelve for any office, " if yum nscensiicj? appoint such a one, you will prejudice ourin- flutnco; we must hold your Excellency to your word." He would tbui have no diBcre- tion, but must either be tdeir " tool, " or vio late the honor of hii word. It is thus that thoir required " understanding" or "stipula- tion" — the condition on which they suspend- ed their continuance in oflice — Hid imply the ■upremacy of the Council and the nullity of the Crown. How true then is the statement of the Governor General in his reply to the address of the Gore District Council, that " the resignation of those gentlemen proceed- ed from my refusing to agree to certain stipu- lations which it was unconstitutional for them lo demand, and a compliance with which was iqipossible on my part, as, in my judgement, it rvould have involved a surrender of the pa- tronage to them for party purposes,— an act to which 1 would never agree. In no other respect was the question of Responsible Go- Ternment involved in their resignation." But under the constitutional operation of Responsible Government, the advisers could ■ay to the Crown, in case of any proposed ap- pointment, " we are not prepared tojustify it : it is with the Crowp to exercise its rights and do its pleasure : but in view of it, wc must tender our resignation ; and leave others to assume the responsibility of it." It would then be with the crown to consider not mere- ly whether it desired to make such an appoint- ment, but whether it was more anxious to make it than to retain its present .idvisers ; and whether, if other advisers were called to its assistance, they would be sustained by par- liament. Thus the Crown would be free : and yet the parliament would liave a cli«ck . upon its acts. This is the constitutional check of Responsible Government. The former was an unconstitutional demand of the late Coun- cillors. This leaves the prerogative invio- late : the former makes it a " nullity." This Sir Charles Metcalfe acknowledsrea : the for- mer he resists. Ought lie not then to be sup- ported .' 1 have still another witness, although I do not need his testimony. I will give it for the edification of the reader, and as an illustra- tion of my argument. Mr. George Brown, Editor of the Glolic, and organ of the Toronto Association, thus delivered kimsef in a speech on the aoth of March :— " The Cabinet Min- ister of England is no hireling— he is not the head clerk of a public office, whose advice is asked when wanted, to be unheeded when gi- ven,— he is not the plastic non-enity conde- scendingly to bo consulted on matters of "adequate importance:" (laud cheers:) but he is the life, the moving power of esrery wheel in the whole machinery of government —he is the very Government itself. Still the minister does not one single act in his own name, or for his own benefit— all ia in the name of the Sovereign. The Cabinet Coun- cil as a party or as a power in the state, is perfectly unknown— it is the Executive of the' Crown— the mouth-piece of the Sovereign. — Tuougli the ministers aione aic ies])onBit.iie, they appear in no shape as a party. The So- vereign and the Cabinet together form one power in the Slate— Royalty is practically embodied in the British Constitution."— (Cheers.) Ii appears then that the British woik has been sadly astray in sayincr, " King, Lords and Commons." Mr. George Bro.'n will teach them better. They should Hay, '• King and Cabinet to^etAer, Lords and Commons." In this partnership of power between the " So- vereign and the Cabinet," Mr. George Brown will teach them how little is permitted to the former, and how much ia the property of the latter. The Cabinet Minister is not only the "mouthpiece" of the Executive,*but the mo- ving power," the " life," " the very Govern- ment itself," and :he Sovereign is less than "a tool"— a mere name to be used by the Ca- binet Minister to endorse and give prompt to his acts. Sr.ch is the " loud cheers" doctrine of the Toronto Associationists. And no won- der, thei, that Mr. George Brown's newly imported patriotic ire burst forth against Sir C. Metcalfe, for " trying to strike a deadly blow at the poioer and ifficiencij of the Provin- cial Executive Council," because he resisted their pretensions to be not only the " mouth- piece," but the "life," the " moving power " the " very government itself," a»d himself to be a name in form, and a nullity in practice. The words of Junius— oddly enough quoted by one of the Toronto Association''or;Uor8— were never so appropriate in the Cabinet en- croaching days in which they were written as on the present occasion :— " VVe havQ no- thing to fear from prerogative, but every thins from undue influence." Before the completion of this discussion I trust the people of Canada will more fully ap- preciate the sentiments oi Junius, and the conduct of Sir Charles Metcai.fk, as the equal-justice protector of their constitutional rights and public liberties. NUMBEK V. Dr. Paley'a refutation of Hume's celebrated sophism against miracles is the shortest argu- ment in that most admirable work— TAc evi- dences of Christianity. Dr. Paloy '» exposition of It does not occupy three pages ; and his mathematical demonstration of its falsity oc- cupies less than one pige. The most impor- tant argument, therefore, in that unrivalled work IS the shortest. So, if my argument in this paper should be much shorter than that which 1 have advanced in each of the pre- ceding papers, its importance will not be in proportion to its length, but in proportion to its brevity. The fourth proposition which I propose to demonstrate is—" That the question at issue Oelween the late Councillors and Sir Charlib Mbtcalfe, according to the statement of cer- tain vftkemstlves and others of their own par- ty, on different occasions is not that which Mr Baldwin stated to the House of ..qstembln and on which, the vot& of the .Isstmiibj waspredUa- led. ^ The Bubjattt proposition ii embraced in tions. It is « and fifty yean inpnt. hiss ing of the latf duut. This p as well as u hI bold than true tant. In the disi first thinuf nei what the qu« Btated to the which the vo' ted. The res Bill was a cir ijueslion. A plained by H has only beer never answer in the langua Nova Scotia, " As regards Lodges, it aji may arise, al been introdiii desirable." ted those cir( thut nfier un^ their bearing sion,) to an done from 8 himself pro jesty's apprc mitling it to only to rcn but to erase perso:w who duced very i slaves— thou any other co Sir Churles qualified dis and the obje I can state 1 thority— of t Excellency of Orange place a few ly [at the d? ed letter wil range dispia no blood shi religious am or humaiiit} confidence, perty, and i. excite suspi represented organs as a baso for Ma racterestic every prjva the moatf w( cate and de pectable im do the Gl follow in h or form one 1 practically ilitution." — fi wo#d haa i^injr, Lorda Bro/'n will «ay, '• Kin(f Commoni." 'enthe"So- Jorge Brown nitted to the Jertjr of the not only the but the mo- 3ry Govern- is less than d by the Ca- e prompt to rs" doctrine \nd no won- wn's newly againat Sir ke a deadly the Provin- he resisted »e " mouth- ing power," rd himself to in practice. 'Ugh quoted in orators — Cabinet en- 2re written, 'e havQ no- every thing iscussion, I ore fully ap- us, and the i.FK, as the nstitutional s celebrated lortest argu- k — The evi- 8 exposition ?3 ; and his falsity oc- nost impor- unrivalled rgument in r than that of the pre- II not be in oportion to propose to on at issue rCuarlis nent of csr- ir own. par- i wklch Mr. caspredica- The «ubj««t of di«cuMlon inTolwd in lhi« propoiition ii »• novel ai that which was embraced in eachoftlie preceding propoar tioni. It in without exa nple in tlie hundred and fifty year* history of Responfiiblo Govern- inent. It is ao, aiinply because the proceed- injjofthe late CDuniM.lors is witlmul prece- dent. This pronosition is cnnfeisedly a bold, as well as a slir'tling one. But it is no moro bold than true, and no luaa true than impor- tant. . . ., In the discussion of this proposition, the first tliini? necenaary is, to ascertain precisely what the question was whicti Mr. Baldwin stated to the House of Assembly, and on which the vote of the Aswmbly was predica- ted The reservation of the Secret Societu's Bill waaacircumKtnnce-, but it was not the question. And of that clrcumslince-px- plained by His Excellency in a manner which has only been alteinplcd to be cavilled at, but never answered-it mav be sufnciept to say in the lan circulntion by the Toronto Association, the late Couneillors have complaiaed mucli_th;il certain F.ditors in Canada claiired lor t.iein- solves and party to be cxdusivfJij the friends of British coinexion. In the first part ol llie cnaracipr ui wic ,..,..v.j -- - ,,.. i,,,„, harmonize with that of tho spirit of the latter. Thii is the first time I ever r-collect of read- ins of a minister or ex-minister ot the Crown in urcin\]!^^,,Z",J^.u.r. thin^—they represent their own party, a. tx- dus'icUj " desirous of preserving lirilish con- nection." In addition to this parly inoor.sis- toney, it may be remarked that this boasted (exe.ltisiffly f*-") "f'esire" w ■ very oddly expressed by Mr. Plincks and uie Associaii- onistB during the rebellion of 1837. i can state upon unquestionable authority that a leadincr member of the Toronto AssocMtion, :i;';o';u:rg;;^;;;;;.;t:;nd-oniy adapted to '■'i^v--^j^j,;.:^i^i837'r"Tii^/2- ;l:lie the^elfishness of part^ at the expense -. to t ,e ^bellion^of .8.7) ^J , tw%'pir.rhlfe"lvayrXer:?erd"as":n L. .... di.inot talk then of bein, " desirous evilboth to civil and religious society. Ac- cordin" to Mr. B.ildwin's recommendation, the greatest party ma- ir. the best pubhc man ' Mr. Hincks and the Toronto Associa- tion avow as ^faet what Mr. Baldwin indivi- dually urges as a recommendation. Mr. Hincks' address to the " Reformers of Fron- tenac" was not only republished m th" To- ronto Association organs, but ordered by a But they did not talk then of being " dcsiroi s ff preserving British counexion"- they would not » turn out" to preierve it ; and yet tliey now profess to be the only " mendeairous ot preservioT British connexion ! ! '•" In the above quotation, three things should he observed: Ist, The late CouncilL.rs ana the Associationists admit and declare as aj«c( that tiiev had sou.Ti,t tn fill up the vacant ot- fices with men of their own party. V-iidly, ronto Association organs, but o"""-" "? * TI.eVavovv as a doctrme tli.it the Governor special resolution of that association to be J''^>' "T"",'^' ^,, '^'^^^"^p ' pointed and circulated in the tract form In G'^'""' '"•"•; ;•^^;^l,,^.'^^t " the advice ot t^hat tract we have the following words .- f"/ ^^f .1' M^nlTse s"-that otherwise. his responsible adviser»"-that otherwise. ,, , ' . . .-- -r D.,...n,.=aiU Govern- " all the auvatu:igt.-a Ot .»- -.ii." - Gr»«l fault has been found with the late mi nistry .'because they were party men, and be- -''';■"■•;" 'r'r^^r, q'hi, of course makes tl.e tnd Ihia ii declare of Responsible C iherefore represen Metcalfe as nn em meiit, because ho ,,11.' iif liix aiisweri ments aro to made considerations. Such,bB it recr lors' own acci'UnI (r/ iroeeramtnt. — I of th! advisers of (ftlio majority ii kind of party gov not even hinted documents wliicti pretended that h« objection to tne ( c:l : or that he ei entertained the : lii-m and filling from the MiiU'i o administration ot party, he li»s ass iliorous^lily as he Ii another — a n>" ment, which the late Councillors tein of Itie gover rtrninij the parti It is this new eli the above qunle< addrusa, which 1 luhed by the T' It is this new eh (,f Mr. Sullivan, |\)lly" the idea < iny other than lurty ; it is this el the point of Charleu Metcil from an early p was this new e demand for the party purposes, slble pretext ll Responsible Gi above quoted p; ed by the Torn tiy Sir Charles i tho " demand ' cil regarded tin hastd on the. coi oil the metiniug This is the o itaiements bet iiiii late advisei an absolute im IJy Responsibl tliis sort of pt billiard Respoi Excellency m male Respons nizes ministei Bdiiie time the tlie prerogativ es; or, as Mr. it, " to besloio wUhoui rrjttet. Now, the q > eonntxion itry, in«l««d ire Uking a v,nnlrary ef- ndo, jTpnl'.f- »t Ri'»pon»i- I by t!i« iliv 1 (.f lUe Go- lut the term I'll used, bin e must liare The very ob- ia to control lie Govrrnor c confidence, nuke nppnliit- r against the g, it muHt be n utiderslanib f Responsible )U iinagine lor ly set of men lints are to be ice? Thevp. icnl acting in itself! Ami almost every , that the liout reference ounded in the it lecollectetl, ounoiUors, ami inted for wii'.p lOvintion. The iied mucli tli;il i:H"d lor lIieMi- e/i/ I lie friends first part of iIib 1 that the To- isiMy the samf wn party, a^ <-x- ins linlisli con- parly inoor.sis- at tliis boastfd if,"'^ very oddly I ilie Associaii- )f 1837. I can uthorily that a ltd Asaoci.ilion, Toronto (rel'er- " 1J ice had on- don", niiyt'tiiig." hi>ing " desirous m"- they would t ; and yet tliey men desirous of I I I" ee things should Ouncili'irft and 1 declare as nfuct p the vacant of- n parly. •Judly, ,it the Governor inlinents agninat, , " the advice ot -that otherwise, ..nusjble G"Vern- course makes tlie "of the council: t.nd Ihii ii decltred eiMHlitl to the e«i»l«no« „f Responsible Geverniuent! 3rdly, Ihey ilierefore represent, in the tiiirii .•>l«ce, Hir l^. M»-lcalle m nn enemy lo Reinoii»i'>!e Govern- iiienl, because he " declare*, in iilnioHt every nil,. ,.t hix answers to addressfs, that appoint- i;u'ntM ar.' to niudo without referonca to party cinnlderations. , , /-. -i auch, b« it recollected, is the Ulo Council. lors' own acciunt of wiis.1 they mean by imr- (,, ,roBernmint.—h i^ not merely the selection ullh! advisers nf the Crown trom the party rftho majority in the Legislature. To Ihii iiind of party government Sir C. Metcalfe hue not even iiinled an objection in any ot the documents wliich lie has put forih. It is not protended that he ever exprersed iho slightest Objection to tne cumposUion of the late Coun- cl ■ or that he ever so much as suggested or fiiterlained the idea of dismtssmiif »ome ot th-m and fiUinj up their places with P""""" from the Miik-i of the opposite party, lo tue administration of the government a«cnt.-d ;s practically and as ;i,orou>,'lily as her Majesty herself But there „ auolher-a n-w-a- d a very d.lTerent .le- ment. which the Upper Canada section of the late Councillors has introduced into their sys leuioflhegovernineiilof party-thiU u, go- rernin'r the vartij, to th* exclusion of a party. His tlufl new element which the doctrine ot the above quoted passsge from Mr. U'ncHt address, which has been ad-pted and repub- lished by the Toronto- Reform Assoc.alion ; ,t is this new elemi..t which is ll'« ^f y."' „f Mr. Sullivan, in pionouncing as'' childuU Iblly" the idea of bestowing an office upon any other than the supporters of the rul.njr ,, Jty ; it i« this new element which has form ,1 the point of " antagoniom" between Sir Charlei Metc.lfe and h.s late Councillors from an early periou of his »'i'"""''!f»\'7 '^ wan this now element w»'"=\""e'"'''«i \'', demand for the patronage oJ the ^'"^ '"' party purposes, and under the alse but plau- rble%^etext that it formed the """«« °f Responsible Goyernment, " •n^'!"''^'"' '" 'j above quoted passage from the addres adopt- ed by the Toronto Association, and " •lated hy Sir Charles Metcalfe, when he "/» t'"^' llVo " demand which was made by the Coun- Iregarded the patronage of the Crown was 0,1 the meuniuir of nesi>o,inbUOoacrnment. This i« the only solution of the coiifl ctlng Uatement. between Sir Charles M^t^'' « ""^^ In, lal. adviser., which can be given «. hout an absolute impeachment of their inlecniy.- 1 V Responsible Cxovernmenl ll.ey rraUn mean tiLsort of party patronage S-J"^^^':^ bi.tard Responsible Gover.iment-wh.Ui h « Excellency means by the phrase, the legiti- mate Responsible Governimnt, «>_•«'' ^ecg^ „„es ministerial respoiis.b. i y, ^^^ '^\ ^^ ,ai,ie lime the puro.t and ""''l'''* "^^^''f "^,^,° ibe preroARTV GOVERNMENT and th .. from the lime of his arrival in C-"»^;' h« was determined to overthrow it. J^l''^^^^ own express.on, thai » he h^f . "'^,':;"'*j. ^^ AN r.\GONISM" between his Council a a himself from the lime "f J^'y^'V/^ l^./Ji! country." (Copied from the Kingston Chron icle, January M.) , , . ,1 F ere then it is expressly «t'^''^f/^^,';^\J* «nbiect of antaTonism bnween bir Charles Me ca fe ana his lale advisers, was the que - ,onof,.|n-----^,;:;;xi:i*:?rd:. bution of the Crouin : whilBi. mr. "'»'" , scribedihaysubjectofanlag^nism^to^be^;;- (jueitiou ol mo rt^At 'V '«' • — Wi 11 I''-. suHed in respect to appointments to <>$"■ 11 is therefore as dear as that two and two make four, that the question at issue between ThTcounciUors and Sir CkarUs M,:tcr,fe^^cas not that which Mr. Baldwin stated to the House of Assembly, and on which the v >tr. of the .is- semblv was predicated; which i» the proposi- tion that I was to prove— a proposition, tne facts of which are without a precedent or a parallel in the history of Responsible t-"ver". ment. Comment obscures and enfeebles when the naked text itself is luminous as a Bun-beam, and er-^i'" w^^h the voice of thun- der. Yet there is a peal still louderin tlie recent debate of the British Mouse of Com- mona-a debate vhlch stamps with the fcign- est authority, the truth of every '^^l^'fl'H' the correctness of every view, and the just- ness of the warnings which I have giveix m my introductory address and precedmg num- bers of this aryiument. „f ♦,.o P S.— Just before the completion ot the foregoinsryi/f the Empire— of his !i:iving done so deliberately and wilfully— that there may be no dupes, and no room for tiie plea of ignorance which many made who were implicated in the movements of 1837.— But I hope the religion, the good sense, the patriotism of the people will duly appreciate the liberal and admonitory counsels of the Bri- tish Governinent— Ihatno military provisions, nor Royal proclamations, nor removals from olFioial situations, mny be required to sustain the constitution as maintained by the sov- prei-rn authority ; bat mat the grt-at majority of ail classes will unite to maintain a consti- tutioal and affectionae connexion with iM mother country, and a legitimate Responsible Government, upon the principles of equal justice to all classes of her Majeity's Cana. "dian subjeQts. Ined September, ble Govern- nsellors. — A II Russell re- intenance of miry (Great question can led. VVl, .is connexion," i determined ance ajjainst r the Siike of tut:onal,ava- ;ej; or respect '. efforts liave the benefit of and id a con- justice for all ects, and not t of party fa- Reader, Ibe- ;al ground on > step too fur ning man in .d taken more leriod ! How lie steps into / led. But it te for even a )e the frather- I iheoverhang- Mefcalfe will, an"e and libe- ir.ity lor tlieK' inirs of the Iin- undertitood by tiiat when the lie of demarca- rawii— by plac- icial, and mili- hnnds of lliosc nstituted autho- lay be taken by dismssed from lit the clearest himst If against Empire— of his and wilfully — md no room for uany made who lents of 1837. — [rood sense, the July appreciate insels of the Uri- itary provisions, ' removnia from |uired to sustain led by the sov- ! orrfat majority intiiin a conati- lexion with Ih^ lato Responsible iciples (if pqual Majesty's Cana' NUMEER VI. Thefflh proposition which I am about to prove is, " Tiiat Sir Charles Metcii.lfe's stats- merits of his views of Resjionsildc Guvcrnment involve all. that is rontninetl in the Resolutions of the House of Asscmhbj, September 3, 1841, and that the criticisms of Messrs. Baldwin, Hinchs, Brown, and others, on certain of his Excellency's Replies, arc unfair and unjust." Tliere is not an example in the history of England, since the commencemcntof thesys- teni of Responsible government in 1688, of any British monarch ever having been called upon to explain his views of that system; of his reverence for '.t ; of his a.herence to it.— I have never yet met with an iristance in •which the monarch attempted to state his views on tiiat system. I have not even found in any History of Eni^land, a definition of that system, any more than I have met with a de- finition of life or matter, or man himself. 1 have met with descriptions of each from their properties, powers, and operations ; but have never learned the essential nature of theni — So 1 have read descriptions of Responsible Government, but no definition of its essence. 1 find British Responsible Government where 1 find the British Constitution and the Com- mon Law of England, not in any report, any act of Parliament, any plans of agreement adopted at a particilar time between the bo- verei The views expressed by his Excellency on'the system of Responsible Government, are regarded by the Uons.- of Assembly ot New Brunswick and Nova Scoua-inoludmg the Reformers of both Provinces-as consis- tent with the Resolutions of 1841, and as per- fectly satisfactory. Mr. »°^^V v'l Nor^h Responsible Government in British North America-moved for the adoption aaufnac-ns on the journals of the Nova Scotia House of AMerobly,,th9 resoljitiona of i841, «id Sic I Cliarlei' reply to the Gore Distriol Council, as the basis of the system of Responsible Go- vernment in that Province, and ai containing all that he denirfd. The Toronto Associa- lionists dp:;;and what the Reformers in the other Provinces of British North America do not ask for, and what the Imperial authorities declare is incompatible with monarchial innli- tutions, and with the existing connexion be- tween Great Britain and Canada. This is another trumpet voice fact, which I entreat the reader to consider deeply before he fol- lows the Toronto Associalionists another step. But a careful examination of what Sir V. Metcalfe 1-r stated, will demonstrate the agreement of his views with the resolutions of 1841. First, then, let those resolutions be stated and understood. They are as follows, as quoted by the late Councillors in their com- munication lo the Governor General ; "That the head of the Executive Govern- ment of this Province, bi-in'r within the limits of his Government, the Representative ofthe Sovereign, is responsible to the Imp( riiil au- thority alone ; but that, nevertheless, the ma- nagement of our local affairs can only be con- ducted by him, by and with the pssistance, counsel, and informal ri of subordinate olh- cers in the Province •," and " that in order to preserve between the different branches of the Provincidt I'arliament tiiat harmony which is essential to the pe.ice, welfare, and ^ond go- vernment ofthe Province, the chief advisers ofthe Representative ofthe Sovereign consti- tuting a Provincial Administialion under him, ought to be men possessed of the confidence ofthe Re. resentatives (.' the people, thus af- fording a guarantee that the well understood wishes and interests of the people, which our gracious Sovereign has declared shall be the rule ofthe Provincial Government, will, on all occasions, be faithfully represented and advocated." Such are the resolutions which are called the " Magna Charta" of Canada, and which fcjir Charles Metcalfe is charged with having violated in practice and in theory. Let the reader consider their import. Do they in- volve any thing like the demands wliich I have shown in the preceding part of this dis- cussion the late Councillors and the Toronto Associationists have made of the Governor General' Do they imply that the Repre- sentative ofthe Sovereign must slate before- hand his views as to his future policy in regard to appointments toofHce, or any thing else ?— Do they imply that H. E. must come to some previous understanding with his advisers as to the principle upon which the government is to be condncted ? That he is to engage to make only one kind of appointments ? That he is to consult only with the leaders of the majority ? That he is to have no correspon- dence with persons on any ofthe affairs of the Province, except through his" chief advi- sers?" Th»t he in to make no offer of an ap- pointment without consulting his Counc.l .-— That he is not even to havealistof the ni»«i'« of applicants for office, except in the tuti^of «f tiM ^retary of the FroTinco ? .. ^ .*■.!. shall agrea to make the influence of hi< advisors the rule of distributing the patronage of the Crown .' Again, do the above resnlutionn require or imply that tho chief ndvisirs of the repre senlalive ofthe Sover<'i;:n should 'if UuLds of Deparlmm'.f ? I know that L'lrd IJurhain 'a Report ivcommends it, and that Sir Charles .^:ctcal^L> h:\s expressed his own opinion to the same etTeat. But do tho above resolu- tious— our Magna Charta— the only authority recognir.ed by the Crown or House of Assem- ljly_re()uire it ? Do those resolutions require thattha "chief advisers" ofthe Crown shall consistof three, or six, or nine individuals.' Do those resolutions require any thing as to the mod' of interconrse betv^een the Crown and its advisers .' Furtliermore, do those resolutions, inter preled by tho practice of men in various and less imporlr.nt positions in society, imply that no act whatever— how orJiuary soever— caa bo performed by the head of the Executive without the formally express^'d opinion of tho Council .' Isnot Uie fundamental principle — tho public " guarantee" — in those resolutions this :— That the advisers ofthe Crown shall ■consist of men who possess the confidence of Parliament,— hav, ;,' a right to retire from ofiice whenever, in iheir judgement, the acts of the Kxeci.tive arc not in accordance with the wishes of Parliament, and the Parliament hnving a ri^Mit to influence their removal whenever they countenance a policy adverse to the public interests ? From this it is, I think, obvious, that the advisers ofthe Crown should be competent and have the right of oflerin? advice on every act for which they are responsible — a ri:^ht which the Governor General has as explicitly avowed as any of the late Councillors. But it dues not tl ere- fore follow — taking usage as an interpreter — that any act performed by the Crown without consulting its advisers, is therefore, unconali- tutiondl. A merchant has an agent or clerk ; and strictly speaking, that agent or clerk has no riglit to perforin any act without the sanc- tion °of his emplujer"; yet he may perform many acts of which that employer is ignorant until after they are performed ; but he is ne- vertheless responsible for those acts, and in most cases vo;untarily adopts the.ii after they are thus performed. And if an agent orclerk can do so as a matter of common u.sagn and necessary convenience, may not a Governor do so without the actual ndvice of his owa subordinate ofhcers ? Those oflicers could as- sume the acts of the Governor in either of two ways — by recurhmending them, or by adopting the^in, after they were performed.— They would act alike voluntarily in both ca- ses ; and there would be no more hardship in the one case than in the other. It has been rspresented as a hardship for a man to be held responsible for an act that he did not advise. It would be so if his responsibility were con- pulsimj. But as un adviser ot tho (/ruwn,no man -erd be responsible for an Executive act,— either before or after accomplishment unleii he chootts. He can retire lioia office any hour he pleases. What is done from spontaneous choice cnnnot be a hardship. — But suppose those officers were to experience inconvenirnce .is well ns mnrtifintilion from their royal master doiiirj acts without tiieir ad- vice, and were to apprise him of it and inform liim that on the occurrence of similar acts — this would he rii^lit and constitutional ; but C)r Iheni in addition to demand of this an en- gagement or understanding that he would do nothing without their advice, and evnn noth- i.^g contrary to it when given, would be be- coming (Ur.lalors or stipulators to, instead of advisers to, the Crown — would be going out of their own province and invading that of the Crown — would be insulting its dignity, invading its freedom, and reducing it to a «' tool." In these remarks I have snppossed a case ns strong as that which tiie lute councillors have alleged against Bir Charles Metcalfe; and even in such a case, it will b? seen that Ihey have not acted constitutionally. Cut be it recollected that his E.xcellency denies ever having made an appointment without the kuowledffe of one or more of his advisers. In a despatch to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated December 26, 1843, his Kx- cellency says, " that he did not recollect of a sinitlc instance in which he hud made an op- pnintmint leithoiit hdn^r previously vmde uc- quaiiUe.d with their sentiments on the subject. But let us now consider his '.-.cf lleiicy 's own words on the subject of llosponsible Go- vernment—words must explicit, yet most shami fully perverted and misrepresented by h-s accusers. NotseeUinc to shitdd himself und<*r the reserve of prerogative, his Excel- lency has unequivocally staled his sentiments from the first day of the dispute, in his pro- test against the late ('ouncillors' intemied ex- planation, he says—" The Gutrrnor General siihscribes entirely to the Resolalions of the Le- gis'.alice .^isskmlily if Ihe'Ard Hcplemhrr, 1841, and considers any other system of Government but that Khich recosrnises respunsO.Hily to the people, and to the Reprcstntativt Assembly, as impracticdbln in. this Province." This was as much as Lord Sydenham, who wrote tho?e resolutions, ever said — as much ft« Sir Charles IJagot ever said, Such a de- claration from the Crown is nil that it could siv to any nation or people on such a subject. The late Councillor* ihcinselves, in their in- tendid explanation, admit that ^^ His Excel- lency disnvnxBed any intention of altering the course ofadministriition of public affairs lohick kc found on his arrival in Canada." Yet have they, uotwitlistnudmg, held him up to the public a- an enemy of Uesponsible Governmrnl, and hb s--eUiiig to subvert the constitutional liberties of the people of Cana- da ! Sir C. iMetcftife has in some instances given even a detiiiied exposition of his views of Responsible Government. I will select and examine the paper wliicli lias been the gubjecl of t'le most 'inf.ur and unjust crili- cisiii. I reler to his reply to the address of the Gore Disltict. On* pbiaie of a long puagraph of thii re- ply has been the subject of columns of ariir- cisms in the Banner and Oloba and Examintr newspapers, and by Mr. Baldwin and others, whilst they have not so much as alluded to a word of all the rest a* the entire niragrapli (every word of which I beg the reader to weigh) iti as follows : " But if you mean ilia*. the government should be administered ac- cording to the well understood wishes and in- terests of the people ; that the resolutions of September IS-Jl, should be faithfully adhered to; that it should be competent to the council to offer advice on all occasions, whether as to patronage or otherwise ; and that the Gover- nor should receive it with the attention due to his constitutional advisers; aipl > >n8nlt with them on all esses of adequiue impor- tance ; that there should be a cordial co-ope- ration aiid sympathy between him and them ; that the Council should be responsible to the Pruvinciil Parliament and the people; and that wiien the acts of the (jovernor are such as they do not choose to be responsible for, they sliall be ut liberty to resign ; then I en- tirely agree with you, and a-"' no impractica- bility in carrying on llespon.ible Government in acolony on that footing, provided that the respective parties engaged in the undertaking be guided by moderation, honest purpose, common sense, and equitable minds, devoid of party spirit." Now, after much reflection and careful ex- amination it is my firm belief that the above paragraph contains not only the essentials of responsible government,biit a morefull, i 're explicit, more det!\i;ed, more practical recog- nition of that system than is contained either in tho naked Resolutions of September, 1641, or in Lord Durham's Report, or even in both documents taken together. Nothing but ihe most downright party interest, and party feel- ing, and party criticism, c.oxldifive it a differ- ent interpretation. Well therefore have the Toronto Associ.vtionists and their city organs kept out of sight every part of that paragraph except a single phrase ; well have '.hey snatched tlsat phrase from its natural connec- tion, and perverted it f.om its legitimate meaning. The first article of their creed is party ; And therefore truth and reason, and juslie^ must succumb t^ party. But suppose the system of interpretation adopted •n this instance !y Messrs. Baldwin, Hincks, Brown and othi 8, were adopted in interpretingeven the inspired Scriptures themselves, what might not those saored writings be made to say .' Suppose even a verse — much more a phrase— were torn from the context, and in- terpreted irrespectively of that context, wht sort of a bible would we have .' What sort of doctriues would it teach, or rather would it not tecch ? Yet such is the prinniple of inter- pretation practiced by the accusers of His Excellency in respect to this reply— all others of his replies on .vliich it may not be neces- sary in this argument for me to dwell. Let tiie reuiier r^iildiily consiarr v.-;iai liiO Governor General does uay and does not say in the above quoted paragraph. it will b« obaerved that lit cefais tiirougK- i( «| a '. 3!- «ul to his coancU or advissra, in thait eallec- tive capacity. -. „ . It will be observed, that he carefully and clearlv dislineuishes between their competency or right and his obhgttlion that the former ex- tends to " odvice on all occasions, whether as to patronage or other Ise-" that tlie latter extends to '♦ all cases ol . lequate importance. Yet has the Governor General been charged thronghout with liavinff denied the right of advice to his late Councillors. It is the phrase " cases ofadequate impor- tance," which has been perverted and made so much capital of by the Associationist.— Let us examine it, before vte proceed to the other parts of his Excellency's reply. The accusers of his Excellency represent that he is to be the judge of the " cases of adequate importance," and therefore that in the exer- cise of the undeSnpd discretion which he thus reserves to himself, he can swamp the whole system of responsible government. This 1 entirely deny. I deny it not merely " upon authority;" but 1 aftirm that his Excellency can be the judge of the " cases of adequate" only in the initiatory part of an Executive act, but that ultimately the Council themselves, ei- ther in their collective or inf/anduaf capacity, are the judge of" all cases ofadequate impor- tance" in which their advice shall or shall not be given. In the preceeding (fourth) number of this argument I adverted to the fact tliat two me- thods had been adopted in the distribution of patronage intimated in the following words of his Excellency's protest : He appealed to the number of appointments made by him on the recommendation of the Council, or mem- bers of it in their departmental capacity."— Here then, in "cases of adequate impor- tance," the " recommendation of the Coun- cil" was given ; in " cases not ofadequate im- portance," the recommendaaon of individual «« members of the Council in their departmen- tal capacity" was acted upon: a distinction understood and acted upon by the late Coun- cillors themselves. Now, this distinction the Governor General expressly states in the for- mer part of this same reply to the address of the Gore District Council, and to which he of course refers in the phrase under consider- ation. He says, " Ifyou mean that every word and deed of the Governor is to be previously submitted for the advice of the Council, then you propose what, besides being unnecessary and useless, (or not of " adequate impor- tance") is utterly impossible consistently with the due despatch of business." Here then is the very doctrine of the heretical and awful phrase "cases of adequate importance." — Now, what does Mr, Hincks, in behalf of himself and colleagues, say in regard to thii. very doctrine f In his review of Mr. Viger's pamphlet, page 13, he says— " Every memhet of the late Council was as well aware as the Governor can be. that it is " physically im- possible to make formal reference to the Couti- » oil of dvery matter that comes up for deoi- •ion ;" nor did any ofUiem desirt aueh a sys- t»mtob*practited, Eitty act [no coaverw- tion] of the Gownor, however, roust be communicated by his Secretary, and that Se- cretary should be a responsible minister tho- roughly acquainted with the policy of which he IS a member, and capable of adviainir the Governor on every subject not of sufficient iir-portance [or not of "adequate iniporlauce"] to be referred to the Council. If the Secreta- ry recommends any step, which for his own sake, he will not do, his coUongues will of course hold hitn responsible to them.'' This then is the identical doctrine, express- ed in the almost identical words, which the Governor General stated in his reply to th3 address of the Gore District Council ; and the phrase, " case^ of adequate importance," in the latter part of that reply, is a mere recog- nition of that doctrine in his Excellency's avowed course of proceeding with his Coun- cil. Neither the Governor General, nor any other perbon that 1 have ever heard of, has ever otherwise than professed that "every act of the Governor must be communicated by the secretary, and that secretary a respon- sible minister ;" and I can farther state upon unquestionai.le authority of that secretary (as he will doublles.s state in Parliament,) that no act of the Governor has been communicated except by him since the resignation of Mr. Harrison. I have heretofore shewn that it was impossible that any act of the Governor General could otherwise than be communica- ted by the responsible provincial secretary, as he alone kept the seal of the Province, the stamp of which was necessary to render any decision of the Governor General an act.— That any gentleman can, and il )ubtle3S will, state that such has been the invariable prac- tice without exception. But I am not yet done with this abused phrase " cases of adequate importance." In a preceding number! have shewn that admit- ting—contrary to fact, contrary to the decla- ration of his Excellency— the very worst con- struction that his accusers have sought to put upon his mode of making appointments ; sup- posing him to have decided upon making apoointments without knowing the sentiments of any member of the Courwil (the reverse of which his Excellency states to Lord Stanley) respecting it, his purpose could not become an act except throui.'h his responsible aectela.- ry, according to the'doctrineof the late Coun- sellors themselves, as stated by Mr. Hincks in the passage above qaoted. On receiving information, or direction as to that purpose or determination, the responsible secretary could, if he thought it not a " case ofadequate impor- tance" to "require further ceremony, make out the commission and affix the official seal to it ; or, if he thought it a " case of adequate importance," he could go and state his view» to the Governor General respecting it ; or, if he thought ita" case ofadequate importance," he could lay it before one or all of his collea- gues ; and if ttiey ihougiil it a "case a: 3,ut quale importance," they could send one or twoof theirnumber, or go in a body to his Excellency, and offer their advice and remon- Btrance, •nd if thej thought it b " cose of adequate im| It is clear th " cases of ad and essential lors thetnseli subordinate ( lency. This memi of adequate so much disr ployed, and (. been made u| mere mentioi sponsible gov the late Coui led, and whi( derslanding r of the practic But party st not hesitate t hold of the fo er — will seiae and wrest it f sential to its i construction order to adv Diana of pari Thus much bered phrase, of which I ho all other " c shall have be with me paus of ear h of thi Metcalfe's re[ I repeat them should be adn understood w —That the R should be fa should be con advice on all age or otherw should receivi constilutiona cordial co-ope him and them 8K UESPO.NSIB ME.NT AND TH THE ACTS OF THEY DO NOT FOR TllEV SlIO It is imp IBS express a mo system of res( lained in thesi have the accu of the oratoi made the slig if they were r as they would 1b this telling the part of ca this acting wi ment and the Or is th.is not ness of every ty ? Would words and acl preientative c r, roust be nd that Sfi- inister tlio- y of which dvidini; the of atifficitnt ipnrlauce"] lie Seoreta- or his own ues will of fin." ne, express- which the eply to th3 cil ; and the irtance," in nere recog- Ixcellency's 1 his Coun- ral, nor any E>ar(i of, has that "every rnmunicated ,ry a respon- r state upon secretary (as lent,) that no rnmunicated ition of Mr. lesvn that it le Governor oommunica- secretary, as rovinop, the render any ral an act. — ubtless will, iriable prac- this abused rtance." In ithat admit- to the decla- ry worst con- sought to put tnient9;8up- ipon making le sentiments •he reverse of 4ord Stanley) not become isible aecre la- he late Coun- fir. Hindis in •n receiving at purpose or jretary could, ?quate impor- iny, make out flicial seal to I of adequate ate his view* iting it ; or, if importance," of his coilea- 'casc a" aac" send one or I body to his ce and remon- I B >• cue of adequate importance," offer their resignation. It is clear then, tliat the whole question of " cases of adequate importance," is ultimately and essentiallij in the hands of the Council- lors themselves, and only in an initiatory and subordinate degree in the hands of His Excel- lency. This memorable phrase, therefore — "cases of adequate importance"— respecting which so much disreputable criticism has been em- ployed, and so many scandalous attacks have been made upon the Governor General, is the mere mention of a fact in the working of re- sponsible government, which, as seen above, the late Councillors themselves have admit- ted, and which every man of common under- derslanding must admit who knows anything of the practical operations of that machinery. But party selfishness and spirit — as it dues not hesitate to stretch forth the hand and lay hold of the forbidden fruit of prerogative pow- er — will seize upon any phrase however just, and wrest it from any connexion however es- sential to its meaning, and place upon it any construction however arbitrary and unjust, in order lo advance tlie interests of the great Diana of party. Thus much t,.en on the ever-to-be-remem- bered phrase, " cases of adequate importance," of which 1 hope we may hear no more until all other "cases of adequate importance" shall have been disposed of. Let the reader with me pause, and ponder upon the import ofearhof the other phrases in Sir Charles Metcalfe's reply to the Gore District Council. I repeat them again — " that the government should be administered acnording to the well understood wishes and interests of the people ; —That the Resolutions of September, 184J, should be faithfully adhered to;— that it should be competent to the Council to offer advice on all occasion*, whether as tn patron- age or otherwise ; — and that the Governor should receive it with the attention due to his constitutional advisers ; that there should be a cordial co-operation and sympathy between him and them ; Th,vt the Council should BE UESPO.NSIBLK TO THK PROVINCIAL PaHLIA- ME.NT AND THE PEOPLE ; — AND TII.VT WHE.N THE ACTS OF THE GOVERNOR ARE SUCH AS THEV DO NOT CHOOSK TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TUEV SllOl/LD BE AT LIBERTV fO RESIGN." it is impiBsible fir tlin English language to pxpress a more complete recognition of the iystem of responsible government than is con- tained in these phrases .' Yet not one of them have the accusers of Sir C. Metcalfe, or any of the orators of the Toronto Association, made the slightest reference, any more than if they were not in existence ! Is this doing as they would be done by' Is this fair.' — Is this telling the whole truth .' Is jnis acting the part of candid and truth-loving men.' Is this acting with a true regaid to good govern- ment and the best interests of the country .' — Or is this not actini* with an utter reckless- ness of every thing except the Molooh of par- ty ? Would the reader like to have his words and acts interpreted as those of the re- preientativo of the Sovereign have beet» in- terpreted by hi« accnuerj ? No Governor of Canada has ever avowedly attached so much importance to the Council, and so fully stated the necessity of constantly consulting them, as Sir Charles Metcalfe. So much so, that in his reply to the address of the inhabitants of Russell, his Excellency says—" No Governor could dream of administering the government of his Province without constant lonsultation with his (Council. Every Governor must be sensible of the advantage that he would derive from the aid, advice and information ofcoun- cillors and heads of departments, in whom ho can place confidence. But that is not the question at issue. If it were or if it had been, the country would not have been troubled with the present dispute. The demand of the party now obstructing her Majesty's govern- ment is, thatithe Governor, who is responsible to his Sovereijin and the British nation for the welfare of Canada is with respect to the government of this country to be a nonenity, or in other words u tool of any party that may acquire a temporary ascendancy. To this I could not and never can submit This was the meaning of the stipulations demanded of me, and which my duty to the Crown render- ed compliance with impossible." My conclusion therefore is, " That Sir Charles Metcalfe's statement of his views of Responsible Government, involve all that is contained in the resolutions of the House of Assembly Se-ptember 3, 1841, and that the cri- ticisms of Messrs. Baldwin, Hincks, and others, on certain of his Excellency's replies are unfair and unjust." Now, let the reader mark the professed ob- jecf and real conduct of the leaders of the To- ronto As.'^ociation. In their late address lo the people of Canada, they define their object to be as follows : — "Our object is, that the Governor General should have advisers— that these should have the confidence of the people's Representatives — that they should be strictly responsible for all the acts of the Executive Government while they continue to hold office." Such is the professed object of the Toronto Association. Now has the Governor General denied this? Has he not assertsd it in most explicit terms .' Why then are the Toronto Associationists at war with him .' 1 answer because their real, object is as different from their pro/«s*erf object as night is from day. — They dare not state their real object in words. Their professed object before the people, is Responsible Government in as moderate terms as Sir Charles Metcalfe has employed. Their real object — as interpreted by iheir stipula- ting demands upon the Governor General- is Responsible Government in a sense that would make the Crown a " tool" in the iiands of a party ; or in a sense, as the Imperial Go- vernment emphatically declare, would make "Canada an independent republic." Henoo the moderation of their actSi as at war with: the Governor General and Her Majesty's Government. Actions speak louder tlian words. The words of tiie Associationists prove what I hare stated, that the GoTernor m Guneral avers and maintain* all that the peo- pUi of Canada understand by Responsible Go- Ternment; tho past and present actions of'the late Counsellors prove all that the Governor General has alleged respecting them. If they liave no other object in view tlian wliiit they Iiavo above explained, they have no cause (or war with the British Goviirnnient. Their being at war with the liritisii Govern- raent, proves that they have some ulterior ob- ject in view. A few words in reply to objections. It has been objected that his Excellency had observ- ed, shortly after his arrival in Canada, un '• antagoni-sm" between him and his late ad- visers on the principle UDon which the patro- nage of the Crown should be di.slributed, nnd thfit he never disclosed it until the interviews which took place on Friday and Saturday ibe Ji4th and 2'nh of November. This is most honorable to his Excellency, and is one of tlie circumstances of his public life that will en- hance his reputation in the estimation of the future historian. Few British monarclis have been so considerate of the feelings and influence of their adviser.^ as not to let it be known when their feeling.s were hostile to liie policy recommended bv those advisers. Even " iiood Queen Anuo" did not hesitate to let it be known tliat she re^^arded the advi eers whom she disliked as her "enemies," nor did the Georges, First, Second, Tliird, and Fourth, conceal their " antagonism" with certain advisers and ministries, to whom per- sonally, or to whose policy they were oppos- ed. It was notorious throughout ttie nation that there was an " antagonism" between William IV and his advisers, from 183"2 to 1837, that he availed himself of the opportu- nity that presented itself, in 1834, to get rid of them ; that though thev w»re restored, and continued in office until iiis death, yet that during the three first years of liis liie espe- cially, his " antiigonism" witli tiieui was in- veleir.'", and t!:e papers teemed with " public ru'nours," an 1 even (examples of it, In Kng- land, such as " antagonism" or even " public rumours" of it, has never been considered a Bufiicient ground of ministerial resignation, (ir even of public ccuiplaint. As long aa a minister's advice, aa to acts, ij so far assented to by the Crown as to cna- iile him to retain the confidence of Parlia- ment, he continues in olTice and counsels the ntfairB of tho nation, whatever may bo tha |iersonal f.elings of the Sovereign, or the " public rumours ' of his feelings. But did yir Charles Meicalfe subject his late advisers to such a disadvantage.' Suppose that he had avowed this "antagonism" against con- ducting the government upon party princi- ple«, as to the distribution of patronage short- ly after he had arrived in Canada, would it not JK.ve given a great advantage to their op- ponents ." Dia not the late Counsellors make use of Ills I'-xcellency's nanip ir. everv fonp. to strengthen themselves and vveoken their adversaries.' When then did his Excellency acknowledge and avow this " antagoniani .'"— Only when the late Councillora, not content with advising him on acts and measures, an- nounced to him formally the principle of pnr- ty government in the d.stribution of patron- age, and demanded of him to enter into a sti- pulation, or, as Mr. Hin^ks expresses it, "come to an understanding on certain points," that he would not in future make " appoint- ments prejudicial to their influence." Ilia Excellency refused to come to such an under- standing ; and then, and not till then, did he express his " antagonism" to the principles of party patronage, which he had observed go- verning their recommendations to oflice from his first arrivil in the Province, but to whicli his formal assent was then for the first time demanded, llillierto, without discussing or alluding to the party principle which he°had noticed influencing their advice as to patron- age, he had considered each case on it* me- riia, and sought to meet the wishes and sup- port the influence of his advisers, ns far as possible, both in abstaining from and in ma- king appointments. But when the principle — the newly avowed, the false and unchris- tian principle— was broUi:)it before him for his sanction, that tiie prerogative might be bound to the car of party, he avowed liis "antagon- ism" to the principle, and asserted, on behalf of his Sovereign and her Canadian subjects, the prerogative of justice and impartiality to all classes and parties. With what commanding dignity an author- ity to the conscience and soul of uncorrupted man, does this parental and divine -principle, this principle avowed and contended for by Reformers in Canada during the last twenty years— contrast with the seifish, the ignoble and ignobling principle laid down by Mr. llincks as the fundamental principle of (his^ representative government, wlien in reference to this very antagonis;n, he says in his third letter to the London Morning Chronicle, " I admit the good intentions ot the Governor, but I am firmly persuaded that no representa- tive government ciin be conducted unless on party principles." Where tiie principles ol a government are party, their parly must he the first interest in the state, and where party is the first intere.st in the state,' he Lord have mer- cy upon all who are not otti.e dominant party, and away with tho prerogative. This doc trine is tlie very antipodes of conatitnliouai monarchy — does not even attain to the virtue of republicanism — and is the very essence of oligarchy and democracy — the demo- cracy of Athens when fw^racwm was in the ascendant — the democracy of England when Cromwell seized the crov.n— the oligarcliy of Athens wlien the Thirty Tyrants ruled — the oligarchy of England when the Earl of Lei- cester and twenty-three others ssed to his on the subject, in otKce ; ll)us lellency and to 1 what he had it to the Coun- Uisfaclury and sers, as scon as his Excellency eding to which oquiescing and other example •alleled in con- ualled by those icillurs, that 1 )er of thisargu- ' the Governor iterated times to tlitf influence 3 the appoint- ofthe Peace in leir great case, to his Excel- Now, although r appointment lat question at irs have select- le against the lave no objec- on this single judge between eral. What I case is derived istry, and from District of the hurch Presby- ntiments, who other of Mr. giton, on her racant office in nly surviving ughters were ssaries of life, ivul applicant ed by tiie late itous circum- well had come Pistrict with coniiderablo property,— had been the princi- pal founder ofone of the set'lements of that district,— hao like many of his generous coun- trymen, exhajsted his mpans.and becrme cm barrasaed in his circumstances— was appoint- ed sheritt'of that district, and died in debt; that his eldest «on succeeded his deceased fa- ther in the office, and to him the family look- ed for support ; that son died also, leaving a younger brother nearly o; age, and nearly through his legal studies, as the only earthly prop of his mother and support of his sisters. Thatmolher, notcontented with having trans- milled a written application, came Unperson to Kingston to lay her case before the Gover- nor General. Her son was not a member of any secret society, and too young to be rcgar- cied as a political character. He're then vvere the cases of two candidates laid before the Governor General— both equally well quali- fied for the office applied for. In behalf of the one pleaded political party purpose—the "principle of government on party principles" — in behalf of the other, pleaded the wants of the widow and the fatherless. Which plea was the more likely to affect the tender and generous breast of Sir Charles Metcalfe ?— To which plea was he the more likely to lis- ten, to the tears of the destitute widow, or the ex-Councillors' relentless doctrine of party patronage ? The case is abore reasoning. Humanity is rather disposed to weep over the shrivelling and heartless selfishness of party, than to defend his Excellency in such a case— to e.xecrate a system of policy that extinguishes every feeling of individual generosity, rather than vindicate an act which ought to call down a country's spontaneous blessings upon the head of its author. If HE whose example is not beneath the imitation of parties, any more than of Governors, went with orphan sisters at Bethany, and raised the son of the widow of Nain, that he might support and comfort his mother, is Sir Charles Metcalfe to be pilloried and ostracised as the enemy of Canada for acting Against the advice of party, in order to confer upon a widow's son a " tri- fling appointment," that he might minister both to his mother, and his sisters ? I believe there is a heart as well as a head in Cana- da ; and I mistake the sympathies of that heart if they do not embrace that man as the friend of the country and the just guardian of constitutional rights, who prefers exercising the prerogative of the crown for the relief of the widow and the fatherless, rather than prostitute it at the demon-shrine of party patronage. Pleader, was your mother that widow, and you her only son and support, and was you qualified for that situation, what would you think of the Governor who would exercise the lawful prerogative to enable you to sup- port her, and what would you think of the system of government that would proscribe you because you were not of the dominant party ? Upon the appointraeut therefore even of Mr. towall—tht case of Iha late Counoillors— I fearleBsly appeal In the jijstico of patriollgm, the humanity of honest men of all parties in Canada, to support his Excellency and her Majestyls government against the crusade of the late Councillors, and against the unprin- cipled principle of exclusive patronage. ^ Thus much, then upon the views of tho Governor General— professedly and practi- cally— on the system of Responsible Govern- ment, as enunciated in Ihe House of Assem- bly's resolutions of September, J84I. 1 might here dismiss the subject, confident of an honest country's decision upon it. But 1 will add an illustration from British practice —all the late Councillors say that they desire. I will give then, instead of the alleged uncon- stitutional practice of Sir Charles Metcalfe, the acknowledged constitutional practice of George the Third of blessed memory. Tho reader may easily judge, as he attentively pe- ruses and weighs the facts, whether there would not have been a revolution in England had the late Councillors been Ministers, and had they George the Third as head of the Go- vernment, in«;tead of Sir Charles Metcalfe. 1 give those facts not as to what ought to be, but to show what has bien British practice ; and with these facts, and the elucidation of the principle, as suggested by them, I will conclude the present number, feeling that the importance of the subject is an ample apology for the length of the following extract from Lord Brougham's Historical Sketches of Statements, — Article George 3:— " George 3 was impressed with a lofty feel- inirofhis prerogative, and a firm determina- fi 1 to maintain, perhaps extend it. At all events, he was resolved not to be a mere name, nor a cipher in public affairs; and, whether from a sense of the obligations imposed upon him by his station, or from a desire to enjoy all its powers and privileges, he certainly, while his reason remained entire, butespecial- ly during the early period of his reign, inter- fered in the affairs of government more than any prince who ever sat upon the throne of this country since our monarchy was distinct- ly admitted to be a limited one, and its execu- tive functions were distributed among respon- sible ministers. The correspondence which he carried on with his confidential servants during the ten most critical years of his life, lies before us, and it proves that hip attention was ever awake to all occurrences of the go- vernment. Not a step was taken in foreign, colonial, or domestic affairs, that he did not form his opinion upon it, and exercise his in* fluence over it. The instructions to ambassa- dors, the orders to governors, the movements offerees down to the marching of a single battalion in the districts of this country. — The appointments to all offices in church and state, not only the giving away of judgeships, bishoprics, regiments, but the subordinate promotions, lay and clerical : all these form the topics of his letters : on all his opinions uie pronounced decisively ; on all his will is declared peremptorily. In one letter ho ds. cides the appointment of a Scotch puisne judge ; in anoUier the narch of a troop froK "iHl I Uiickinghnmsliirn tn Yorl<8l nro , inalliird llic f t.c.inmatlou to tlio Dt-niiPry of Worcfbter ; in fitted at tl a toiiillilifsays Uiat, " if Adaui, llio arclni.'t:!, niiccoeds W.irsley at tlie iluard of Works, he fihall th.nk Cliaiiibors ill used." " For tiio t'.'nit afliiirs of state it is well Uiiown how subslantially he insisted upon bi'in^tlie King ,lr. facto as well aa dc jure. " Tliot such a SovfR'ijrn was, for tlio ser- vants lie coLlided in, the best possible manter, may well be supposed. He gave thain his entire nnd hearty support. If lio kept a watch luleye over all the proceedings both of parli- nnient and the country; if wo find him one day comnienliniT on the line taken in debate aa» dangerous,' at another as 'timid nud va. cillating, or discussing the composition of the majority, or its numbers upon the division, or sujfgestinjr that the journey of Mr. Fox to Fans should « make the dilFerent departments bring on all their business before he comes back, as we shall have much less noise fur the next three week.- ;' or expresi (a hocr to be itted at therato ofi;i'.>0,00i) a vear.") The i.nglish animal, according to lhe"ai-ove doc- trine, much more nearly answers this some- wliat coarse diHcription; (or the Ablie's plan was to give his royal beast asubst"ntial voice ni the distribution of all patronage; while our lion ,3 only to have the sad prerogative of na- ming whoaoever the parliament chooses, nnd eating his own mess in ipjiet. " Now, with all the disposition in the world to desire that the Uoyal prerogative should be restricted, and the will of the nation gov- ern the national ulliiirs, we cannot compre- ■end this theory of a monarchy. It assijrns to the Crown either far too much revenue" or far too little power. To pay a million a year or more, lor a name, seems absprdly e.xtrava- gant. To allect living under .a kiogly rov- eminent, and yet suffer no kind of km.rjy pow.T, seems extravagantly absurd. Surefy the meaning of having a soverel!,'ntive of na- t chooses, and m in the world ;,'ativc should 10 nation gov- innot coniprc- y. It assignH ch rpveniiP,or million a year, Urdly pxtrava- I killjrjy ^ov- nd ol' kingly surd. Surely ■eign is, that his intluence blifi affairs.— ■ havo a ri/rht r nil in thoir litsare invad- nenls, or to their mutual mutual cnn- notioii of a, d" three pow- n, the royal he allowed to lie etlect uj)- if not denied too much ; it rijfht to be r considero- ention of his / discharged ng for hiin- UU.1 opinion, ? those opin- inlesg those y, and yet Id incur all ils of a torni i the worst, would pur- ittst evils at counter the ch is worthy fused to be ters' hands, ler by men 8 which he ever accuse !s could any le'g choice, understand s are so in- ! latter be- lie Ibrnier,) th in this That hiH Kxr,ollcncy'» avowed practical po- lii'y in the adniiniatralionol the Government, a precisely that vrhicli was professed by the late Councillors twelve month* arnment now ad- vocated by the late Councillors is that which they have heretofore repudiated, and which must prove injurious to the intellectual and moral improvement, the happiness and best interests of the people of Canada. As to the nature of his Excellency's avow- ed practical policy in the administration of the government, his accusers,— in the tract I)ubli»la'd by the Toronto Association, (piotcd in the liflh numbor,— represy;it it Vhus:— •' The Governor declares in ..huost every one of his answers to addresses, iJtul the apjwiiit- vir.nts are to be made loil/i mt rcjcrence to paitij considerations." 'J'he sum of all his Kacci- lency's declarations ii, that the goveruxncnt shall be administered impartially, wiilioul re- ference to religious creeil or the population — that the appointments to otfice shall be made upon the ground of qualihcations to render ellioient services to V.io state, and not upon the ground of parly connexions. Proof in detail upon a point so well known and 80 univc sally admitted, is as unnecessa- ry as it would be to prove that it is light at noon day. Such I assume Ihon to be the Governor Gtijeral's avowed practical policy in tlie adminisiratijuof the Govirnment— the principle of justk:i: as its basis, and i.mpar- TiALiTV asi ils rule of practice. That a Go- vernor should be held up as an enemy to the country for avowing such a principle and rule of government, is one of the most extraordi- nary phenomena of Canadian history. The ne.xt point is, what was the principle and rule of government formerly professed by the late Councillors, and I may add by the Reformers generally .' The Upper Canada section of the late Councillors (and I have written lliroughout for the people of Upper Canada ; I have never pretended to under- stand orjudge things in Lower Canada,) have always professed the adiierence to the princi- ple and rule of government avowed by tlie earl of Durham and Lord Sydenham; and the late Councillors of Lower, as well as Upper Canada, have professed their adherence to the principle and rule of government proclaimed by Sir Charles Bagut. The favourite phrase and avowed doctrino of Lord Sydenham was, " cord Sydenham " brought into practical operation the sound British principle of Responsible Government," that his Lt^rd- ship was actually the " founder of our consti- tution," and is entitled as such, to the lasting gratitude of th^i people; Mr Hincks, also, in the language of praise represents Lord Sy- denham not only as entertaining opinions of his own, but as acting an efficient part in the measures of the administration. Now why does Mr. Hincks denounce Sir Charles Met- calfe for doing, what he praises Lord Syden- ham for doing .' If Lord Sydenham " brought into practical operation the sound British principle of Responsible Government," and yet his government was non-party, not mere- ly in respect to its administration, but in res- pect to its very composition, why is Sir Char les Metcalfe proclaimed as an enemy to the " representative system of government," merely because he insists upon impartiality in appointments to office .' Was there ever more gross inconsistency, self-contradiction, and injustice, than is thus exhibited in the former and present conduct of Mr. Hincks .' Nor is Mr. Hincks alone in an unbiassed testimony in favour of Sir Charles Metcalfe. The sturdy and scolding Kingston Herald has been wont to bear the same testimony in his be'ter days. Of Lord Sydenham's po licy he said — " As a statesman, he was uu doubtedly, wise and prudent ; for, however some, who have heretofore basked in favour, may complain of neglect to them and of pro- moling others whom they looked upon with prejudice, yet sure we are, nothing else could have secured peace ; and peac-- becured, lliia noble province needs but lime to be prosper- ous and happy." Why then does the Kingston Herald make war upon Sir C, Metcalfe for avowing a po- licy, which the Herald says, in Lord Syden^ ham, was leise and prudent and securedpeace ? The London Canada Inquirer also — now so fieree against Sir Charles Metcalfe and his defenders — has recommended Lord Syden- ham's example to his Excellency'simitalion : — " His (Lord Sydenham's) views of the go- yernment of Canada, we'e formed on shrewd observation and deep reflection, and whoever hie '**iff.C^^fiT Vli-dl* hf^ ISi?. O.T£ CQTltiiiSflt th€** CQ.?i' not adopt a better chart for Iheir guidance, than may be gleaned from the course he has taken, apd the inttructioas ho may have left. A system of views will iir The chart has been odn accordance v dation of (hf« that sanio /wij lency.' Wli; less liberal (J 1841 ? Wliy party governt justice goveri To complel Upper Canail ciferous llai admonitory u Inquirer, the ntr, in favou government, thy conditior press spoke ham's Roporl cal governm« Lord Sydenh liar sagacity \ hitherto cons practice, in government, talogue of be rior to all tha believe, not i The gi-sat pri inent, so libe by tho Britis necessary in affairs, still : rect attentio successful ap was on the oi tion of the fa bigotted ; an other by tlioa deration of d them to activ apathy, — Loi contend will rear in this himsolf coul' dom andjust are now uni^ who opposed few indeed— ficult to justi Ev::ry sectio to do him ho let it be kno serve tranqu agriculture country, and py people, ill be continued Now what Charles Mo non-party pi pect to Uppe beyond that tti Lower C " Journal & lency almost 1 have ma A ijHtetn of tfovemnient baied on Icia liberal views will not Hiicceed iii Canndn " Tim chart laid rinwii hy Ijord Sydenham has been od>)|)ted by Sir ciiarles Alutcalte, in accordance with the " conlident" recommen- dation cit'tlif ('iiniiilii Innuirrr. Why thru in thatHanio biquirrr in arms aitainfit hiH Excel lency ? Why does the Inquirer advocate a less liberal (iovernmeiit now than in October, 1841 ? Why does he advocate an exclusive party government now, instead of an equal justice government ? To complete the catalojruc of this class of Upper Canada papers, we have the now voi- ciferous Hamilton Journul, S^ Ef press more admonitory ami impressive than the Canada Inquirer, the Kingston Herald, or the Exami- ner, in favour of non-party and equal justice {yrovernment. In its coiistitutional aid heal- thy condition, the Hamilton Journal ^' Ex- press spoke and taught thus: " liord Dur- ham's Report, that admirable theory of politi- cal government, was the text book by which Lord Sydenham was guidid ; and the pecu- liar sagacity with which he applied principles, hitherto considered as adapted only to Hnlish practice, in the administration of Canadian government, entitle him to a place in the ca- talogue of benefaotors of this Province, supe- rior to all that have gone before him, mid, we believe, not inferior to .any that may follow. The gi'5at principle of llosponsiible Govern- ment, so liberally conceded to this Province by the British ministry, although evidently necessary in the administration of Canadian atfairs, still required much patient and cor- rect attention to ensure its peaceable and successful application. For, harrassed as he was on the one hand, by the violent opposi- tion of the factious, the disappointed, and the bigotted ; and but feebly supported on the other by those who,— although every consi- deration of duty 'and interest should prompt them to active exertion, remained in slothful apathy, — Lord Sydenhiim had difllculties to contend with at the commencement of his ca- reer in this Province which few men but himself coull faave surmounted." Tlie wis- dom andjustice of his Lordship's Government are now universally acknowledged, and those who opposed liiin when alive— and they tvere few indeed— now that he is dead, find it dif- ficult to justify the cause of their opposition. Ev-'ry sectional difterence has been laid aside to do him honour, in t.he same spirit, then, let it be known to his successor, that to pre- serve tranquility, to increase trade, to support agriculture draw out the resources of the country, and make Canada an united and hap- py people, the policy of Lord Sydenham must be continued." Now what is this non-party policy of Sir Charles Metcalfe but a continuation of the non-party policy of Lord Sydenham in res- pect to Upper Canada, and a policy generous beyond that of Sir Charles Bagot, in respect to Lower Canada ? Yet is the Hamilton " Journal «fc Express" at war with his Excel- lency almost " to the knife." 1 h»Te made these quoMilions from a pam- phlet published by Mr. Hineks in the Utter part of IU41, containing the notices of Lord Sydenham and his government'* by the press of British America." It will be recollected that those passages contain not merely perso- nal refereiicps to Lord Sydenham but delibe- rately expressed <>pinions ui the system, the constitution, the policy, and the nieiils of his government — a government, be it also remeni- liered, which had Mr. Dra|)er for Attorney Genoral, and Mr. Harrison for Secretary, for ')iinada West, to wi4ich Mr. Baldwin was in opposition. Are Messrs. Draper and Harri- son less liberal now than they were in 1841 :' And is Sir Charles Metcalfe Jess liberal than Jjord Sydenham.'' And is that policy of go- vernment which was held up by those jour- nalists as the only salvation of Canada in 1841, to be deprecated and resisted by them as the sure destruction of Canada in 1844 ? — When you compare the present and former fieiitiinents of these journalists and consider them as the orj^ana of- ' ty, one cannot help exclaiming, whal a -v- .-^rcock is Canadian party, and v.'hat weatnercocks are Canadian parly men : When the leaders of party were seeking for power, then party patronage go- vernment was denounced, and an equal and impartial adininistrulion was the only consti- tutional government for Canada ; but no soon- ner do they gain the ascendancy in power, than we are told that there is no constitutional government for Canada except a party patron- age government ! It IS surprising then, that Sir Charles Met- calfti having the paini)lilet from which I have made the above extract, put into his hands on his leaviii r England, should have come to the conclusion that a government administered " without reference to patty considerations," was what the people of Canada desired .'— Was it not natural for his Excellency to be- lieve that when he was insisting upon an ad- iierence to that principle, in his decisions and acts, he was consulting both the wishes and interests of the peoble of Canada :" Had he not the strongest reasons for believing that when his late Councillors insisted upon an opposite line of policy they were not only in " antagonism" with him, but in " antagon- ism" with the people af Canada .' Could he imagine otherwise .^ Could he suppose that the people of Canada entertained different sentiments and feelings respecting the right rule of government in 1843, from what they did in 1841 ^ How then could he think or declare otherwise in his replies, but that he vis maintaining t'>D views as well as defend- ing the rights and interests of the people of Canada, Tn resisting the party patronage " stipulation," or ^' understanding," or even policy urged upon him by the late Council- lors .' hTs Excellency would of course take for granted that the Journals which I have quoted, tocether with the Guardian, spoke the sentiments and feelings of the reformers and middle clasaes of society in Upper Canada ; and could he believe for a moiuent ihat they would not support in maintaining what they had held and advocated as essential to the llv. good goTernmcnt, happineai and welfare of Canada? , ^ ... These facts will explain the mystery of his Excellency's firmness, but of his confidence of ultimate support by the people, when the real nature of the question at issue between him and his late advisers should be under stood by the country at large. He could not but be certain of the consistency and honesty of the people generally— that although the interests of parties, and partizan editors and leaders might cKange ; yet that the people would not change— that what they had de- manded of his predecessors, they would desire and expect from him, and what they desired and expected from bini, they would support him in securing for them. Hence the calm determination of his Excellency ; and hence his forbearance in not forming an exclusive party government— a measure which his ac- cusers have sought to badger him into, in order to give plausibility to their own accusa- tions, and place themselves on the best ground to obtain a parly iriumph. But besides the declarations ot Lord Syden- ham, the avowed policy, and even composi- tion of his government, and the unqualihed sentiments of the above leading reform Jour- nals of Upper Canada, in respect to botli t.ie character and policy of that government, 1 will adduce other proofs still to show that Sir Charles Metcalfe's avowed practical poli- cy is that which was formerly professed by the late Councillors and the Reformers generally. The first shall be the declaration of the Larl of Durham, in whose sentiments it is known reformers of all shades exultingly concurred. One example out of a dozen will be sufficient. In reply to an address from the citizens of the present metropolis of United Canada, July, 1838, the Earl of Durham said—" On my part I promise you an iviparliul administration ol the Government. Dftermined not to kecog- HIZE THE EXJSTENCE OF PARTIES, prOVinCtai or imperial, classes or rates, I shall hope to receive from all her Majesty's subjecls those public services, the efficiency of wh.oh must ever mainly depend on their comprehensive- ness "— " Extend the veil of oblivion over the past-direct to the future your best ener- gies, and the consequences cannot be doubt- ad."— This doctrine of" an impartial admin- istration of the government" is tlie very doc- trine of the present Governor General ; and Lord Durham's declaration against the recog- nition of even the existence of parlies or classes, is stronger than was ever made by bir Charles Metcalle. Such was then the doc- trine of reformers. My next proof shall be of a still stronger nnd more decisive oharccter. It is known that Mr. Norton Buell, of BrockviUe, was ap- pointed Treasurer of the Johnstown District by Sir Charles Bagot, by and with the advice of tlie Council; that strong opposition was made to that appointment by the Municipal Coun- cil of that district ; that an address was pre- sented to his Excellency containing sundry eharcas against Mr. Buell, in connexion with the events of 1?.!? and ISae, and praying for an investigation of them. Sir Charles Bagot was advised by his Council not to investigalti the charges against Mr. Buell, and to make an iuiportnnt.and impressive reply to the Johns- town District Council— a reply that was hail- ed with a shout of triumph by the supporters of the late Council throughout the Province, and was received with dismay and dissatisfac- tion by their opponents— a replj that express- ed fully the professed principles and policy of Sir Charles Metcalfe against a party patron- age government, and condemns the late Coun- cfllors out of their own mouths, for their rup- ture and quarrel with his Kxce'lency on that ground. The following is the concluding paragraph of that reply. " 1 observe with pleasure your declaration, that you "wholly repudiate all selfish, all fac- tious, all national, all religious distinctions, animosity, and exclusion:" and that "you desire to see all her Majesty's subjects in this country enjoy the most perfect toleration and equality ; and the distribution of the patronage of the Executive Government confined to no particular section or party, religious or politi- cal. You may be assured that it is in accor- dance with these principles that I am deter- mined to administer the Government of this Province ;— and that in so doing 1 but exe- cute the commands 1 received from the Queen. 1 therefore called on you to co-operate with me in my task, and with that view to lay aside these by-ane of this fine Province. I call upon V to turn your attention to the politi- cal mi' s necessary for the improvement ot the country, and to prove your loyalty and earn the gratitude of your fellow subjects, by ma- king this Province what it was by nature in- tended to be, the most valuable dependency of the British Crown— a source of wealth m peace, and a means of strength in war." How applicable is this exhortation to the a declared also, Lhe command of iy and the pa- ay be the perso- lals who become And such is the tcalfe's avowed listration of the larat with that which WM professed by the late Councillor* themselves under his Excellency's distin- guished and lamented predecessor. 1 will yet add another illustration, which will present, if po8sible,in a still more vivid light, the downright inconsistency of the laie Coun- cillors and theirorgans, and the claims of the Governor General upon the support of the people of Canada. Just a twelvemonth before I commenced this discussion, I wrote a short essay on "Sir Charles Bagot and His Ca- nadian Government." That essay was ori- ginally published in the Kingston Chronicle ^• Gazette; was applauded in the strongest terms by the organs of the late Councillors, and by themselves in various ways, and, in accordance with the suggestion of some of them, was printed in pamphlet form at the go/ernment press and widely circulated.— Now the whole object, and spirit and doctrine of that essay throughout was, to illustrate the evils of a government administer! d on party principles, and to show the importance of an impartial non-party administration of the Go- vernment; for such I supposed was the go- vernment of Sir Charles Bagot, from his re- ply to the address of the Johnstown District Council, and many other replies identical with that in sentiments. In enforcing this doc- trine, I selected my illustrations from Greek, Roman and English history. My first exam- ple was that of Lycurgus, who forgave and appointed to office in his own household, and thus »' converted into a faithful friend and useful servant" a man who had carried his opposition to Lycurgus' system of govern- ment so far as to attempt the lile of the Spar- tan lecrislaior. iVly second example was that of Thrasvbulus, who abolished party distinctions in Atica, (which had been convulsed by party dissentions,) by requiring the " citizens to en- gage upon oath that all past transactions should be buried in oblivion." On which I remarked—" Thrasybulus required by oath, what Sir Charles Bagot has often recommend- ed as a duty : and those who admire the conduct of the former, ought to respect that of the latter," From Greece 1 turned to Rome, and then to England ; and I solicit the reader's particular attention to the following passages from my pamphlet, as they contam the policy of government which was professed and applauded by the late Councillors, and theirnewspapers throughout the Province at the time of Sir Charles Metcalfe's arrival in Canada , , " Julius Cccsar's celebrity as a general ana & conqueror over armies and provinces, is sur- passed by his conquest over his own personal resentments and party feelings (after having grown up and lived amidst ail the asperities of both) when ho ' pardoned all who had car- ried arins against him, made n» distmctions with regard to parties,' and avowed in one ot his speeches ' 1 will not renew the massacres of Sy lie and Marius, the very remembrance ot which, IS rhockiiig to me. Now iimt my enemies are subdued, I will lay aside the sword, and endeavor by my good offices to gain ovtr those voho coTUinue to halt mt. *■ Such an example may, with perional honor and public advantage be imitated by every philanthropist and Christian in Canada, as it has been by Sir (J. Bagot. " If we turn from Rome to English history we meet with examples, even during its less enlightened periods, which ought to silence and shame the proscribing spirit of our times. " The Earl of Pembroke, who, during the minority of Henrv HI. (1217) was protector of the kingdom, is admitted to have been th» ablest statesman and general of his age. But after suppressing a rebellion which had du- ring the latter part of the reign of King John that distinguished nobleman, (to use th , words of Hume)—*' received the rebellioue Barons into favor ; restored them to theis possessions ; and endeavored by an equal ber haviour, to bury all past animosities. " It is known that Henry V.,— the most he- roic monarch in English history— found the kingdom convulsed by the contests which had been commenced by his father, Henry IV., between the houses of York and Lancas- ter—to the latter of which I?"nry himself be- longed. Yet, says Hume,— The King seems amb-:ious to bury all party distinctions in obli- vion; the instruments of the preceding reign, who had been advanced for their blind zeal for the Lancastrian interests, more than from their merits, gave place every where to men of more honorable character; mrtue seemed now to have an open career in which it might exert itself; the exhortations as well as ex- ample of the Prince, gave it encouragement; and all men were unanimous in their attach- ment to Henry." How much mote honour- able Lo Henry, and beneficial to the nation was such a polioy, than the partial and pr> scriptive policy which has been pressed upon Sir Charles Bagot, and than the party policy which characterised the otherwiss most use- ful reign of Henry VII,, of the same House with Henry V. After referring to the union of the two Houses by the marriage of Henry VII. with Elizabeth, heir of the House of York, Hume says — "Instead of embracing the present happy opportunity of abolishing .'*'cie fatal distinctions, of uniting his title with that of his consort, and of bestowing /a- vour indiscriminately on the friends of both families,- he carried to the throne all the par- tialities which belong to the head ofafaetion, and even the passions which are carefully guarded against by every true politician in that situation. To exalt the Lancasterian party, to depress the adherents of the House of York, were still the favourite objects of hn pursuit ; and through the whole course of his reign, he never forgot his early preposses- " It will bo a dark day for United Canada, should its Governor become " the head of a faction, and not the moderator of factions ; but Sir Charles Bagot, disregarding the little- ness of uarty faction, and acting upon the „,. „i.., «,h.o!i Bvpn Buonaparte had the dis- crimination and wisdom to adopt-" tell me not what a man was, but what he «*»<»"'. -■ has pursued a course which hai added bril- liancy to the noblest acts of the most renown- ed statesman of" Greece and Rome and Eng- land ; a course, tlie recollections of which no doubt sweetens his hours of retirement and sufferiuff, and will embalm his mind in the grateful remembrance of Canada when the tongue of calumny shall have been silenced, and the breath of faction shall have been ex- tinguished, amid the gratulations of a united and happy people." " Whilst it ha'b been theoretically admitted upon all sides, that our French fellow sub- jects are fully entitled to 'a representation in the Councils of tiie Sovereign, as well as of the people. Sir Charles tiagot has been .assail- ed with unwonted bitterness for the seiec- ions which he has made — charges as consist- ent and as rational , Mr. Baldwin remarked— iiicii was the fi become the The change d, but in the of those who iiDunce tliern. les Metcalfe, irie of admin- istribating the pure, and sa- ri the reply to as lon;^ as it le late Uoun- Jlional heresy liow's son, not Clerk of the i Sir Charles nd banished as ilaining it ! — I of party in- , that a large rhicli aniinad- 3 of my essay Charles Met- he same Iden- he two parties tent changed ?s. The late s have espou- rine of party 1 ; while their tocU Monarch that still revel itlleness,) ha- lool of adver- es of the old )f " equal jus- The latter lion gratifying this country,; instances of )cals to the old exclusiveisni lis colleagues •• Viger, p. 18, d it IS for the power, acted I never giving to come for- n practice. — the ,'' Cana- no absurdity ny body else wrong once. tid worse thaa illeagues, and ;ome forward ctici^' but to of the " Ca- ^h all shades liroliiili'd du- vhicli some of .'d the rebel- for the late if iieformern ■ssion, adopt I ot the " Ca- I Association remarked — " A rose, it was said, by any other name would wmell as sweet, and he would venture to say (hat the poppy would he e(iiially disngrceable to the sense, and equally deleterious in iis ef- fects, though dignified with the name of the queen of flowers. (Entliuaiastic cheers.) If they were to have the old system, let them have it under its own name, ' the compact system,' .or any other adapted to its hideous deformities." In this I quite agree with Mr. Baldwin ; and if he and his colleagues have adopted the practice of the old systen) of the " Canadian Tories," ttiey ought " to have it under its own name" — and not foster the old member under some new and fascinating name calculated to conceal its hideous deform- ities." It was always admitted that the evil of the old practice was not in the men. butin the system. If it has heretofore been injuri- ous to the intellectual improvement, social happiness and good government of the coun- try, it can be no less so now. Hut the avow- ed practical policy of Sir Charles Metcalfe is sustained not only by the declaraiions of Lord Durham, Lord t^ydenham, Sir Charles Uagot, the late Councillors tliemselves, and the or- gans of the Toronto Association ; his Excel- lency is also supported by the concurring views of the ret'ormers in Nova Scotia. The reformers there have only asked for an Cfpial, representation in the Executive Council, and have deprecated even the discussion of a party government in the Legislature. In the de- bate on the reply to the openinrj speech from tiie throne, Mr. Howesaid — " Turning to tlie second point of the adilres.s — that of part\- go- vernment — he, (Mr. Howe) viewed it as a (luestion of almost illimitable scope ; and one which this IloiisK shoiiJd not lie cullr.d upon to discusx." And in the amendment to the ad- dress which was ])ropose'f and voted for by the Reformers in the Nova Scotia House of Assembly, is the following diciaration : — " The qnrstivn of partij ffovcrnmrnf is one which this House docs not fr.rl itself called upon to raise at the present time '' And as to the prerogative, Mr. Howe remarked in reply to a newspaper attack tliat iia.l been made upon him, *' There was little consistency in what had been written about ' forcing opinions' upon Lord Falkland. INo man had a rightto do that -. all had tiie rightto reason, remonstrate, retire, and go into oiiposilio:;. i'hese were ci; nstilutional checks uni'. guards operating all round a Governor, but caving the preroga- tive uiifiettercd." 'i'his party patronage doctrine is denounced bv even the whig republicans of tiie United Stales, and is only advocated by the party of wiiat are cail'd " Loco b'ocos" in that coun- try — that !.•? the democrats— the name appli- ed by Mr. lloebuck I who well understands the nature of their policy) to the 'ate Coun cillors and their supporters. Mr. Marcy tii6 late " Loco Foco " governor of the State of New York — the friend of iliu sympathisers and briirands ajainst Canada, in IrtiV-i— thus nvows this docirine in one of his speeciies in Congress : " It may be, sir, that the poli- ticians uf the United States are not so fasti dious as some gentlemen are, as to disclosincr the principles upon which they act. They boldly preach what they practice. When they are contending for victory, they avow their intention of enjoying the iruits of it. If they are defeated, they expect to retire from office ; if they are successful, they claim as a matter of right, the advantaires of success.^ They see nothing wrong in the rnle that to the victor belongs the spoil of the enemy." Mr. Marcy, like Mr. Sullivan, in hise.xpla- natory speech speaks of those not of his party as the enemy, and represents the government as designed for tiie benefit of the victorious, and not for the welfare of the whole commu- nity. This theory, therefore, of the " spoils" for the one parly to the exclusion of the other is the policy of American Loco Foco democra cy, and not the principle of British constitu- tional iiovernment. The late whig President of the Ifnited States repudiates this partyism under his government. Mr. Hincks has said that governing without " reference to parly eonsidoratioii is inconsistent with representa- tive government." Hut what says the head of even a democratic republic' He was ele- vated to this oilice by a majority of the suf- frages of his country ; but does he say on reaching that elevation, that he rtill govern for the benefit of those who voted for him, and regard as "enemies" those who voted for another? No, like a true representative of a country, who, when once invested wiih that character, represents the interests of the en- tire country, without reference to the party that eitiier supported him or ojiposed, the late President Harrison, in his inaugural address declares that he will know no party in his go- vernment. Intellijent republicans through- out the United States responded to that doc- trine ; and only democrats opposed it. And is a British Governor to be less just — less im- partial — less ol' a party patronage man, than an American I'rcsident.' Let the following just and noble sentiments of the late Presi- dent Harrison sink deep into t!ie mind of the reflecting reader, and abash tiie democratic policy of party selfishness which has risen up in Canada ; " Before concluding, fellow-citizens, I must say something to you on the subject of the parties at this time existing in our country. " ir parties, in a Republic, aro necessary to secure a degree of vigilance Builicient to keep public functionaries within the bounds oflaw and duly, at that point their usefulness ends. Beyond tliat they become destructive of pub- lic virtue, the parents of a spirit antagonist to that of liberty, and eventually its conqueror. It was the beautiful remark of a distinguished Enirlish writer, that, ' in tlie Roman Senate, Octavius had a party, and Anthony a party, but. the Commonwealth had none.' Always the friend of my countrymen, never tiieirllat- terer, it becomes my anty to say to them from thia hiirh ]ilace, to which their partiality has exalted me, that lliern exists in tiie laud a spi- rit hostile :n thoir bpRt interosts— hostile to liberty itself—it is a spirit contracted in its views, selfish in its object. U looks to the ikgifrandizement of a few, even to the destruc- tion of the interests of the whole. The entire remedy is with the people. Soinethinor, how- ever, may be effected by the means which they have placed in my hands. *' It is the union we want, not of a party for the sake of that party, but a Union of the whole country for the sake of the whole coun- 'ry — for the defence of its interfsts and its honour against foreign aggression— for the defence of those principles for which our an- cestors so gloriously contended. As far as it depends upon me it shall be accomplished. All the influence that I possess shall be exert- ed to prevent the formation, at least, of an executive party in the halls of the legislative body. «• The true spirit of liberty, although devo- ted, persevering, bold, and uncompromising in principle, that secured, is mild and tolerant, and scrupulous as to the means it employs, whilst the spirit of party, assuming to be that of liberty, is harsh, vindictive, and intollerant, and totally reckless as to the character of the allies which it brings to the aid of its cause. The reign of an intollerant spirit of party amongst a free people, seldom fails to result in a dangerous accession to the Executive power." In conclusion, I think the facts and autho- rities I have thus adduced, are sufficient to establish the propositions with which 1 com- menced this paper. The latter part of the seventh proposition will receive a more dis tinct consideration, when 1 come to discuss the eighth and ninth propositions in ihe next number of this argument. The eighth, and part of the ninth proposi- * tion will form the topics of discussion in the present number, namely, '« That the proceed- ings of several of the late Councillors, since the prorogation, have been unprecedented, — enervating, if not destructive of legal govern- ment—calculated, though mot intended, to weaken and sever the connection, between Canada and Great Britain. " That in at least seven diSerent instances have the late Councillors departed from Bri- tish constitutional usage— that the present course of hostility against the Governor Gene- ral and Her Majesty's government by some of them, must be attended with injurious if not fatal consequences." In my introductory address to the people of Canada West, I stated that for some members of the late Council I entertained the respect and esteem of personal friendship. 1 referred to two of the gentlemen on whose recent pro- ceedings I am about to animadvert. I con- fess I had hoped much from their legislation and administration in the government. — The only idea 1 entertained of ever writing any thing which would involve a reference to their proceedings, was a dissertation or two on the connection between the laws of the country and the happiness of its inhabitants, and the adaptation ot the colonial relations of Canada and the laws enacted since the union of the two provinces, to the condition and interestf of the people and their rulera to render the operation of those laws and relations benefi- cial. The deep-felt conviction of duty which has impelled me to condemn where 1 had ho- ped to approve, to expose, censure, remon- strate and warn, instead of elucidating, ap- plauding, encouragingand congratulating, in- volves one of the most painful events of my public life. But whatever others might think of men or parties, 1 have always professed to love truth and justice, more than men — to re- gulate my own conduct by principles and not by parties. Long before Mr. Baldv;in had a party, and both before and since the Union of the Canadas, 1 have disclaimed being a party man and protested against being judged by the rule of party. I did so explicilly,°either in explanation or in reply to attacks, in the Christian Guardian of May J6, Julv 11, Au- gust 15, September 19, 1838 ; June 5, October 23, 1849 ; January 8 and i.2, February 5, and April 15, 1840. In reference to scores of at- tacks which have been made upon me on this ground, and in justification of the remarks which I am about to make, I will quote the following passage from the Christian Guar- dian of Jorie 5, 1839, when Mr. Baldwin was in private life, and when no small degree of odium and labour in supporting «• equal rights and privileges for all classes of Her Majesty's Canadian subjects" fell upon my- self. " Before entering into the subject of attack, we beg to make two or three prelimi- nary remarks :—l. Our views of the science of government, as well as of theology, and of the system of government adapted to the so- ciety and condition of this Province, were de- rived from early reading and reflection, inde- pendent and without the knowledge of politi- cal party. 2. We have always professed to advocate principle irrespective of party. 3. It is possible to advocate the same interests and objects, and yet, at different times, sup- port and oppose the same man and the same party ; namely, when the same man or party assumes an attitude of hostility to those inte- rests and objects, or connects other and irre- concilable interests or objects with them. If our consistency be tested by the men or par- ties that we have supported or opposed, we readily acknowledge ourselves very inconsis- tent ; yet it is by this rule that we have been frequently judged. Against such a rule of judgement, however, we protest, as wenever professed to regulate our public or private con- duct by it ; but have again and again repudia- ted it as incompatible with our duty and office. If we had professed to be devoted to party, then an enquiry into the manner in which we supported the party which we professedly espoused, in order to judge of our consis- tency, would be perfectly fair. But as on the contrary, we have always disavowed any thing of the kind, the question is, not what party we have supported or opposed, but what principles in regard both to the civil niid ecclesiastical afTairs of the Province *-*j^ have advocated." Such were my views and positions in 1839 ; such they are in 1844 ; and whilst 1 pay wil- ling and cordial tribute to the amtableneit, itioni benefi' if duty which ere i had ho- sure, remon- cidating', ap- atulating, in- vents ol my I might think professed to men — to re- iples and not Idv/in had a the Union of eing a party T judged by cilly, either icks, in the uly 11, Au- ie5, October uary 5, and scores of at- 1 me on this the remarks I quote the stian Guar- }aldwin was II degree of ig •' equal sseft of Her 1 upon my- ! subject of ree prelimi- the science logy, and of i to the 80- ce,were de- ction, inde- Igeof politi- irofessed to F party. 3. ne interests times, Bup- d the same an or party those inte- it and irre- i them. If nen or par- pposed, we ry inconsis- have been o rule of as we never private con- in repudia- ^ and office. d to party, n which we professedly our consis- fiut as on disavowed ion is, not oposed, but 1) the civil ns in 1839; 1 pay wil- niablencit, and generosity of Mr. Baldwin, ai a pri- vate and professional man, 1 protest against the doings of Mr. Baldwin the party man; and whilst I honor the kindness and liberality of Mr. Sullivan as an individual, 1 cannot but deprecate his late proceedings, and despise his " Legion" partizanship, and whilst 1 retain no unkind feelings toward Mr Hinckb on the ground of his personalities during the early part of Lord Sydenham's administration, and acknowledge the general courtesy of his late remarks in regard to myself, I must reprobate with feelings of the strongest indignation his conduct towards the Governor General and Her Majesty's government. If the proceedings of the late Councillors, in their demands upon his Excellency and their mode of resignation and explanation, were unprecedented ; their conduct since has been unexampled. A man who Jias been ele- vated to the station ofa minister of the Crown has obligations of duty to his Sovereign and to his country resting upon him after his re- tirement from office as well as before. A vul- gar rustic, when he quarrels with a neighbour, employs against him all the epithets and insinuations that his supposed history can suggest or the rustic's own imagination and passions create. A retired Minister of the Crown ought not so to conduct himself towards his Sovereign. British practice dur- ing a hundred and fifty years without excep- tion, inculcates the language of the protound- est respect towards his Sovereign from the lips of t!ie ex-minister, as well as Minister of the Crown. Were it otherwise, that freedom of intercourse between the Crown and its con- fidential advisers which is essential to the safe and efficient administration of government, would be interrupted and destroyed; reserve and distrust would characterize all the communication between the sovereign and his advisers, and discord would ever an^* anon paralyze their most important counseU, con- fidence and frankness would flee from the pa lace, and suspicion and duplicity would suc- ceed. Every retired British minister has, therefore, invariably regarded as s red the feelings, the integrity, the principles, the un- derstanding, the character of the Sovereign ; and no British sovereign since the days ot William and Mary, has had cause to regret or blush fonhe most unreserved freedom with any of l.iS advisers. But in what way have the ex-Councillors treated the representative of their Sovereign .' They commenced by impeaching his principles and conduct as un- constitutional ; they have continued by nn- pusning his justice and integrity, and even ridTculing his understanding. Witness the Association address itself, written by one ex- CounoiUor, and brought before the Associa- tion for its adoption by another— an address abounding in insinuations which cannot be true unless the Governor General is a decei- «pr. stvrantand a hypocrite. Witness Mr. Hiricks' charge of wiliul talsehood against ins Excellency ia a passi":- which I quoted in a preceding number. Witness Mr. Sullivan s exhibition of the Governor General at a pub- lie meeting at Sharon, ia the Home District, under the character and title of" Chailed the SmpZe"— Witness Mr. Baldwin's speeches at Toronto— at one time imagining his Excellen- cy to have employed a I'hrenologist as hi» adviser, and regulating bis decisions by the science of bumps, and at another time hold- ing up his Excellency as aiming to impose upon the people of Canada "a new fangled system of Responsible Government" — and concluding byaphillipic of ridicule against his Excellency's reply (or rather on a perverted phrase of his reply) to the Gore District Council — especially his advict to them to " keep" responsible government, " cling to it," not to " throw it away "—in the following words ; " They all no doubt remembered the story of Little Redridinghood, and the poor child's astonishment and alarm, as she began to trace the features of the wolf instead of those of her grand.T.other ; and let the people of Canada beware lest when they trace the real outlines of this new-fangled responsible government and calling out in the sympathy of their hearts, Oh, grandmother what big eyes you have ! Oh, grandmother, what a big nose you have ! It may not as in the case of poor little Redridinghood, be too late, and the reply to the exclamation. Oh, Grandmo- ther, what a great big mouth you have ! be, «' that's to gobble you up the better, my child."— (Cheers and much laughter.") Now, it may be fun for Mr Baldwin, and cause cheers and much laughter imongst the statesmen of the Toronto Associr.tion for him to exhibit the Representative of his Sovereign (of whom he had recently been a confidential adviser) as in the passage just quoted ; it may comport very well with Mr. Hmcks' feelings (the concluding sentence of his letter to Mr. Buchanan notwithstanding) to represent his Excellency as knowing what he had stated to be untrue ; it may seem very witty for Mr- Sullivan (notwithstanding his testimony to SirCh rles Metcalfe's vigourous understand- ing and noble cliaracler in the concluding part of his explanatory speech, to show up his Excellency to the wise peopleof Sharon, as a^ simpleton ; it may be a necessary piece of partijism for Messrs Sullivan and Baldwin to apply to the Governor General the abusive insinuations an attacks which pervade the Toronto Association address ; but where is tha precedent of British practice for such con- duct .' How would such conduct on the part of ex-Ministers in England be viewed by the Parliament or the nation? Would the people of England be likely to force such CounciUorB upon their Sovereign after they hod thus treated him .' Would the British Parliament be likely to permit them to come again in the presence of tha Sovereign as his Ministers ?— Would not humanity to the Sovereign for- bid it .? Would not a sense of propriety in the nation prevent it, unless after satisfactory pioof of deep humiliation and contrition ? It the Sovereign has not an unnms'v. -»- the selection of his advisers, but must ma irreat measure be controlled by Parliament, is not that Parliament bound by every consider- ation of propriety, honor, juiliceand human- ity, to see that the Sovereign's feelings and cliaracter nt'i protected ngaiiist Ihoae who ei- ther have been sr may be his advisors ? In daye of unlimited monarchy — before responsi- ble government was known — the Sovereiijn had the remudy entirely in his own liandd ; but as Parliament has now a voice of control in the appointment of advisers of the Sove- reign, Parliament is bound in the same pro- portion to defend from wanton insult and in- vasion the feelings and character and Iiaj)))!- ness of the Sovereign. Header, would you regard yourself as a free and happy man, were you compelled tocommityourself and all your interests to those who had lield you up to the public as either a simpleton, or a despot, and conducting yourselftco//c-like towardsall who were in your power ? Js the Representative of your Sovereign to be thus treated ? But this very language of ridicule and sneers, in which Messrs. Baldwin and Sulli- van have so much gloried (for 1 might select many examples,) argues the conscious bad- ness of their own cause' Dr. Dwigl)t (late President of Yale College) has justly remark- ed, in his 28lh discourse, " a cause which needs the support of ridicule and sneers is bad of course, and is by its abbettors seen toby bad ; for no man of common sense will resort to tbis feeble and ineffectual piode of attack or defence, when the surer, more rational, and more efficacious resort to sober argument is in his power." And if such has been the language of the ex-minister leaders of the Toronto Associa tion, it may be easily supposed that its less responsible members and newspaper organs have indulged with as little restraint as decen- cy in the same style. The Globe, has attained nearly to an equality with Mackenzie's celebrated Jldvotatc V Constitution, and the Examiner is not far in the rear, as amongst the first words on which 1 cast my. eyes in lately looking over one of his Editorials, was the designation of Sir Charles Metcalfe as " the political spoiler who is destroying our substance and subverting our peace." Mac- kenzie's Caroline Mmanac is not much in ad vance of this. But it is with the proceedings of the ex-Councillors 1 have to Uo in this pa- per, and not with those of their subalterns. — ■And 1 would ask if their proceedings and Ian guage, as above referred to, are not calculated to degrade the majesty of the throne, to lower the dignity of the advisers of the Crown, and weaken the moral influence of the whole exe- cutive branch of the Constitution .' The ho- nor of the Crown will not be long preserved inviolate in the country at large, if it be thus trampled upon by those who have been recent- ly entrusted with its counsels. To language bo unexampled is also added political orginization unprecedented. Can the late Councillors adduce an instance of ex-ministers in Kngland having ever allied themselves witli,or attended the proceedings of, much less created a political association such as the late Councillors have formed in Toronto .' In the moxt exiting penode of Parliamentary reform and political organiza- tion in England, have any of those political associatiijns on the one side or the other, ever included the name of even one miaistei or ex-ininistcr of the Crown.' Did Earl Grey and his colleagues ever become leaders, or members of sucii associations, even when the Sovereign got them out of office on account of his hostility to their policy.' Did Sir Ro- bert Peel do so in W.V.), when her Majesty rejected his advice and claimed as her prero- gative not 10 submit to the advice of a minis- ters' appointment wliich he had recommended her to make.) Did Sir Robert Peel or his ex-ministcrial opponents ever use such lan- guage towards the Governor General.' Sir R. Peel calmly left the points of ditference between his Sovereign and himself to the na- tion ; the nation by a general election decided in favor of the Sovereign, and Sir Robert Peel was left out of office for two years, when he gained the majority of Parliament to his views on the corn law question. But durinof that interval of two years did Sir Robert Peel use a disrespectful or offensive word towards his Sovereign, or in n. word or manner im- peach the views or conduct of that Sovereign.' Was not his whole conduct characterised by such respect and courtesy as to gain more and more upon the good will of the Sovereign, so that, in 1841, she cordially acceded to his ad- vice respecting all the appointments of the royal household, as well as respecting the great offices of state.' How differently have the liite Councillors conducted themselves in regard to her Miijesty in the person of her re- presentative ? In their Association speeches and addresses duplicity is the principle of his professions : tyranny the nature of his acts ; the ?/•' Tthe exampler of his policy : and sim- ple Wu i|)pellation of his character. With what sort of face could they come into the presence of the representative of the Sovereign after having applied such epithets and insinuations to him .' With what decen- cy could they be pressed upon him without a due repentance for such conduct .' With what impartiality and justice could they pre- tend to advise any representative of the So- vorcign on the affairs of the Province, after having founded and become the articled con- federates cf a political party association .' — They would 'in- iim loudly against a member of the Ornnn-c Association being an adviser of the Crown — nay, the original draft of their bill provided that an Orangeman should not even boar arms as a militiaman — (a provision that would have operated rather doubtfully in 1837 .') and could a member of the Toronto Association, with a shadow of consistency or propriety, then be an adviser of the Crown .' The signs of liie one association may be secret, and the signs of the other association may not be secret ; the obligations of the one association may rest upon an oath, and the obligations of the other may rest iinon "on honest man's word," which is said to be as good as hi« oath ; the professions of the ona may be Protestant and loyal, the profeBiions of the otiier may be confeseedly party politi- cal ', the tubo possess more scrupulous ar of phjsical w except wlvn ity and suec any more tha tuiion of the of the one ass oth'-r politicc suljects.' A the part of the not now avov power nn I ei their confedr others ? Ha doubt that till the Sovereigr her represent power and en ihe Toronto , derates cxcli without distil ciation more i formed agair eumstances, I objects, espec Canada? Tl Ishn.ael— pro given them i w.*iatever the ancestor did i his brethren. the traveller possesses, th« rob — they »aj ers of the Toi selves and ih may be fount of even a pofi ternity, and I ciation as a power in ord for the atta spirit of sucf the principle vtaelism ; an Ixutinn by nn anomaly of enlightened admirable w explaining tl of Goveriimf: of an cx-inin vested of his draws from t piracy, or co member of P agamit the n and purify it and resentin filed by his ( part on the guard a^ains liiiuent and .1 .,__ «■!,,> !■ high offici.il hi) pnrliame view to rega b&i been cat \ cal organ i«a- lose political lie other, ever s minititei or d Karl Grey le loaders, or ren when Iho on account Did Sir Ro- her Majesty IS her proro- ;e of a miiiis- ecornmended Peel or his se such lan- eneral ? Sir of difference elf to the na- ction decided 1 Sir Robert years, when iment to his But during • Robert Peel /ord towards manner im- it Sovereign? •acterised by ain more and 5overeiirn,so ed to his ad- lents of the speoting the jrently have lemselves in ion of her re- ion speeches dciple of his of his acts ; ;y : and sim- iT. they come tative of the iieh epithets what decen- m without a Jct ? With lid they pre- 2 of the So- ivince, after irticled con- ooiation ? — st a member an adviser Iraft of their should not (a provision oubtfully in the Toronto isistency or he Crown ? on may be association } of the one th, and the 11 not! " an id to be as of the ona profesiions arty politi- eat ; the tuborJinate momberf of Ihf one may poBsess more phynicnl cnuraire and hi? less scrupulous and more hazardous as to the use of plijsinal Wfapons tlian those of the other, except wlvii Ihere is a rertninty of s'lpprior- ity and success ; hut is the one ossocinlion any more than the other knov, n to the consti- tuiirin of the country ? Are rot the members of the one association as well as those of the oth'-r politically isolated tVoii their fellow suljects? Are thoj' not avowedly more so on the part of tile Toronto Association ? Do they not now avowedly claim the spoils of olfice, power nn I eninlntnenta, for themselves and their confederates, to llie exclusio. of all others ? Has it not been shewn beyond doubt that the real contest between them and the Sovereiirn is, that that Soverei;^n through her representative insists upon bestowinir tiie power and emnluinents of patronajje not upon ihe Toronto Assoniationists and tlirir confe- derates exclusively, but upon all classes without distinction of i)arty ? Can an Asso- ciation more danfferous be conceived than one formed against the Crown under such cir- euinstances, tiie leaders of wiiich avow such objects, especially in view of recent events in Canada? The Arabians— ih" descendants of Ishn.ael— profess tha', the God of heaven has given iheia a right to their country and to w.latever they may find in it, because their ancestor did not receive an equal portion with his brethren. When they therefore relieve the traveller or the merchant of all that he possesses, they do not profess to plunder or rob — they say '■'■ we. gained it" So the lead- ers of the Toronto Association claim for them- selves and theirs all the spoils of oflicn which may be found in the country, to the exclusion of even a poor widow's son not of their fra- ternity, and they found and support the asso- ciation as a lever to elevate llicniselves to power in order to make the Crown a " tool" for the attainment of such nn end. The spirit of such a dominion is IshmadititU, and the principle of such a policy is that of Is/i- inaeiism ; and the heading of such an oriran- iKiition by an ex minister of the Crown is r . anomaly of the nineteenth century. The enlightened and eloquent Gisbornk, in his adiinrable work on the Duties of Miin, after explaining the Duties of the Executive Offictrs of Government, thus remarks upon the duties of on «-.ninist'r of the- Crown : " When di- vested of his employ .iient, whether l.o with- draws from the bu.^y world undei the shade ot piracy, or conimues to serve Ins country as a member of Parliament, he will arm his breast against the slings ot unsuccessful ambition, and purify it from every emotion of bilierness and resentnienl against those who iiave pro- filed by his fall, ft' he continues to act his part on the polilic.il slaiie, he will be an jjuard a^ramst the secret liankering after I'iiio- limientlind power, usually proilominuni in .',.._ v.'!'.!! have ^'^ce leen in possi'ssion of hi^fh oificial situat.ons. He will not frame hi « parliamentary conduct with an insidious view to regain tiie eminence from which he b&i been cast down ; ho will not seek popula rity by disIns^enuouB artifloct ; h* will not hoist a standard to collect the ditcontanted, nor present himself as the leader of the fac- tious. He will support, from his heart, everjr measure of his successors, which promises to promote the general welf: e ; however eyi- dontly it may contribute to raise them in pub- lic estimation, and consequently to obstruct the return of himself and his friends to the helm of government. With how much more dignity and propriety would the late Councillors have concluded, and how much more benefit would they have conferredupon the country, had they adopted sijch ft course, instead of getting up an or- ganized agitation against the Representative of their Sovereign ? The late Coumillors for Lower Canada have pursued the dignified course of retired British ministers ; so did Messrs. Howe,Uniacke, and McNab,of Nova Scotia. They did not even attend a publie meeting assembled in their behalf in the metropolis of thft Province. The resolutions were communicated to them at their own reti* denceg. But the SKUriMENTS inculated at the To- ronto Association, and by its principal organs, are as anti-colonial as the procfedinga of their px minister founders are unminislerial. They have scouted the phrase, " Responsible Go- vernment as applicable to a colony ;" and the Governor General's remark, that auapp^tcaftie to a colony, it was " still an undtfined ques- tion," they have denied as a fact, and repro- bated as a covert attempt to subvert the con- stitutional liberties of the people of Canada. — They have supposed that they would obtain a decisive advantage over His Excellency by r?presonting his absence of precise definitions as hostility to the system of Responsible Go- vernment, contrary to his own assertions. Now, such a proceeding was as disingenuous in itself as it was unjust to the Governor Ge- ner.Tl. They knew that a precise definition of Responsible Government itself was impos- sible. Their own Mr. Bi.ake has declared it absolutely undcjinable, and sad, '* we seek not to define it." 1 hey also knew that Respon- sible Government, as applicable to a colony, was to a still greater extent not only an "un- defined," bKt an undefinable question. They a'so knew that Responsible Government in a colony and in the parent slate, is not one and the same thing, as they and their organs have sounhl »o impress upon the public mind. I say'advisediv they knew it, because they had avowed it. The first part of the reolutio.is of September, 1841, quoted by the late Council- Inrs in their written communication to the Governor Gencrnl, is as follows : " That the Head ol the E.-ceiMitive Government of tho Province, being within the limits of his Go- vprninentthe Represni-.tativeof the Sov^relgn is reriponsible to the Imperial authority alone." Now, the length and breadth of the import of this resolution, is (in addUtnn todi- n^ct Imperial interests and foreign ccminr^ree,) the len nh and breadth . the difference be- tween Responsible Gnvernmenlin Great Bri- tain and in Canada ; and when the late Coui\' elliorf ihall hare giren a precite definition of thin raiolulion in all the working:! of our go- vernment, then may they chard to a co- lory, ns a Hlill (indetincd quesition In Enir- Innd till' Soveri'ijfn is not I03|ion8ib(e to ;uiy body for ««!/ act of the {rrvi'rn.neiit ; in Can- ada liie •' Uiad of the Executive CJovfrniiuMit is responsible to the Iniperint aulhoritv" for every ;icl of his governiiifni ; and lie is the only member of the Canadmn Kxeculive that can be impeached and punished for the acts of his ijovernmenl. Now, if the Governor of Canada is involved in a re!);!onsibilily in which his Sovereign is not — a resptmsibilily equal in inni/nitude to the sum tot' I of the acts of his government — llun must he, within the r:»n:je of his additional respiinsibilily, be invested with some additional power for res- ponsibility without power is a contnidiflion and absurdity. In the iixlh number of these papers, I have shown tlial ilie Governor Ge- neral has reco^rnised Responsible Government in Canada to the hill extent of the resolutions of tJeptemlier, 1841 ; but those resolu'ions themselves recognize a difference between Ile»pon.-<:ble Government in Kn;r!a..d and Reiipiinsilde Guvcinmeiit os apphcihle to a colony. What that differrnne is, it is need- less for me to undertake to fay, until tiie A-i- soci itioniits shall have defined the nature and ■extent of the above quoted nsolotion. While that resolution ruoiains, ilie moxii^i tint" the Kin/ can do no wri»n<;," cinnot te ap,)lie(i to the head uf the Canadian E.xi'cuiive ; liiil is, as long as Canada remains a Province of the British Empire. How then do they evade the force of that resolution r Why, by not only avoidiUL' all 3llem|)ls to explain it, and even al; relerence to it, liut bv practicilly and positively deny- ing its application,— nay, hy :l>-n'iuncing the very principle ol it. This nfKce tliny appear to have assigned to Mr. Ulake. 1 i the exe- cution ol it, lliey lepealeilly and enthnsiasti- ' cilly chtered hiiii ; and for having pi rO>r:iied ji, Mr. ./•illivan most warmly eul>i_riH d Inn. Tlie following: p:issageb fnuii VI r IJIake'sTo- r mlo Ass')ci.ition speech, with the a'comp,".- nying cli' ers, are my witiieisaes ; " Hut it is said tlial the head oi'the Executive G vern- menl here i.> resioiisihie to the i enple ol Eng- land. Now, layingoul ot view fir a mmiient the practical eileol of this respnnsilnlily, whicli we shall consider by and by, wedn now unhesitai.n;.'ly as.-erl, ihai lioHev.:r well fitteil S'lcii ri'gpMisiiiiJiiy may be lo deprive us ol all ■h.idow of hherlv, it can nev r raise us lolbe rank of freemen. ( lieers ") "We hive heard oi;e to whom lliis I'rov nee certainly owes much, [I mean lyird Durliaii] declare, that he d.d not pretend lo decide upon Hi- pulicy of granting to Can ida rLiinsuiliiiint in- tlituliiim - l.'in.ru:!iri> this wliic!! hjiui:!:! iiev: r have escaped ilie lips of an Englishman. I inubt contt'sj myself, therefore, md.sposed to fit upon the Wording of a despatch, ur a u^so- lutjon, for th» pnrpo«e of fortifying our right*. Such a cAurin may be highly proper in scllling mere questions of form ; but tltutt essential ri.i^hla xchidi ire now demand, rist on lite basis ofeterniiljiitlicn, upon which i.o re- R.diilim, however r.oii«lilutionnl, can more firmly establish tkeiii — from which no deg- palcli, however iirlfully w.irded, c;in ever re- move them." '* But. sir, it is said that the respoiisibil'ty of the head of the E.xeculive to the people ol Enirlanil is th' surest giiaranleo ofou'- liiier'ies ; nay, llie only trnaranlee which we can have consisten'ly with our position us colonists. Tint siuli |:in!.'imire should tall from the lip.s of noble Secretaries of S'ate '; that iliry shiiuid considei asiniple declaration of minister al approval as a sufficient sanction for any violation of our rights, however Ha- grant ; nay, that such passing noiice .four humble condit 01) siiould be regardid as the proper ob|eui (d' oar gratitude, would not much surprise us. And we siiould not feel disconcerted, even ihnusih we jliould find surh latiniMge fainllv 'echoed hy tlie pe iple of England. I3ui that there should be fou-id in tills country any mm degraded ho I.jw as to pander lo tli's lust of despoti;; power — (cheers) — that there should be found any man base eiioU{rli to har'er his own. Ins ch'lilren'a dearest riglil, f r some paltry presetit aOvnu- t*ge. How can such ih iigi I'e, and not till UH with wonder.'* ((.iniid clieer>i.) Rrspon- sihllity lo the people of E'li/land, tWrso.tli ! — What : dues not tin- Crown eons iiule here iho til rd bnncli of the L'>_'islal(ir(', as in Eiti." land.' 1< not the Li sji.slalive Council «?;/• se- uoiid briKncli, iio.inn iti d by the Cmwii, us in Eiiirlaiid ? Are ni«t lie (irero^ralives of thn Crown as iiiviola'e here as in England r And urn I to lie tiild thai all tiio.-i)veriimeiil "f lliiS e.onntry bo cnndiiiiled Iiy niinisL'Ts civer wlioin the peo- ple of the country have no cmitrol .' 1 tiny, Sir, this riiiht iiin-t not be cunc-'di d by the |)eo|)h' ol Canada ; nay, it iii;;st imt be Con- ceded even thiiUL'h the Comiiions ot EiiirlinJ Were disijitsed to exercise it w ll: the utmost impariitilily and vi; f' f.emrn need noi be ashamed. Eoiriand ciiiii >t wis>i, iind we must not consent « be bound as slaves. — (Cheers.) Unt, sir, we 'ilt'Tly lii'wy th.ii tho ri^hl of control, if conceded, would even be e.xercised bv the people ol Ei>.'lind with iin- paiti.ility and viifor; and history shall havo raised her waro'ii;; voic;.' for us lo li tie pur- p >se, if siie has laiieil to convince lis that such control, however well filled to sec. re the aggr.inili'zeiiient of the parent stite, has never yet oMe.-iled, :uid never vvdI op^-rale as n sli:eld to she !iS;er!ies .■>! the clon -!, Wc have, indeed, seen the pe"p!e ot England de- mand of t noble L rd some acc.inntofa rapa- city al.nosl unparalelled in the ago of Roman despoliira— rapacity which during a few brief ■ Iiighly proper nn ', bat thoit :viavd, rest on which i.u re- ml, cnn more vhicli no dea- I, c;in ever re- Haid \\\.\i the ' Kxpciiiivf lo rpsl ijiiaratilei> Hranlce wlinh tiur |>'iMiti(iii iiM (f cihoiihl tail ■'"'!» of 8'ote '; lit' iteolarntioii icient H.'inctiiin liowerer Hu- noiicp . f our i;artli d as the t', would not louUl not tcfl e jlioiild find )y th(« pf i|ile oiild lie foij'id led HO |.j\v na |ii)ti;; powiT — oond any innn his children'a lest'tit aOvrtij- », und not tiil 'r«i.) RFsjion- d, furso.tli ! — mile lu're llio (', an ill Kiij;' /"iliinil ovr se- (Jrowii, lis In iii lives (it liu? i;jliiiidr And slrililir, t use , iMiisl be rc- re also lo coii- is e.oiiiitry be tioiu ilie peo- ilroj ? 1 «(iy, ic-'il" d by tilt) I tioi be Con- IIS ol l;^ll|r|.ihij 1: lilt' Utllinst iiiii'jessiiiii no ol (.yiina !a lo Liiejs Ol Elig- jileed Wi' eiir- irlaiid ; hut it 71 need not be iH'i, iiiid we J IIS sluves. — deny th.il iho ouid evi'ti be ind with ill)- ry sliill have lo 1 1 lie |iur- virici- II!) ihat led lo src.re 'III 8t lie, lm» I'ltl op'Tiile n» ;i'k>n -!. Wo I Kiiyland de- innt oil' a mpa- :igc ot Roman ng a few brief jrhf had amaitrd nrealth Ruflieient toaroa§e the envy of the ancient and priviipged nobili- ty of Eiit'lmid. lint with what, rexull ? Why nt the very lioor — ilie very iiionient when the Co "iiioii* id Kii.thinil i\ ere PiiiTiiL't'd in the ill- ve>iiiruiion o; tliiit hemoiH "fftiice — nl llmt Vrry liour and niOiiieiii, the K. iig of En^iHnd w;i» deiti criitiii r Hi,' veneraiile lem^ile of VVfsiiiiirisier. by hestlo.vin.' i';i.in that GoVf r- iior the lM;ih''sl hriiiiiur ll ••( rnwn ol Kiijjlaiid Ciiiild conli'r lii.t it may be laid lliiit ilie ciruii'n»tarice«i of our roiiuiry, na", ils very poverty, (I liiive heard le>s teiinlile ar^niii" nl« ur^ed,) H'lflicieiuly pro eel lis rroiii the iron fruKp lit lapii ity, iiiiil ihnt giieli in^ianei s as have adduced, u-o lii'-relnre iiniiis'rueiive. Let 113 li en nontiMi .! ile ilie i iionnitiea ol the iininediiiU* BUcceKsor ol thai dvernur of the Indiuti Kinpi.-e ol k^iiirlund, for the piiriio«eof saiis:ying ourselves whetiier ilia responsibil- ily ol till' I'^xecuiive Governinenl I the peo- ple of Eiiul'iiid, on wliic'i we are nsked to rely, can bo justly rejrarded as nnv jrnarunlee (if on- rights. Look then at Warren llaa- tinif*,"' iVc. " l«ei u« then hear no innre ol' ou" iiif njiiilicance in this our Ktrujfale for trec- doiii. No iiiiin, no body ol me.i, ronl''ndin2 for liberty, can evt-r be regarded as insiiinifi- canl. Such a Hpi clac e 18 insigniticani only lo the nownrd slave, who knows not wherein the Iru'.' dnjnilv of man consi'ls. (Hear, hear.) r. will ije hailed liy > very l.ue hearted Eii^iishiii 111 us a «|iectai'le the m>'8l siirnifi- cnnt. lie will rejoice to me llie luidiimg iorih of ilinse seeds oMiberty, which it is i. e gio.y ot Kii.%;land to have planted over the globe. (C .1 eis )" Kvery woru ot these quo ations (r.« long aa they are) '8 eiiiiiLatic and lull of oieaniiiL'.— Lei Hie reader pondi r them carpfiilly. Apart from mere military rcfi'ipaiion, (a ureal ex- pense to Kiiglan J. and a C'irres|ioiidinir source ot iiain lo (^aiiHila,) apiri from feelmijs of atTection and fiienilship— ilipse senlinien s of the Toronio Ass iciulionisia cut asunder the only pnlitiail lie which unilPB Canada to Kng- land. II the head of ihe Canadan Executive is not responsible to England, then is he an independent potentate, and Canada is an inde- pendent sovi reignty. The re olution of the House of Assembly of "eptember, 1841, which says, " That the hea.i of the Executive Government of the Province, being within the limits of his govprninent, the Represen- tative of the Sovereign, is rrspnisibie to the imp'r.al aiiliiorily alone," is (|pcl;ired by the T« ronio AssocirilioMists to !ie ineompilihie vim liii'Miy, to iie til only lor slaves •. and they repudiate t e dentr •,— nay, lliey refuse to su iiiit to any oth'-r than ih s imippenHent coniiexi'in with Kiisilanil — tln' Iriendlv con- I i*Xion wlii.'li iho " freoiiipn" of the United Si'iies loiihly value and eariieftly uuntain^ with tne ,)eople cf Eufrland, and bv virtue of which thev have obtain.'d large loam, from U.ilisii caint'tlists. 1 ehail notstiipto ar?np tiu- doctrine of the above quolahons ; i merely adduce ihem os proof demonstnilive tli.il tile dnctnnBol Ivdc- pendcncc, (as I slated in my inlrodudory ad- dreii to the people of Weitern Canada) ts En* vnlved in the proceeuin(;s,und hat been incul- cated under the auspices of the l.ile Coiincil* lors. Neither will I r.'|)ly to these imputa* lions upon 'he Sov reiirn imil peoere of Eng- land ; liiey are mere repetiiinn of what Ha- THICK IIkmiv used to say, (iom whom Mr. IJ.'alie "lepois lo have borrowed a considerable P'irtton of his !«|iP'«eli, and 'lie nnimin of Ihe wiiole of it The Toronto Ulobk — the ofsjnn iif the AsHoe.inlion — hre.ithps out ihesumede- iiunciiili'ms a^'iin-tthe Minisle.s, Pailianient and |ieo|i!e ot EiiL'land, and the same denial of ilie Im(ieri:i| authority lo judiie of those very resoluiun' which rpcoynize llio rea- pon»ibility of the heai of Ihe Canidian Ex- ecutive In thsl riulhorily. In tli«' G/oAeofihc 4tli of Jiin-, (it sli"uld have been daied the 4lli J1.I11,) tiie Editor quotes the parauriph ef my intriiiliictnnj niliircsn in which I have sta- led the Imp.Tial nuihority to be Ihe legitiintlo tribunal of appeal on a qnesiinn nl the conati lulional preroirativp of tlie ("rown, wh ch be- yond all tloubl, involves an imperial interest of the highest and most sacred rharacler, as w»ll as acts for which the Governor General is responsiDle lo the Imperial aiilhoritv alone according lo tlip resolutions of lc'4 1 ; that the Imperial authority had virtually decided in ('av has shown it." To which I will add the following de- lectablo sentence — " It will require heavier BMt&l and c!earc'i lieitd.4 yet than the Rev. F>gerton Ryeraon to defend the present Od- vernrnent for their late IrenliMpnt of Canada. Now, aside from these deni.iis of'lhe autho- rity of the Imperial (iovernnient, und the re- sponsibility of the Govern' r (Jeneriil t.i the nuthority,— and rspocinlly in ronnexion with thein — whit in the object ol tliise inipnt.iliune upon the S'lveri'ign and people of Kng^lind, made by iMe8!.UisHi'd li.at his kmd und iugfnuoi;n n ilnre iiud bin loipooeu Uj.on Willi a vie IV, if not of liiuking a "stool pi- geon" of liini at Imsrt usiiifr him an o "tool" for party puipoae««, uud that fiia honest heart eould not ly cohmiul-cuni Toronto A»! avoW''d by ^ ing will Mr tun ChruniiU firmed.— Til wanting in mistakes as volved in thi Sir C. Melei it abouiiils in to the Sover bows contti Mr. Fergii'd da will iiot acts Thuj the British t liiimKnt — iin will re<:p tin The Toro received tin nient." and nient, and v believe lor ( Mr. Fergus have been u to Associal: and support thority— tiK tion kick u the authnrii sing howrtv the sentiine reforinem i " award" is ert ought li Nova Scot! aeph Howi' JYueft ScoUi- rial Parliari Imp trial packet arri ultalion ov Debate on ■upposed t principle ci der.-tood a We thougi case, and i mes, with i anticipatiu errors, am Colonies, son to con agreenhly reading 1- Kussell's coiicurren in Nova fc: he objects '•1st. in nl! inle "li.l. ' Governor in all caM disuitiut ( "No at scotiu, to Lord Stat ireiient Go- (if Canada, iflhe aulho- uiid thi* re> neriil t.^ I he lu'xion with iiiipiit.ilionB )f' Kng^Iind, )wi), amidsit of the then cialiuii ? Is tda respect p t.he confi- ?n^tlipn the and Cdna- cns speak k i>rstood,ap.d mistaken. — I from nie to nlerjjrct the re, which I lat the pro- Councillors, iinprecpden- ive of legal not intended on between • the present ivernor Ge- ent bv some injurious if rring to ano- ,vitli th.' pro- ors and the ■.■'. The re- 1 and renion- xillors even g unv sort of n\.r, Refonn- r attendance inal .iBsocia- .uiates them utronagHS in es, as forin- of Canadian > (in addition n the prece- J repudiated itn has been Toronto As- poeh in our enviable one »S% of popu- ii.il positi. ns rown and the f. Roehurk's isinir to find xecuting: the to see hini ive Council , nialili^ 1 man jTlit in Hiiclia fo strangp a lis kind Hiid ipiioL'u uj.on u "stool pi- as *• tool" ionest heart eould not sympathise with the spirit and anti- coliiniul-connejiion dnclrme cheriKhtd by ilio Toronto AwKnciniidnitts, and so expiieilly avow'd by Mr. Ulalie. *l. The deinind of a stipnhtion from n Governor, ns to the mode in .vhicli lie s^nuiUl in ai: caries, f xercise the prerogative in Iho disiritiut on oi [ aiioiiiiije. »' No iiifempt Ims ever been niarfe, in Nova- 3Colla,todin in the adininistrn- lion of th« ((»v<>rnmt*nt, niiil (he prnulinil inaintennncp vt them by iho people hi Inr^p, involve the remedy for llie evils which din- turh the peace and impede the prnapcrity nf Canada In illiitlrntm^ the efficienc\' ofilinl remedy, I Rhall cunaider the appiic>ition )o the different deparlm*nta of the govi'rninent, nnd the people (.'eneriliy. Thia iiirliidi'* Ihe Duly •/ Utt Governnr General—Un' Dulij of Axttiitiva Ojfifers—ih^ Duty of !.rgi»l'iti)TS — tlM> Duty of the Piople. \ lew n-innrlcN on •ach of thnae topics will firm itiy I'ipteilion of what I think ouirht to he the prnctical workini; of the eat^tbliahed aystein of rotpnn- ■ible government in Lunada. 1. Thi Dutt of the Govr.nnoR Gkntrai.. —An ancient author reninrka of the rinman Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoniun ihit •' he appeared like «ume benevolent deity, diflu- sinjr around him tinivoraal peace and happi- neaa." Such is the flmr icier of the prcs nt Hovereign of the Hriti«h Fimpire ; such should bt the character of her repres<>ntBtivi> in Ca- nada. Such is his cinracter in privnte hene- fieence, such it should be as th>- head of the Executive. The ifovernment is estalilished for the "greatest happiness of the greatest number" — for the equal benefii ol the entire community ; the htad of the givcrmiif nt, therefoie, should sustain a comm )ii relation to the whole ofthut co;ninuniiy— Iiki> the sun in ihe firmmnent. He siuiuld not tl)»i.'fore, be the head or Ihe " tool" of a fiction or pir- ty, or bound by or idf niified with fiiclion or parly, by " stipulation" or otherwise, in nr.y ■liapeor form whaiever. It is n beautiful re- mark of Lord Bacon, that "The motions of factions under Kiniis ought to lie like the motions, as aatrono .sers speak, of the inferior orbs; which may have their propwr motions, but yet still are quietly carried bv the higher mutton of prtniuin mobile." i cannot xlate my own views on tbii subject- and the fre- quently expressed sentiments of the Gover- nor General — belter than in the words of the excellent Gisborne on the Duties of thn So- vereign. " To check as much as may be pos- sible the a irit of party, appears to be one of the first duties and noblest employments of a Kirg. To countenance it, is to encourage interested nr bles and aspiring commoners, factious orato! 1, needy and profligate adven- turers to associate into ban^ls and confedera' eies for the purpose of obtruding themselves into all the offices of government; and under the name and garb of servants, of im- posing on the monarch nnd on the people chains too atrong td je broken, ll id to pre- scribe men from einpioynients, not because their characters are ruijeaaliable or ambi- guous; not because their talents are inade- quate or unknown ; but because thev are sus- pected of attendini} to measures rather than to men ; to reason and to public good rather than to hPCkneyd walcliworHH. s;'.r! r:".')p!la- tions ; and hesitate an implicit allegiance to the chief, and obedience to every principle, of the political ooaBpirscy. These are not the charaeterestics of a particular party ; but of all parly and will he di»p!ayed m stronijer or fiiinler col.. rs according to the ijenius of the leiders and the cirriiiiii8tance« o( the times.—. Thfir prevuleiiiiH at any one period nil only enilaii\;er» the final slubiliiy ol ilif empire by dividinif It iiiIk two c nllictiiig pnrtions ; by perpetU'ilinjr jeiiloUiies.aiiimiia'tii'Knnd f, ud*; by ihreiit'-iiiiig ilie anniliiintion o( palnnliRm and public spirit ; but mure H>jeedily oli-'cures thedi^rnily and d.slro3iihe power of ihe mo- naroli. Ferhipa lie may lio|ie to preserve his authority by uiiilinif liinisnlf with Hie ruling fiction. Hul.anLord l)aciinsn\ s •' Kiiiirn had need beware how they mde themselves, .ind make tliemseUes asof.i faction or pariy. For lertjjfiies within the stale are ever pernii ions o monarchien; f.ir they raise an oblij;iiii»n par- amount to tiie ohli^iitioii ol sovereiLMitv, and mnke the Kina tunqunm vnva tx nnhit fan one of themselves.) A Kin., ihuiigh he m ly be a member of a party, can never be the leader. That post -vill ever be filliid bt the h'>lil de- claimer whose iiifl'iHiicM coiiiiniinds Ihe lloiiae of I'arliament. All that i:t permitted to the Sovereign, no longer a Suvereiifii but in name, i« to co-'iperat" in ri.r>;ing liisown feiter.4, and to endeavour to persuade himtelf nmi ],(. ,, frff, to be flattered by his potent associates, when they are at leiniire and in huni<:ur ; to be menaced by Ihem, whew he dares to intimate disapprobation nf their schemes ; to be over- awed by one part nf his siibiects wlinlie deno- minates his Iriends ; and despised by Hie othvr whom he h.is f.>r-ed to be his enemies. " ftut when a Monarch (or Governor) con- siders himself as the ciimiiKin father of his people : w;,eii, rejecting all distinclioiw not originating in pcrsniial merit, he is ready to employ in Ihe service ot the flue, nn'. of liis Riibjeel,! possessed of virtuen t nd talent« capa- ble of furthering its welfare ; it is difficuli to say whether he ens-ires, nn fiir as human con- duct can ensure, more nulisi.inlial advuniages to his country, or more satisfaction, honour and authority to himself. Housed by his im- partial call, public spirit revives in liie remo- test extremitie.^ of his dominions, prompting all classes of citizens to whatever exertions the general good may require. No individual is deterred from stepping I'^rward in the com- mon cause, by fear that, in consequence of inauspicious parly connexions his most stre- nuous eflbrts will be coldly accepted, his most important services forgotten. Political dis- cussions no lonirer make one part of the lami- !v an 1 nemy to the other. Hnr.ii my nnd con- fidence reiijn throuiiiiont tlie cii:i.mi!nity and ntford the nn?' stable security against attacks from abroail." Siich is liie kind of rliief-rul-r enjoined by the uislituies of thi> inspired Jovisii l.ejrifila- tor ; such isliic kind of clii«'f-iiiler that tlio people of Caii.ida have alrendj desired. Tlr.t any considerable nuiiilier of them should have been in;!iiced to bund tiipm^elvrs loiretlier under i!ic b.ip.ticrs of tha 'j'oron!'- A~s."r!Sl;nr. as enemies of Sir ('harles Melcalfi' for liin in- sisting upon such an exercise of the vice-re- gal ofBce, c«u only be accounted lor irom the part^ ; but o< 111 iironijiT or i;i>niiii rif tim it I lie tiiiief.— > riijil nil only llic pitipirt' liy piirtion^ ; by tii-K nnd fvud*; of piiiriiiliRiii fdiltr oliiuurra WIT oftlie IIKI- prtucrvf hit lit llif ruling >i" Kiiii;Mlisil Miiseivt'ii, nnd orpnriy. For r jiernii ioiig o bli^riitmn \inr- iTt'iL'iily, mid c nnliii (a* nna ;li lie liny be be the leader. the bold df- ndi ll)p lioiiRe ■iiiitti'd 1(1 Ifitf II lint in nnm«>, VII fi-iif r.i, and "If llllll lie IS nt. iKtooiatci, li(ini<;ur ; to be eg lu iiiiiinnta ; lo be over- Willi he dfiio- d by I lie ollu-r IPIIlic*. iveriior) oon- fiitlier tii hit ilinctiMii-) not f II nady to )>, nn', of tiis 1 talents cnpa- Ir difficuli to i liiiiiiiiii con- Ill udvuniagps :liiin, linniiur ed by his ini- in llie reiMij- 8, prompting ver exertions No individual d in the com- nsequence uf is most 8ir«i- pted,his nnost Political dii- ■i ot the fami- laiiy nnd ron- hiniMiity and rain!>l!ii.tucks r enjoined by ■isii l.cfjicla- nler tlinl. iIih ssired. 'I'lir-.t II should huve Ivrs loijetlier t. A~srrial;on ilfii' for liii! in- t the vicc-re- 1 lor irou tb» fhet— >s remarked by tho histormH d* Tko% — thsl '^ nation*, like intiriuals, are subjected to paroxysms of frenzy." The President of a Itonrd nf Police in a vtllage performs the du- ties of hi* nflii^e " Mitlmut reference to parly conntderutKinH," and he is honored for it, ait is the Mnyor of ii oily, or the Wiirden of a dis- trict ; bill the ri'prfsenliitive ofllieSnyereijrn, thi' fouiiluin ol lionor and the supreoie urbitrr of jiiilice in the country — avow:< t|u> BaniH principli* ort'X''Ciiiiii8 Ibu functions of hin hi^h and responsible nffice " wiihiiut reference to party ciinsiif. rations," nnd lie is proclnuiiej iiii eii'inv to the liberties of Ihit cnui-.try : — He ditciiiintenances pnrty exclusKin, nnd lie Ik set down as a iiiiiiileioit or a icolf! Hut how does ihe hiinL'ry prowling wu'f of party cupidity Mlink nwoy before the solnr Majesty of equ»l justice and parental impartiality ; und how does llie faithless Biin/jitton of pnrty ad- vocacy sinnJ lit its native worthlessneirs and de.'radnlion i.ii the prenence of a iroveniiiient ha<'inniiizin;r with that wisdom which i» "with- out parti'ili y und without li vpociir. Uooke Tay- lor, in his Naturnl History ♦' Civilization, that •' K.xcl(isiv(«iiesi is ilic ^irinciple offline- hood in iii'st of the opinions ih^il linve pre- do.iiiiint'd over innnkind ;" the principle of til»eliood iii{iiiiial whicli the people of Canida h ive ever protested ami prayed, and n^'aiiist whicii the represeniii'ivi- of Iheir Sovereign lias s l-oiiily ol jeolfd, (leclnr'.n/, B» he does in lii.s |ir ilfst, that " ull {rovrrniiient exists solfly fir the luMif-lit of ttie iter pic," and not f ir tiie " txcluiiventsd" of partv patronaife. Every ju«t man iscoiicrned ilint " llie throne sliall be i-HialilistfieJ iii righleousiii'ss." — Hiat " tlie King .iliall reiirn in ri^rlit ousness " — Anibitoius and seifuli parlizans ulon'- ar • in- t-'resied m iiiviuL' ibe Kiii'jr rei^n for party piirpo.'ies. Ti e people huve more to expect fro, II riirh'eousti-iis tlian Irnni exclusive party paironijie, apart Ir'iii iiioinl obligation ; liuiimii and (fwin-. Miy "justice ever be llie liuiii- lutinn of llie Ifiio.ie" in the governnienl of Cunid.i ! 11. Tur DuTv or E\KcuTivr. Ofkickhs.— Ifiheend'jf ^rovermiieiil iiiacouiilry is the iMppinesB of ine pfople, and ifju-ilice in the {Tov.rnoient is '■.■fsenlini to Miat end, then oil 'III i.lie acts nnd cnunseU of llie iXi-cntive olfii'fs to accord vviih it. To txersise l!ie power C'linniiiled lo lliem With a view to ex- alt one puny and d press another, is a Inlse nnd base » ew of the innonons of their offiie. 'I hmiirli pirly may liive paced them ilier", pa ty is n'll the end fir w.i.cli ihey are placed there. Porty miv linve eonlnliuled lo make a niiin u President of a Conference, nr a Mo- deralor of a Synod, or liisli'.p nfn Di'>cese,or Mayor of 1 Cnrporaiion ; '.;ul III his office he 13 r.'ti to pi 1^ llie part nf a p irty mm — to re- gard on-' p irly of llie co nuiiinioii over whom lie i> placed «» his friniil* nnd the otlier as hi.H liiieniiss — lo cheiish "!ie foiiner ;'.n I pros- cribe llie inner, fjy wiiaiever iniiiience he may have been investi-d with his p 'W<*r, and by whatever influence he may be con'.inued ia poaiessioa of it, the ohjtct of that power ii not •party, \>ai\.Ut public good, and he is (im lected as the most competent instrument im promote that end. For him in use bis pow^r for any other purpose is to betray the tru»t committed to him, and to pervert the very desiirn of government i'self. The Rev. Pn. Wiivi./i.Ni), Presidniit of Hrown U' iv-rsily, Untied States, has the fuHowiiig just ob«e' va- tiori!^ nn this siilijeet ; in his sensible work on Moriil Seienc — a work used as a Text Book in mosi of the American Colley^es: " And not only is an executive officer bound to ex- ert no other power than Hint coiiiiniUed tu him ; but he is bound to exert that power for no other [lurposes ifian thniie tor whic4i it wot committed. A pnwer miiy be conferred for the public ^ood ; but this by no meansauthor- ites a mm to uso it for the gratification of in- dividual love or hatred; much less tor lh» s'lhe of buildinin better policy in the atlhirs of state than in any other atlairs ; though men may per- suade tlinmselves and others lo the cor^a* ry— lie is not tlrere as the organ of a sec- tion, or of a district, much less of a party, but ol the society at large. And he who '-ses his power for the benefit of a sec- tion, or of a party, is false to his dut}, to his country, and lo tiis God. lie is engraving his nnnie nn the ndamantine pillar oi his coun- try's history, to be gized upon for ever as an objpTl of universiil de'Lestalion." What ineffable scorn does this noble lan- gnaire nf an honest American Republican pour upon the ''ernocrnlic party p^tronaga policy of the Toronto Ass'iciationists ? Con tragi the address ot Mr. Hinck's to the Elec- tors of Fronlenac, and other publications, printed by he 'I'oronto Association — contraxt what I have provd lo be the real ground of rupture b -iween Sir Charles Metunlfe and his lale Counoi'lors— with these iinmulable aen- timeots «t f Sir (r')'r|i"< vifu Ciilfe'st l.'iiiieril'il i rcdi-ccssiir K^ilnceJ liitii to llu' mere *\ rtiKmnal it ri|>iiiT in : ;it' ^'ne n- meil, and Icll il l.TeicI ire ctilfieiy in ilio hands lit n ;i-.irly willinut ciinirid or i^herk. — Tl P imclic'cki'd fXerciS' i.f p;i tv |i:nriiii,ijje for SIX rnuiillis :iii(l ii|nviird.i, was fniiiid lo be a griiliCy iiir .■uid iidviinta^enns nccesBOn of power lo tlie lenders of ii piiiiy, iirid it ap- pears t.i have presenU'il lo liiem so jro'den a harvest, aa absolutely to have blindtd tlieiii (as jifts blind tiie eyes of e.eii t'.e wise) toa funda::ienlal a'-liele of Iheir forme; ly proless- ed creed, and to have Hllured tliem nucon sciously and uiider the extnneous iiifluencu of party ri'iplinationi and tliroati', into tho ndoptioii of a oniiir.-iry article, nnd at leiiixth into the avowal nt it as a ( rinciple olgoverii- ineni— espr'oi.i'.ly tlinuiijli the lipu of vlesars. Sullivan and Umcks, wli) ha\e lieen lesii re- moftkalile tor wisdom and prude ce aid con- • isflfncy, ihan t!iey have been for zeal and abiiitij. But the health and vij;our and aris- tidean sense of justice entertained by Sir Charles Metealle presented a serious " anta goniam" to this nneontrolled exercise of ex- clusive party patromiie — es|ieci.«ry in view of certain patronage lulls pendiuij beloie the Legislature, which l\au been prepared during the days of council supremacy and royal weakness, doubtless vt'ilh the contident expec- tation that the authors ot ihein would enjoy the uncontrolled ndvan'.ages of the power which those bills conferred. They, therefore, seem to have hit upon the ex|,edient of redu- cing by "stipulation" or "understanding' Sir Charles Metcalfe to the amanuensis or ci- pher condition to which Sir Cliarles Bagot had long been reduced by sickness. The ex- pedient, however, did not an-iwerthe purpose anticipated, but produced an explosion which blew down its authors. To have come before the country upon this new policy of governing upon the principle of party patron- age, instead of the principle f equal justice t ral and Pol, tical Science, as also by the late Whig Pre.^ident of the United States in the words quoted in the oreceding number. Let an enlijhiened English writer speak to the same rlfecton the Uuty of a Minister of the Crown. Gisborne says — " In the disposal tf honours and emoluments, the good of his count' y will bo his ruling inotl.ve That prin. ciple he will openly and uniformly avow ; and will be anxious to exeiept himself by all reasonable precaiuions from the suspicion of fceintr influenced by the sinister ailuremtntu of ministerial or private convenience. There are few methods by which a Slatesman can render more essential service lo the commu- nity tiianby a judicious exerciae of lis patron- age. "Consistent simplicity of conduct on thi* point, manifestly coiibined with personal dis interestednes's, will not only secure to hiin self rational contidence and esteem, and coi. ciliwte to his measures that treneral favour and approbation, which in the bands of an upright minister liecoine the means ot'nccom- plishmg the noblest and most benelicial de- sifns ; will not only contriliuti* to exciie eve* ry subordinate olficer to a diliffeni Hnd faith- ful ditcliargo of his duly hut will tend lo re- vive and invigorate nulilic spirit in every part of the Kingdom; to call forih einulntinu in M'tue; to diH'use an ardour of Minolism, wli c I spreading th;on,rh every class ol the coim:iiinr.\ , every depiriment of tlie Slate, pverv br.ineh of he p'lblic Servic", will pro- duce effects truly great und ^rlormus. There ave likewi-e r.:\i> r ii.-!v.ani.'ig> ts r; ^ii.liing from a ste idy aiih.Tence to the principle, of which he will himsell .-eiip tlie peculiar unit imme- diate comfort. He will thus preclu<)e hissup- porler» from every ostensible plea for taking offence win themselves, isting eiicur them from p rejection ol him the res? (illir;g up ii recommend i the post' vvhi a step, to bi cutive depar men, whosti suited to th< to discharge merit, in wh whatever sii The opera policy in th men I, would the country- aspirali his r enterprise, classes of its propelled by sive partyisi rilily and c energies aiK ness of a c eruptions in association, party prose ]»arty riotiui the life puid it will beat ' itic, and pai and j.ublic c out the who selves will I and even i announces | sion as the itself no bet racy armed secrecy are oaths of oth policy woul of which al legitimate asT'ii st soil] fostering pn ing the rult be tho lii'c-l death of Lli; tion ; its 11 means of g' more than i lish parly c would be k power an ii more regat tism, not hi but becausi sway not o Btjcielies, SI tiplv, but t be the gre; r??.".n would ning woul( eniploymei falU of obs Henes iho nt, and down en of neces »s IJiigrii dur jiiinnl tidiiiin- iiiit up at nl!, il .'iliiiie wi're ie« Melciife vilhoul being ' by consent tl liy disens?, s Council. — that (.'iirtics We know parlies, thr.jr neceas.iies, t send then, e biiliince of ' gainestern : >, and IS sure {as has bePii one of Mr. anne was not f tiie Bt:\te" but claimed game" and of such pai'^ TiGerrt stand', will pro- iiius. ThiTO ^^!.!!lli!r from ple,ot whicij r anil iinnie- :liiocial happi- ness of a community, Lniitlinu; its volcanic eruptions in all the diversified forms of party association, party passion, party violence, purty proscriplicms,- and not unfreqiiently ]iarty rioting, blo>dshed and rnurdj.. When the life pulse of tlie sjovernment is pa.lyism, it will beat to the exUemilies of the body pol- itic, and partyism in every variety of secret and j.ublic combination, will spread through- out the whole population, and slalutrs ihem- uelves will be us cobwebs against its existence and even prevalence. When government announces parly l;ivourilisni and party exclu- sion as the [irinciple of its administration, it is itself no better ll.ar, a polilical party confede- racy armed with dreadful power ; iU oalhs of secrecy are but the counterpart of the secret oaths of other polilical confederacies; its own policy would lj«! serving the seed broad-cast, of which all party confedtracies would be the legitimate fruit ; it might even legislate asr.ii st some of them, but ilself would be the fostering parent of them all ; party policy be- injj the rule ol its action, p;irty-spirit would be the lik>bli).)d (if its exiritencf, and with tl^; death of that spirit would be its own dissolu- tion; its moral power— the most essential ineaiis of giio'l in a rnivernwenl— would be no mors than tiio lUdr;'! power of any other sel- fish party oombmutiou ; thi; law in its hands would be felt as a tyranny, and the executive power an instrument of party despotism, only more regarded than any Oliver party Oe»[io- tisin, not because it was more just or virtuou*, but because it was more powerful; under lis sway not only would parly combinations and Btjcielies, secret and public, increase and mul- tiplv, but the noisy worthless partizar would lie the great man, and the iuteiligeiit werlliy •^™,. ii.jj.ii.i ije the obscure !ii:it> ; party cun- ning would be on the hij;li way t» exeoulivo employment and virtuous industry the sure f »lU of obscurity ; and the teacher must ap- prize iiis pupils, that under the existing syg* tem of government they would not be encou* raged, patronized and rewarded, according to their virtues, their attainments, their abili- ties, their industry, their love of justice and law — but according to their party eonfedera- ey, their party zeal, party skill, and all the arts and qualifications of the party gamester. In illuitration of the truth of these remarks, 1 appeal to Ihe g;rowth of party associations, secret and public in Canada, since the hour when it was fully understood and acknow- ledged by the late Councillors that party po- licy was their rule of government. 1 appeal to the revival and the character of party spi- rit in the country, which is as' the zephyr be- fore the gale, in comparison of what will be, if such an unprincipled policy be substituted for the principle of Provincial policy in the administration of the government. I appeal to the party combinations ' party manoe- uvres in these sections of ti. Jnited States, where the executive power is only tne breath f party and where party is the main-.'spring in the whole machinery of governinenti where lynch law, and mob power is stronger thaa executive ; .ver. 1 appeal lo the late riotg in Philadelp.iia — the natural spawn of an ox- elusive-party-policy-aJministratioii of the go- vernnirnt advocated— to the moral wcnltnosf nf the executive authorities there— the power- lessness of tlie la> — the necessity and evea inefficiency of military interlerence. I ap- peal to the sentiments and wariness of the late President of the United States, as quoted ia the last number. I appeal to the denuncia- tions of the above quoted Dr. Wayland— to the testimony and ihe lamentations of the most able statesman and writers, and most es- timable characters in the American Republic. 1 appeal, finally, to the unwitting testimony oftht Toronto Associationists tbffmselves. — In the address of Mr. Hinckg to the electors of Froutenac, which the Associationists or- dered to be re-printed and circulated by their agents in 'llustration of the doctrine earnest- ly advocated, tiiat " the vacant offices should be filled up by men of their own party," (p. 2,) a quotation is introduced, losuow that the " di.stribulioii of patronajrc should bs so wielded as to secure the active support of the friends of the governnietit, and weaken the party of their opponents,' — (p. 4 ) That quotation conclude.s thus:—" A man of abili- ty in Prussia, without connexions, has a much better chance of getting on, if he deyota himneU' to I " public service than in Eng- land; but nt aie same tinio, the chances of suoii a person being advanced are infinitely srrt.iler here, [Knirland,] than in the United States, in the latter everything is sacrificed to parly coiisiderations; and the most splendid talents and capacity to render great public services would never advance their possessor one step on theladder ot promotion if he hap- pened to le of a difierent party from that in favour at the time, or to want parly support. The reason is, thu in Ent'land Parliamentary influence predoininutes merely, wheieas in Americtt it i» everything: auU cverythirg tnuit, in conieqnence be made lubseryient to itisapport." Now, as to England, I shall presently ad- duce fact ngainst aasprtion. But the opera- tions of the party-patronage system must be vastly more marked and more banelul in Ca- nada, than it is here exhibited to be in the United Slates as our examples. The popula- tion is much smaller here than there ; and the number of offices larger, in proportion, and they were greatly multiplied by the late ad- visefs, and proposed to be multiplied to a much greater extent. The violence & per- sonality of party are increased in proportion to the smallness of the population, and the amount of patronage to he distributed tor v'w- ty purposes. This system, once the rule ot government in Canada, and all hope is extin- guished that the Janus temple of social war will ever be shut, or social peace ever be en- joyed. Between the rising youth of Canada and all promotion theie is an impassable gulf, however "splendid their talents," or shining their virtues, or high their attainments, unless they can provide, and prove the possession of the additional requisite bridge of political par- tieanship interest. And this apple ot discord — Ihis premium for partisanship— this offshoot of the worst species of democracy— this ex- tinguisher of inobtrusive virtue and intelli- gence—this system of political and moral corruption— this blood-sucker of the religious and moral feeling of the country ; is dignified as the " essence of responsible government" and all who do not fall down and worship this golden image of party idolatry, are to be cast into the furnace of party proscription and ex- ecration, heated seven times hotter than it was wont in former days ! Such a system •will prove Ciirran— the gem of Irish intellect —an idiot. He said " I have known tumult and disorder to make many a rich man poor ; but 1 never knew it to make a poor man rich." This newly advocated system of re- sponsible government will indeed make a rich country poor but il is the patent though unprincipled wav to make poor political par- tiganarich. Under its operation cunning will be the desideratum for the public man, and moral principle will die, pnd with it will crumble the whole constitution of govern- ment ; for, as the learned Schlcgel, in his ad- mirable lectures on the philosophy of history, remarks—" At no lime has a political consti- tution or mode of government been duvised, which could permanently supply the plaee of principle." May the Ruler of Nations avert such a calamity from Canada ! For Sir Charles Metcnlfe to be a party to such a system— much more the stipulated tool of it— would not only be violating the com- mands of his Sovereign, and the still higher commands of the King of Kings, and wither- ing every verdant germ of Canadian excel- It'nce and hope, with the simnan blast of the _-.i- -I — ~ A~^~^naioA ■ liiit wniilil hH seltintf trvUn QtfY-- -I'-j'f ■" • •■ — -- '- " _ — the seal of condemnation to his own appoint- ment as Governor General of British North America, In the late debate on Canadian nflfaira in the British House of Commons, Mr. Bullet said that Sir Charles Metcalfe belong- ed to " tha ranks of the opponents of Her Majesty's present government;" Lord Stan- ley said Sir Charles " was not a supporter of the present Ministry ;" Sir Robert Peel snid that Sir Charles was not even personally known to a single member of the present Go- vernment, until aft^r bin recommendation to Her Majesty as Governor General of Cana- da. The emoluments of that otfice are larger than those of Secretary of State for ihe Colo- nies. The Ministry in England have many needy and office-seeking; dependants lind friends — noble and otherwise— to wlioinsuch an office would be an invaluable boon, and who, no doubt, regarded themselves as having strong political claims " for services render- ed." ° And, had Her Majesty's Advisers acted upon the new and detestable article incorpo- rated into the political creed of the late Advi- sers of the Governor General to regard thetr opponents as "enemies," and fill up " allva cant offices with men of their own party,' then would Sir Charles Metcalfe not hav» been (as Mr. Buller expressed it) taken from the ranks of their opponents. He desired not the office : he desire't and needed not itscmo luments ; the affirc. needed him ; Hi r Mnjes ty's Ministers residviiig (as Sir Robert I'eel has more than once avowed, and as Lord John Russell declared, after the passing of the Municipal Corporation Bill,) to recommend persons to office according to thi'ir fitness and merits, advised the appointment of one ol their "opponents" in the person of Sir Char- les jMctcalfe. This is British rf^ponsiblc Go- vernment, as practiced by Her Maje.'ity's Mi- nisters in the very appointment of ihe present Head of the Canadian Exe^utive, and this is the true responsible government for Canada. Sir Charles Metos'fe's peculiar fitness for the situation of Governor General of Canada, was asserted even bv Mr. Hume, and eulogized in the strongest terms by the late Councillors themselves, at the comirencement of the late Session of the Legisiolure, niter they had had several months' confidential iiilercourse with His Excellency. But having changed their doctrine of Government, they have in a cor- respondinff ratio amazingly changed their lan- guage in rec^ard to Sir Clnrles Metcalle, and have done but little else in their speeches for months past, than attempt to falsify the words they themselves had enipb.yed in Failiament durinir the discussion of the answer to the .Speecli from the Throne at the opening of the Session. Thi^ is only another addition to the cataloirue of their inconsistencies and self-contradictions which 1 have heretofore pointed out : whiUl Sir Chiirles M';tcalfe, true to the principles sanctioned by \i"T iVla- ieslv and her advisers in his own appointment, true to the equal rights and privileges of all classes Of Her Maiesty's subjects in Canada, coiitinups to maintain what the late Council- lors advised Sir Charif s Bagot to declire to the Johnstown District Council, " tiiat inn distribution of the patronage of the Execu- tive Government shall be confined to no par- ticular section or party, reliaious or political. That Ihe pi England has purposes — ps] istralive and no doubt. T corruption, a administratio beacons of vvi tion. The pi both by slalei profane swea guilty of it; t of patronage wh-M-e it was mil of denial crown did in trine itself; I his celebrate trine of the 1 has his price tested. Dr. Fhilosiipliy, f according to oflhcsulijecl. are perfect o be asserted I comes in the of law." Ie rights," he where the q best ((ualifiei yet if lie be cannot seize dress at I aw Wlierever tl ponding old prefer the hi be grateful my children in all these right is im " imperfect, language of however, si that it leads less guilt in gation, Iha groundless perfect or ir violence mi force it. 1' tiality," di station in li or liveliho grievously in others. . greater crn out of a lib kerchief; t an imperfei In this r( didates lor to their qu correspond liave the d ments upoi paliuii will dren ; and other princ t.y and inj alfe belong- Mit8 of Her Lord Stin- supporter of rt Peel snid I personally present Go- lendation to ml of Cana- cn are larijer for the Colo- have many •ndaiits i;nd ) whom fiuch le boon, and /BB as having 'icP3 render- dvisers anted icle incorpo- he late Arivi- regard thetr 1 up " all va own party,' life not hav» ) taken from le desired not i not itscrno ; liir Mnjes Robert Feel as Lord John issintj of the u recommend t'ir fitness and ■ nt of one of I of Sir Char- jjponsibli' Go- Majesty's Mi- of the present re, and this is it for Canada. fitnesH for the f Canada, was d eulogized in Councillors ent of the late r they had had lercourse with chanoed their have in a cor- nged their lan- MetcaU'e, and ir speeches for ilsify the words 1 in Failininenl mswer to the le opening of her addition to isistenciee and ave heretofore irles Metcalfe, led by H^r Ma- n appointment, rivilegea of all pets in Canada, e late Council- t to declare to cii, " that the of the Execu- fined to no par- lus or political." That the patronage of the fOTernment in England haa been advised and used for party purposes — especially before the era of admin- istrative and parliamentary reform— there is no doubt. Those were the days of Executive corruption, and not of " equal juslico" in the administration of the government. They are beacons of warning'-, not examples for imita- tion. The principle was always condemned both by statesmen and moralists — the same as profane swearing— even by those who were guilty of it; and the fact itself of such abuse of patronage was denied, except in cases whore it was too shamelessly notorious to ad- mit of denial. One minister of the British crown did indeed unbiushingly avow the doc. trine itself; but his name, in connection with his celebrated maxim (the essence of the doc- trine i^f the late councillors,) that " every man has his price," is only remembered to be de- tested. Dr. Paley, in his Mornland Political FkilosDiilnj, even ranks appointments to otWce according to qualifications amonifst the rights ofthcsul/ject. (Chap X.) He says, " Rights are perfect or imperfect. Perfect rights may be asserted by force, or, what in civil society comes in the place of private force, by course of law." In giving examples of " imperfect rights," he says, "appointments to office; where the qualificulions ar prescribed, the best qualilied candidate has a right to success ; yet if he be rejected, he has no remedy, H^ cannot seize the office by force, or obtain re- dress at I aw; his right is therefore imperfect. Wherever the riglit is imperfect, the corres- ponding obligation is so too. I ain obliged to prefer The best candidate, to relieve the poor, be grateful to my benefactors, tak<> care of my children, and reverence my parents ; but in all these c;\ses, my obligation, like their right is imperfect. 1 call these obli^'alions "imperfect," in confonn'ty to the established language of writers on the sul)ject. The term, however, seems ill chosen on this acrount, that it leads many to imagine, that there .3 less guilt in the violation of an imperfect obli- gatioli, than of a perfect one ; which is a groundless notion. For an obligation being perfect or imperlect, determines only whether violence may or may not be einp'oyed to en- force it. Paley adds that a man who by par- tialitv, " disappoints a worthy candidate of a station in life, upon which his hopes, possibly, or livelihood, depended, and who thereby grievously discourages merit and emuhition in others .oinmits I am persuiided a much greater crime, than if he had hitched a book out of a library, or picked a pocket ol a hand- kerchief; though in the one case he violates an imperfect rltfht,in the other a perfect one. In this reasoning, it will he seen that can- didates for offices have a right in proportion to tlieir qualifications and merits, and that a corresponding obligation rests upon those who have the disposal of officers to make appoint- ments upon that principle similar to the ohli- pation which exists bctA-ccn parents and c. ;- dren;and to make appointments upon any other principle, involves a species of dishoncn- ty and injustice. I may alio observe, thai it involves disboneity aud injuitice against tha public as well as against individuals. Offi- cers are created, not for the purpose of party patronage, but, for the public good. Tha public therefore have a right to the employ- ment of the best qualifications and talents (re- gardless of parties or party interests) in those offices. To use the patronage of those office* therefore for any party purposes is no* only a perversion of them from the very design of flieir creation, but a wrong against the public. The late Councillors have been compelled to admit this principle in respect to the office of magistrates. They have been compelled to declare that magistrates ought to be appointed without regard to party distinctions. And are not all other offices created for the good of the public at large as well as that of magistrates .» And are not the other offices for the most part more uurthensome upon the public than that of magistrates.' And are not the public at larse as much entitled to the full and impar- tiaf benefit of one public office as they are to that of another.' In all probability, there cann it be more than one office holder to one hundred of the population. There are then the interests of nineiy-nine to one in farour of iiaving public offices filled according to qual- ifications and merit, " irrespective of party considerations." Neither the Sovereign nor the public have any interest in parties or par- ty appointments. Partizans only are inte- rested in party appointments ; the public at large are interested in appointments accord- ing' to qualifications and merits. Offices are created for the public at large and not for partizans or parties. The whole theory, there- fore, of parly appointments, and party patron- age, is rotten at the very foundation. Jt is alike at variance with the fundamental prin- ciples of civil government and the first prin- cple of morals. It is the original fountain of political corruption, and the death-knell of equal civil ritihts and privileges amongst all the members of a community. It is both the effect and the source of public corruption. It assumes that a people cannot be governed without this partial and therefore corrupt pa- tronage of the Crown; and it makes them more corrnpt. The emulations and pretensions of party to public favour, should, therefore, rest upon other grounds than that ofparty patronage.— The' sphere of the operations is beneath the throne— not above it The exercise of the functions should not taint the fountain of ho- nour, and justice, and law. That should be held sacred by all parties, and flow on unpol- luted by party, to the humblest inhabitant of the land. The emulationsof parties in regard to patronage itself siiould be, who shall advise its exercife most disinterestedly and most effi- ciently ior the encouragement of virtue and intelligence -for the interest of the public service, for the discouragement ofparty con- lentiansanddivisions-for the promotion of r>..nc» n..d "ood u ill. Their emulations in re- gard to measures should be, who will devise and carry into effect the mo.it numerous, most comprehensive, moit simple, and most em- •ienl measures for the good government of tlic people.the advancement of'the education , the moraU the enterprise, the comnierre the wealth, the happiness of the country. Upon these ijrounda and with these objects of ho- nourable rivalaiiip and mutual einuhuion, Btalesman will, in exact proportion to liicir ability, skill and success, command the confi- dence, support, and gratitude of tiieir fellow subjects, and be benefactors to tlieir common country. This is my theory of patronnge ; this is my theory of the dutyoftiie Executive Officers ; this is my ilipory of the practical ■working of "party government ;" this, I be- lieve, is the true tlicory of poo J 'rovernment; ■while the vicious system of party patronnge and party proscription is dangi'ro-js alike lo the throne and the people, and the prolific parent of numberless viced and evils in a com- munity. Lord Brousrham haB well s.'iid (and the history of Canann proves il) that " I'arty undermines principles, destroyt. confidence in statesmen, corrupts private morals, unites Bordid motives with pure, produces self-de- ception, destroys regard in truth, promotes abuses of the press, j^'ives scone to malignant feelings, paralyses the public councils, pro- motes treasonable proceedings." III. Thi. Doty of Lkoislatohs.— The du- ties of a lo'Tifhtor are, in several respects, common with those of an E.xecutive officer. If it is the duty of the latter to advise measu- res and acts for the public good, without res- pect to party, it is the duty of the lormer to support them. If the Executive councillor, on being elevated to that posiiinn, should faithfully and impartially consult the interest and happiness of his country as a whole, and not regard one section of it as his" enemies," and tiie other section of it as his articled con- federates, the legislator should do the simp. The representative of a country, or town, or being invested with that character by the ma- jor vote of hia fallow freeholders, should lose sight of parties for or against his success, and be the faithful representaiive of his country or town, and not the mere agent of a party in it. It is not, however, my intention to writa an essay on the general duties of legislators, but to advert to two particul irs .^ Heeling them involved in the presen;, discussion ; n nme ly first their duty in preserving the consiilulion unimpaired, by maintaining invioh'.y the pre- rogative or rigiits of each branch of it— se- condly, their duty respecting organized poli- tical parties. It has been remarked by Dr. Pai-fy, that " There is one end of civil goveriiineMt pecu- liar to a good con"5t!tu'ion, namely, t!ie iiappi- ncs« of its »uhjpets ; there i.i niiotiier end es- sential to good governnii-nt, but oniinon lo it with had ones — its own prestrv.itinn. tHi- iierving that the l>est ferm of grvernmrnt wouldl^e defective, which did not provide (or its own perinr.nency, in our political r'^ason. ini-s we consirler (ill such provision.') as e.xpe- dient : and are content to accept us a sufti- cient ground for a meiisure, or luv, that it is necesunry or conducive to tlie preaerv >tinn •f the constitution." Ons part of the duty of a legislator is then to preserve the constitu- tion. As in the removal nf one corner stone, tiio whole edifice wonid be overthrown, ho the weakening of one branch of our mi.xed con- stilntion endangers the wliole of it. The Crown is ono of the fundamental pillars of the constitution ; and without its prerogatives it is likf Sani'^.m shorn of liis hair; or like a body without life. To deprive the crown of its prerogatives ; or what wa-j the same thing, to paralylie the exerniHe of them, is to convert nur monarchial government; into the worst kindof democracy— a democracy whicii em- bodies all the evils of ordinary democracica without their chief excellencies. Mr. Roe- buck professes to be a democrat in theory— thoucrh he professes not hv any violent means to ap'ply that thorry to England— but he does to (Canada, as the reader will see from the ap- pendix, No. 4. Mr. Roehnck is therefore lis- tened to v.'it!i cnriortity in the House of Com- mons. I myself heard him say, in comnien- cino- a speech in favour of establishing clec- tive'corporations in Ireland, that " Ac did so because it wn.^ one. step towards carrying out those great principles of free c/overniiient to which^nc bowed implicit assent." He, there- fore, as their voluniary patran regarded it as no discourtesy or misnomer to term his clim- teli. in Western Canada, " democrats." He, knew that their " stipulation" or " under- standing," if :;anctioiied, would effect what I have airewn it did involve— democratic inde- pendence. But such is not ti.e duty of a Ca- nadian Legislator. The preservatiorof the monarchial constitution is one of iiis first du- ties at all times- and his first duty when any branch of it is invaded. On this point I will do no more than employ the authoritative words of Mr. Burkk to his Bristol consti- tuents, and on an orcasion to", when, as he says, he received onlv one Tonj vote, but was supported bv the Whigs and Dissenters against a Tory candidate. The following are not only his own words, but his own italics and cnpilah : " The distinguishing part of our constitution is its liberty. To preserve that liberty inviolate, seems Co particular duty and proper trust of a member of the House of Commons. Hut the liberty, the only liberty 1 mean, is a liberty connected with order and viitue, but which cannotrxist at all with- out them. It inlieres in good and steady go- vernment, as in its substance and vital prin- ciple." "To be a good meinlier or' parlia- ment is, let me tell yon, no easy task ; espe- ciallv at this time, when there is so strong a disp' -ition to tun into perilous ex'remfr ot servile compliance or wild popvlnrity. To unite circumspection with vigour, is? absolute- ly necessary ; but it Is extremely diaicult.— We are now members for a rich commercial cihj ; this city, however, in '>u' a parted a rich commercial ?inli'm, (he intere-^ts of which are vuriifi.i, iiuiUi/orm, and inlrirfila. VV- are member.-* i'.iv t:.nt nation wliich, ho-,vrver, f itself hut a part of a frrent empire, extended by our virtue and our fortune to the farthest limits of the Ea';t nr.d of the Wc-st. Alt tliesp wide ipread iaterc«U mu'.t be tvisidcrcd ; must be comf Bible. We a and surely w free constitut inlriaifc, and We ara mem narnhy ; and true regal ri forms the ke noble and wi pire and eon up of balanr.r. thing. As 3 it which (joir Mr. BunK " eippael froi, on it made ought at liis of every con: In tills mam stituenis aevi like a partiza; constitution, principle, atl these great a preserved, a! and that the secured in it pre-eminenc( necting prim In every ii been made t( the constitut ed upon the the Croivn 'i cised ; notkii charge ofthe have gone t which iiave i to so insidioi that which Governor C half of the fi province mi; cause they li ed an accoui according t-j in this c;ise, milling ever which is knc rany Sir Ch; and his nccu liave the rig so fully reci the replies o ea which hr never has lb so much atl' nada, f H in tl of Conimoiif but a delibe pull the " kc roonarcliial sent Toronl Governor C ment of the Tiie oilier I beg to r Days' ol' poll tictil corrupt le conslilu- jornor sti.tie, iro'.vn,Ho the mixed con- of it. The tal pilhirs of prerogiilives ir ; or lik« a ;lie crown of 2 same ihinff, is to convert ito the worst V whicli ein- deniocracica !. Mr. Roe- [ in theory — ,'iolent inenns — but he does ' from the ap- 1 tlierelore lis- ouse ol Coni- in coininen- )lishing clec- it " he did so carryinfT out Dveriiiiient to " He, there- pgarded it as ?rin his clinn- icratH." He, ' or " under- effect wliat I locratic inde- dnty of a Ca- vatior of the >f liis first du- iity when any g point I will authoritative Bristol consti- whcn, as he vote, but WU9 (i Dissenters following are IS own italics \<.\Iy di.Ticult.— ;li commercial n p^rt ola rich a iif wliicii are •.ale, V\' ire i, hnvvfvr-r, i^ rnrc, e.ttended n the (artheat cut. .■?// thesft ;)? (visidcTcd ; must be compn.red ; mus', be rteovcUed, if pns- ■ible. We are menibjr* for a free country, and surely we a;i l:now that the machine of a /rcc constitution i^ no .^im/.'e tliiP!^'. but an intrirfitr, and np deinalc, as It is vahinhle. ' — We ara members in a great and anci"nt mo- narchy ; and we must observe rcliiriously the true recral rights oC thu- Sovereiifn, which forms the key-stone that binriB toijether the noble and well-norslrucled arc.li of our em- pire and constitution A constitution made up of bnhinr.cd pnirrrs must ever be a critical thin<^. As sucli 1 mean to touch thul part of it whicli comes within my reacli." Mr. BunKii quoted tills last passaffe in Iiis ^^ ajipacl from tilt nnn to the «ld. IVhigs" ; and on it made lln' following remark?, which oualitat l';is time, to sink deep into the mind of every constitutional lenislalor in Canada. — In tliis manner Mr. Jiurke spoke to his con- stituenls seventeen years .'itro. He (■•poke, not like a partizan of one particular rnembi^ of our constitution, but as a person stron;ily and on principle, attiichf'd to 1 hem all. Ilethoucrht these irreat and essential members ought to be preserved, arid preserved each in its place : a.nd that the monarchy ousrlit not only to be secured in its pecnlinr existence, but in its pre-eminence too, as the presiding and con- necting principle of the wnole. In every instnnce wherein an attempt has been made to subvert the mo larchial part of the constitution, it has invariably been found- ed upi.n the pretext lliat the prerogatives of the Croivn lias been unconstitutionally exer- cised ; nottin!?; is more easy than to get up a charge ofthe kind in relation to matters which have gone along in the ordinary way, and which iiave not been transacted with a view to so insidious and scnndnlnus a proceeding as that which has been instituted against the Governor tieneral. In the Bame way one half of the firmers and dealers throughout the province mijht lie (iroved to be rogues, bo- cause they had not in every inslauce ronder- ed an account, and gii'en a reeeijit Ac. «S,'C,, according t' tiie ^'clluicnlitu^s of hrr. But in this c;ise, I think 1 have shewn, tl:at ad- mitting even the extreme application of law, which is known to be the worst species of ty- rany Sir Charles .Metcalfe stands exonerated, and his accusers .'stand condemned, .^nd never liave the rights ofthe Canadian people been «o fully recognized bv their governor as in the replies of Sir Charles Metc'^ilfe to address- es which have been presented to him; and never has the imiierial goverutuent conceded Ro much and so cordiilly lo the people ofCa- nad.i, PS in the late debate in the British Hous.> of Commons on Canadian aH'iirs. Nothing but I' deli''oraIo and settled delerininalion to pull the " key-stone" out i.f the arch of our Fnonnichial government can justify the pre- sent Toronto Assicialioi' hostility against the Governor General and the gupreme govern- ment of the eint.'ire. Tiie elher point of legislative duty to which I beg to ri'''"r, relates to polHual parties. Days-'of poliUcal revolution, and daysof poli- liciil corruption and the days of iron rule, ure days of nligiited party organization. It is sn with a neiglibourhood ; it is ho with a town or citv ; it is so with a country. But as with a town or neighbourhood ; so with a country the days of mechanical, asfricultural, commer- cial and intellectual industry— the days of improvement, prosperity, and happiness, are the days in which the clangour of party fac- tion is not heard— in which the social ener- gies are in union instead of collision— in which individual independence is not impair- ed by party bondage — in which individual emulation, merit, intelligence and enterprise has free and unrestrained encouragement and scope of exertion. It is ao in a family ; it is so in a church ; it is so in a province. In unity there ia strength and in division there is weakliest in a country, as well as in a church ; and with as much reason might Mr. Baldwin talk about advancing the interests of a church hy giving "a distinctively partif character" to its annual assemblies and itn locnl meetings, as to talk of advancing the interestsof the country by giving "a more distinctly party character" to its legislative representation. Such doctrine may do very well for a party man who expects to be at the head of a party, or a gainer by party— the same as some men advocate lotteries ; but the f8entim^;nt is as unp.^triotic as it in absurd. Never was a more gross political solecism uttered. And the party associations which certiin ex-ministers have made to elevate themselves against the Crown are of the same charactel". Never were the remarks of that powerful advosate of popular rights— the late Rev. Robkrt Hai-l— on political as- sociations, more applicable than in this in- stance : " Associations in this light may be conridered as the linesses and tricks of the ministrv. At present they are playing into p;ich other's hands, and no doubt lind great entertiinment in deceiving the nation. But let thaiu beware lest it should be tound, after all that none are so much duped as themselves. Wisdom and truth, the offspring of the sky, are iminurlal ; but cunning and deception, the meteors of the earth after glittering tor a moment, muut pass away." Can it then be the duty ofa Isgialator to be the bond-man of party I" Is it not his duty to lie an independant s.preseniive of his con- siituent^, and of his country, and judge ot every act and of every measure on his merits, and not he the horns, or the lungs, or the neck, or the belly, or the leg, or tlie tail, or the lap-dog, or any man, or party, to be at the ootion of liis head, or the biddings ot his mas- ter, as " party purimsea" may require ? In an old and extensive country— where al the m- stitutions of society are laid in the depth ot uTos iind t!,o' admiuinlralion of them in the usai. -s and naramoiml authority o« genera- tions, and where every preu.gat.vc,andmter. ^st, and i-rivilef/e, in the church and iB the Stat.., from the cottager to the sovereign, is defined and settled by the common iunr, oi rentnries, the coUiHiona of party shake not vhc foundation of the ompire-the sphere ot their emulation \m by the avowal and mleresU ot ill pa'ties within the fundamental instilutinns of the government;— 90 that in some in- stances their different forces result in the in- creased velocity of administrative machinery, though in most cases in clorri^ing its wheels, and on not a few occasion's stopping its move- inents altogether. But the resistance and collision that would scarcely cause a jar of friction in the vastly powerful governinenta machinery of an old and great country, would rend to pieces that of a young and techle coun- try The differences or partiziuiship that would scarcely disturb a largo congregation or church would scatter a small one to the four winds of heaven. Hut in Great Britain herself, parties are admitted to be evils in IhemseWeH, and are not, as far oa 1 know, iusiified in the abstract by any authoritative writer on political science. The iinmensely varying majorities and minorities in bola Housesofl'arliament, shew how much indi- ridual judgem(?nt and independence are e.xer- cised, even where the existence of parties is acknowledged, where the great principles ot covernment and public policy are thoioughly understood, and where the great majority ot the House of Commons have avowed their preference for Sir Robert Pscl and hia col- leao-ues as more competent and sale advisers of The government than Lord John Russell and his colleaj^ues. And at this moment in England (as stated by the last arrival) it is avowed as a doctrine by the advocates of free trade on the one hand and by a large portion of the Conservatives on the other, and illus. trated bv the example of the press- that they vviUact'simply with a view to princplrs and mcafures without regard to men. When the Minister of the Crown is aware that he holds his place upon the ground of his general abili- ty and integrity, and that his measures will bejudcred of according to their merits and adaption to the country, he will be more vigi- lant, more circumspect, more just, and libe- ral, than when he grounds his strength and expectations of success upon the confedracy of party. The history of Canada proves that party policy and party legislation have been the jources of gross and numerous extravagan- cies, oppressions, and evils. In any country, and more especially in a new one, for a man to lay down party policy and party legisla- tion as a theory of government, is to lay the axe at the root of the tree of public prosperity and happiness. Such a theory is alike dan- gerous to the stability of the Throne and the liberty of the Subject. Nor is it less favour- able to the morals of public men. No legis- lator can long picserve his Christian feelings and principles uniinpared while he abandons himself to the tortuous iianoBUvering of par- ty The following remaiiui of the Kev. T. GisBORNE should be treasured up by every letrislator in Canada. " In order to preserve this principle ot areeoiule unublubborn bence ' of duty at once pure in itself and efficacious in governing his conduct, let him resolve from the moment of his outset in public life to shun the snares of party. Let hioi learn to detect the hackneyed sophiam, by which ho will bear the sacrifice of every upright motive palliated and recommended ; that a concurrence of many is necessary to the suc- cess of every plan ; and that no man can ex- pect the aid of others. without being ready to make reciprocal concessions and coinpliuncea. Let hiia tell those who urge it, that to co- operate is not to be a partizan ; that co-oper- ation ask.-* no concessions but such ,\a are con- sistent witii morality and religion ; that par- ty Tcq. ires her votary to violate, either ex- pressly or impliedly, the dictates of both ; to atiirm what he believes to be false ; to deny what lie knows to be true ; to praise what he deems reprehensible; to countenance what he judges unwise. Let him explicitly make known to those with whom he co-opeiates in political undertakings, that he is an indepen- dent friend, who will support them in every measure which he shall think equitable in itself, and conducive to the national welfare; not an articled confederate, pledged to concur in proceedings which his judgement and his conscience disapproves." In connexion with this theory of pirtiea in the leffislalure and in the country, and party le(f;slation, preparation is made for an organ- ized opposition to the irovernment, with a view to its embarrassment and overthrow, if possible, whatever may be its intentions and measures. And this is colled " patriotism and " love of liberty !" Rnher should it be called partvism and the grave of liberty. On this point I would address every legislator— nav everv honest man in Canada, not in my ow'n feeble words, but in the resistless lan- 2uaee of one of the most ardent and eloquent ad vocates of civil and religious liberty to whom England ever gave birlh-the late Rev. Ror BRUT Hall, who so far from regarding such a doctrine and such a proceeding as patriotic and favourable to liberty , rcardod it as a ne- cessirv measure of parliamentary reform, as the enemy of good goyernuient, and the death blow of liberty. In his great Es^ay "On a R,.form of Parliament," Mr. Hall says— "Freedom is supposed by some to derive great security frr m the existence of a regular opposition ; an expedient whicli is in my opi- nion both the offspring and the cherisli.;r of faction That a minister should be opposed when his measures are destructive to his coun try, can admit of no doubt ; that a systematic opposition should be maintained against any man merely as a minister, without regard to the principles he may profess, or the measu- res he may propose.- Which is intended by a re-Tular opposition .ippears to me a most cor- nnU and unprincM.led maxim. When a Le- (rislative Assembly is thus thrown into par- Ties, distinguished by no leading prmciple however wi, :n and animated their debates, it is plain they display only a struggle for the emoluments o! -Tice. This the people dis- cern, r-nd in<:v.. .=nce lUten with very l.t- lie attention to th;' t, presentations ot tlie mi- nister on the one h.rd, or the minority on the other; being pe.u.i.'id the only real differ- ence between them ;, that the one is anxious to g;&in what tl a measure be g the nation fron it he esteemed honour not to every obstruct the minister ft always flourisi to the opposilii the blink of convened to di tion, how disi tually talk oft solution to act when, if they to according t( their |iarty, lui of apologies I'd pected ! W hi agree in nothii nisitT, the peo and irresolutio bate is a mere they endeavou betters. It is deatt^ns the c still voice of I the disgusting gles us (he pai is doiimcd to c: IV. The D remarks on l. The inlereats are of course, terests are, m from the prev 1. In the ill of the people Majesty's Re interests and 1 nient ; there - authority ; tl somewhere ; nal of uliimai puti' between gard tl' alleij: Canadian ext is the srpren peal, as stutei Resolutions i Clare: " Tha verninent of limits of hi:* of the Soveri rial autliorit\ tion the unsi party must legally const such cases. renoi'nce tin made it. Is Ciiiiidd to r« perial author Sir Chi.'es the alleiralio pie of Canac if comiiienci mence it ? sist or Bubr which the c , by which ry upright led ; that o to the sue- lan can ex- 11 ir reixdy to oinpliuncea. tliiU to co- iKit co-oper- .18 are con- 1 ; tli'it par- , eitiier ex- of both ; to e ; to deny lise what he nance what licilly make -opeiates in an indepen- Mn in every pqiiitiible in uiil welfare; od to concur nent and his of pirtiea in y, and party nr an orfjan- lent, with a verllirovv, if lenlioiis and ' patriolism" BJiould It be liberty. On legislator — a, not in my ssistless lan- and eloquent lerty to whom Lte Rev. Ro- irardinii such ' - . . / aa patriotic k'd it as a ne- y reform, as and the death Issay " Oa a Hail saya — me to derive e of a regular is in my opi- cherisli.;r of d be opposed re to his coun t a systematic i against any out regard to ir the measu- intended by a. e a most cor- When a Le- 3wn into par- ding principle their debates, truggle for tiie le people dis- •vith YCfy lit- ions of the mi- linority on the ly real differ- on« it anxioui to gain what the other is anxious to keep. If a measure be good, it is of no importance to the nation from whom it proceeds ; yet will it be e.sleeined by the opposition a point of honour not to let it pass without tiirowing every ob>tructioM in its way. if we listen to the niinisler for the time being, the nation is always flourishing anf] happy ; if wo hearken to the opposition, it is a chance if it be nu' on the blink of deatrucliou. In an assembly convened to deliberate on tli ■ I'iiairsof a na- tion, how dis.rusting to hear members p.-rpe- tually talk of their connections, and tlieir re- solution to act with a p.irticular set of in"n ; when, if they have happened by chance vote to according to Iheir convictions rather thin their |iarty,°lKilf tlieir speeches are made up of apologies for a conduct so new and unex- pected ! When they see men united who agree in nothing but their hostililv to Ihemi- nTster, the people fall ai first into eugageiiunt and irresolution; till perceiving political de- bate is a merd scramble for protit an 1 pnwer, they endeavour to become as corrupt a- uieir betters. It is not in that roar of faction which deatens the car and sickens the '.'art, the still voire of liberty is he.ird. Shi: lurnsfrom the ilisguslin!( scene, and rngarils tliesf, strug- gles as the pangs and convulsions in ickick she is doiimid to expire. IV. The Duty of the peoplf..— A few remarks on liiis subject, and I have done. The interests of the people, and their duty, are of course, identical. What their real in- terests are, may, I I ust, be easily u.ferred from the previous discussion. 1. Ill the first place, it is not the . ..crests of the people to resist Her Majesty or Her Majesty's Representative in Canada.— The interests and happiness of man require govern- ment; there can be no government without authority ; that authority must be lodged Bomewhere ; that aiUliority involves a tribu- nal of uliimalo appeal in all questions of dis- pub' between any parties in the stale. In re- gard tu alleiratio'ns against the head of the Canadian executive, the Iin].erial authority is the supreme and ultimate tribunal of ap- peal, as stated in the House of Assembly's Resolutions of September, 1841, which de- clare : " That the head of tlie executive go- i vernmcnt of the Province being within the limits of his government the representutive of the Sovereign, is responsible to the Impe- rial authority alone." In all cases of litiga- tion the unsuccessful as well ns successful party must abide by the il cision of the legally constituted tribunal of judgement in svicU cases. To resist Ruch a decision is to chairman of the Toronto Association him- self (in a printed let' r) thus explains the responsibility of the Governor Generpl, and thus anticip i' s the present position of the question at issue : " 'Fhe Governor Genera- fills a two fold capacity ; first that of reprel sent itive or deputy to the Sovereign, ibi the exercise oflhosi pierogativesof Royalty, with which he may be entrusted, and w,.ich by reason of th- icrsoual absence of the Sove- reign, can Diiiy be performed by deputy; and secondly and emphatically, lli it of the min- ister of the ( rnwn in the -jolony, personally to watch over ., id control ttie local administra- tion of public affairs and see that the colonial auth riue;-. do not infringe r.pon Imperial rights or interests. In both these capacities he is responsible to the crown, and obnoxious to iinpeachinent in Parliament, should he fail in tiie imporlai'.t functions thus confided to him." *' In an Independent state, the Sove- reign is under ;:roater restraint than the Go- vernor of a Coiony, but the dixTerence is ono of degree ; not of character. In either case, where a dill'erence arises, it becomes at once a question whethe;- the diff'erence be of suffi- cient imp'T'ance to enter upon the conflict which iuu.it necessarily arise, where two parti^-s firmly adhere to their respective deter- minations. In an independant state, such pertinacity may bring about revolution and the dethronement of the Sovereign. In a co- lony it may lead to a state of perpetual and continual jr-'itatlon, which may end in the ul- tima ratio of all hnman affairs." Tiiat is, a resort to arms. This is strictly cont tutional doctrine. It admits all that is involved in my argument on this point in the preceding number. It admits that the Governor has more power in the colony than the Sovereign has in Eng- land, because of his greater re.«ponsibility, and because he combines in himself the pow- er of the minister with the prerogative of the Sovereign. But liow has the practice of the autlioi- of this quotation and of his fellow As- socialionists of Toronto contradicted his the- ory ? In theory they here admit — though two months afterwards they and Mr. Blake con- tradict it— that the Governor General is re- sponsible to tl'.e Imperial authority alone ; thev prefer certain charges against him for maiadmiiiislration ; but instead of bringing those charges with the alleged prools of them before the" Imperial authority for adjudica- tion, they bring them before the Canadian public. Their theory before the formation of the Toronto Association admitted colonial connexion with England ; tlicir practice, aad SUCH uusua. x '* leoi-Ti. hmv^.. v. «,.»-. ^ - ^ renoi'nce the authority of the tribunal wliich theory also through Mr. Ulake, since tlie for made it. Is it the interests of the people of .nation of that associaUon, '>''ser\« '/^fPf," Ciinadd to resist the decision which the Im-^ ...... » . -. perial authority has pronounced in favour of Sir Chi. 'es Metcalfe, and condemninory of the alleirations of his accusers ^ Are the peo- ple of Canada prepared to sustain a resistance if commenced r If not, ..ligiit they to com- mence it? This is the altern sist or B which the question has now arri dence of England. And, as stated by the chairman of the Toronto Association hims "If, " it now becomes at once a question whether the difference be of sufKcient importance to enter upon the conflict which must necessa- rily arise ?" The Imperial authority has sub- •^ . . . .11.1 _1__ » I. 4_1I 1 _ f ubmit. And this is the point at appeal is the God of batlles-the chances of veJ. Tlie war. Do the people of Canada regard tlis ''difference ofnuffieiant importance" to make this appeal? To entcr-upou lliiu" conHicl ?" ir not, ouijht tlie^ to couiiienaiice or 'le- come coininittt'd to the iiiril'^''""!^ '"'"^ o^^o- ciations which nrc tlic csscnlial preliminaries to Bjch a conflict .' I believe they ouglit not, and especially for two ainoiiirBt :i;a y reasons. First, the Imperial julhorities !;ave done no more than ihey luve a con^ titutional ri^rht to do. They pass no stamp act ; thi-y invade no Canadian right; they decide iipm l'.u;tasion of re- alvvays un- is \a uu extra- I pleased tliat Ve have boiMj I Dkapkii i« I it stated that before lie was J'hus are all ;iturt! syslsn* btdifii-'rences riners an well :Ui)cr tlio ex 1 Ucsiiatcii.- I'jtli of April, on that dea- ofairreenient jrd Durham's vliat was not armed with it . express niy- id he iindhia lowever, bow am not pre- , to deiiy my he rij-htoffu- he subject ; — utiful respect, &D(1 under pledge of food government, wa bow to the royal decision ; we do bo frankly, openly, unequivocally, and calmly awail the experiment of the Government remedy. We •hall exercise our plengure as to our opinion on the theory itaelf, and as to what we may say or do respectinor it in future yeare ; but for the present we yield obedience to the man- date from the Throne ; and will render the Governor Generals administration all the support in our pow(^r." It is all-important that every man in Cana- da should not le mistaken as to the decision of Her Majesty's Government. That was stated by Lord Stanley, " in every word of whose statements (Sir Robert Peel said) 1 — and 1 am sure I speaii their sentiments— and the rest of the Government entirely concur. Lord Stanley said that Her Majesty's Govern- ment concurred in Lord Durham's Report, as explained and applied in the despatch of Lord John Russell —Then Lord Stanley expressed the sentiments (sanctioned by the cheers of the House) of Her Majesty's Government thus, in reply to Mr. Roebuck :— " Now the lion, and learned gentleman had asked him (Lord Stanley) whether he concurred in the views which liad been taken by Sir Charles Bago'. on the subject of Responsible Govern- ment, whether he would state explicitly to the House what his own sense of Responsible government was .' (Hear.) He would doso. (Hear.) By responsible government, he un- derstood that the administration of Canada was to he carried,on by tko heads of depart- ments enjoying the confidence of the people and of the Legislature of Canada ; and respon- sible to the Legislature of the colony for the due exercise of the functions of each of their departments. (Hear.) Nay, more he also understood by it that the Governor in intro- ducing and expounding measures for the con- sideration of the Parliament of Canada, should be guided by tlie advice of those whom he laigiit have called to his council. But if the honourable gentleman asked him whether, by responsible government, he meant that the Governor was to be the mere machine or pas- sive instrument of any set of men or party in the colony, his answer was, that ho could un- derstand very well to what it might lead, but that such a system was not consistent with constitutional government in a British colo- ny, under the authority of a British Governor. (Cheers.) He therefore approved of the con- duct of Sir Cliarles Metcall'e— (cheers.) -in not agreeing to the terms which his council wisiied to impose npon him. Sir Charles Metcalfe, however, they laid down ine.\press terms, his adherenca to the resolutions of the third September, 1841, to which the honour- able and learned gentleman had adverted — that the head of the Executive Government was responsible to the Imperial authority alone, but that the management of the local air.iirs of the eolo^y v-'?re only to be cnrried on by hini, with the assistance of subordinate otficers of the government. Sir Charles Met- calfe had, in the most express and explicit termi adhered to the principltJ of the rcsolu- tiona to which he had just adverted, and said, in doing so, that be considered any othersyi- tem of government, as impracticable in the Province of Canada. (Hear, Hear.) He (Lord Stanley) was not disposed to enter into the question whether responsible GovernmeiH was or was not the one most likely to conduce to good governoient, to conciliate the opi- nions of the people of Canada, or to enlist in the public servics men of honesty, character, integrity and faith ; but the principle had been conceded both here and in Canada, and to it Sir Charles Metcalfe had agreed. The reso- lutions in question said that the Governor General was to be responsible; but the hon. and learned gentleman would leave him with- out responsibility at Home, but an instrument in the hands of the Executive Council and responsible to them. The two responsibili- ties might, by possibility be exercised by mu- tual forbearance and good sense on tiie part of Iho hon. and learn, d member (Mr. Roe- bucli) be adopted, and the Governor could be nothing more than a mere agent in the hands of the Executive Council— (hoar, hear)— and yet, at the same time, responsible at home. — This was practically dosurd, for without pow- er there could be no responsibility." I submit, therefore, that the Imperial au- thority has fully sanctioned responsible go- vernment, as desired by tiie people of Cana- da ; and that every man and association should be rejected and avoided that persists in resis- tance against Her Majesty and her Represen- tative in Canada. 2—1 would remark, in the next place, that the people can have no interest in perpetua- ting strife and contention. Parly edilors and otTice-seeking partizans may gain by it; but the people will be as a picked goose or a pil- laged householder. The value of property is not increased by agitation ; nor the transac- tion of comm^'rce advanced by strife; nor the influx of immigration, or the investment of capital, promoted by commotion ; nor are the interests of Religion extended by calumny, or its spirit dilFused by clamour : nor are the resources of the country, improved by colli- sion, nor its laws best administered by confe- deracy, nor its energies strengthened by di- vision. In every respect must the people bo a loser, and tho country a sufferer from strife and contention. 3. — Nor can the people advance their inte- rests by ranging themselves under the ban- ner of parly leaders, and digputing about men. To contend for principles is patriotic ; but the Home Government have avowed all tho prin- ciples ever contended for; and to dispute about men — 'he only remaining topic of con- tention— ii factious. The late Rev. Robert Hall has forcibly remarked that" factions are founded on men ;" and that in contending for them, " the people are candidates, for servi- tude, and ara only debating whose livery they ahull wecr." The same writti, after noticing that in tho early tunes of the Roman Govern- ment, they were disputes relative to the prin- ciples of the Government between the pntri- o'atis and plcbians, and nmarks— "in the 10 progreii of corruption, thingg took a turn ; though permanent parties wi.ich sprung from fixed principles of f^overnment were lost, and the cili/.ens ranged themselves under the standard of particular leadarj, being bandied into factiona, under Marius or Sylla, Crosar and I'onipey ; while the H ;' ; . , food by without any interest in the dibpule, a I'lssive and helpless victim." 4. Nor can the ini-ealt u'. ihi.- jjeoplo be advanced by eountonancing party combina- tions, by advocatinij i-xlrenie measures or by supporlini,' extreme mm. By extreme inen, 1 mean, those who are violent and reckless in their aoaduct, or wlio push good principles to extreme lengths. Of two men, one may bo violent in liis manner, but moderate in i.^a- sures : the other may be very gentle in his manner, but extreme in his application of good principles. xNeiiher is desirable, but the lat- ter la by iar the more impracticable ond dan- gerous of the two. He is in politics what the bigot is in religion — a man of ono idea, and that idea is all the world to him ; and all the world is not too much to be sacrificed for it. — Opinions with him are fundamental princi- ples ; and bis principles are infallibilities— al- ways equal in magnitude and alike inviolable. By extreme measures I mean, measures or proceedings that destroy the equipoise of our balanced constitution ; or that infringe con- stitutional rights ; or that involve hazardous if not dangerous experiments ; or that savour more of change than stability ; or are found- ed on party rather vhan general principles, or are promotive of party more than general ob- jects ; or that alter the land marks or loosen the foundations of society. What 1 mean by party combinations cannot be mistaken. In looking over the statute book of Upper Cana- da, and in contemplating its history during the last twenty years, I cannot find or recol- lect a single measure that has been carried in- to effect or single principle that has been se- cured by party combination or by extreme proceedings of any kind. It is an instructive though hitherto unnoticed fact, that every ad- vantage which has been acquired, every con- cession which has been obtained, and every considerable stcj' which has been made in the science of conslitutioHal government in Can- nda has been eftl'cted by moderate men, and in opposition or in the way of no thanks to ex- tremu theorists cr partizans ; and that extreme parties or extreinj party proceedings have formed the most serious obstacles to the pro- greas of ju.st and liberal government. From 1H33 to "]d40, the only liberalising measure got through the legislature was the amended King's CuUege Charter Bill— and that was accomplished by moderate men in the spirit of concession between contending parties. — The political association that sprung up in Toronto in 1834, and its township branches, with the extreme men directly or in«lirectly connected with them, were as inimical to ci- vil reform as they were to public moral and constitutional principles and sowed and nou- rished a seed which produced a fearful har- vest of rebellion in 1837. Opposite party ex- tremes and violence were nearly os baneful during the next 3 yearn. Lord Sydenham owed all his auccesn, and Jpper Canada is in- debted for all the benefit, to raoderalo coun- sels and the support of moderate men agaiiwt the opposition ofextreme men— espucially Mr. Hincks and his followers. In June 1H41, the responsibility of ministersof the Crown to the legislature was the first time in the history of Canada, announced first by Mr. Draper and then by Mr. Harrison, when both ftlcssrs. Baldwin and flincks were in oppositK.u, and when Lord Sydenham's administration was supported by the moderate reformeis in Up- per Canada. It was while they thus evmced a candid conciliatory feeling, and a manifest desire toco-operate with the Governor-Gene- ral and the Imperial Government as far as pos- sible, that the British Turliamont was induced to guarantee u loan at a reduced rate otjnter- cst which secures to th« people of Canada many thousand pounds everv year. And theilome Government have smce bei.'U pres- sing fixed measures highly beneficial to the a- gricultural and commercial ink-rests of Cana- VVhen Mr. Baldwin during the third month ot the session of 1840, not content with the declaration of ministers) (all that had ever been made in England (introduced certain Resolutions on the subject of Responsible go- vernment, the result was rather to secure the power of the monarchy than to advance tho influence of the popular principle, as was evi- dently intended. For while in tie amended resolutions (written by Lord Sydenham) the responsibility of ministers to the legislature was not more explicitly slated than it had been months before by Messrs. Draper and Harrison, another resolution explicitly pro vides for the Governor's responsilily to the imperial auihoritv alone, had it not been for which, it is clear from the spirit ot Mr. Blake and other Toronto Associationists, the res- ponsibility of the governor to the Imperial autlio'ity would have been scouted in toto, and we would have been further towards the verge of independence than we are now.— Had not the new idol of party patronage and party policy been enshrined as the presiding deity of responsible government; and had the late Councillors conducted themselves to- wards Sir Charles Metcalfe in the same spirit of liberality and justice that characteriftd their profession under Sir Charles Bagot, and marked the spirit and proeeedings of Uppe? Canada reformers in regard to Lord Syden- ham, Sir Charles Metcalfe would soon hav<- proved as great a benefactor to Upp- = Cana- da as ever Lord Sydenham was, and as effi-- cient a friend to Lower Canada as Sir Char- les BacTot ever was, and v»e would now be in a happ'y and prosperous state, instead oi beinjc convulsed by agitations and torn to pieces by parties. Canada owes all its evils toiiniuo. derate counsels and extrerao ii!li:, and all its improvements to moderate counsels and mo- derate men, and by moderate men, 1 mean practical men— men firm in principle— just la counsel— provident and eafe in execution.— Tbi« '.■'.'bjecl fi,. / ; but 1 U'.M referen Home Uovi authorised t responsibilil they see the employing i iiexion betvi may be ; no very decent referred to 1 iors except those contai phrase, " di — a phrase ( and is calcii not attaclim vernmeiit. And ever PROOKess i these paity Little more lors would t tronage oft tional dift'ei Now it iinis with special A few year: would bow sioner even ment. No\ rity, even o the constilu In January Association on the part Imperial au lily on the [ tho Imperia auspices of thus that W from step t( the princip trampled up beginning s land. The set out wit their career improvemei London Qu ♦' Revolulio monitory re he who km bespierre ai nnd in publ for the totii death : the) most fearfu practice of ted mankin the Nation! code, provi in no case I perty. Th iiosial Con' that in evei bly follow ; there was ; govern men at baneful Sydenham 'anaJa in in- leralo oonn- misn a^aiiut pticially Mr. ne 1H41, the Jrowii to lb«« le history of ])ra,\>er and loti) IVlcssrs. ositiou, and dtratiort wan neiB ill Up- ,liu3 evincud i a innnifest ernor-Gene- iiafaras pos- was induced rule ot'inter- ( uf Canada year. And :e beiMi pres- icial to the a- •sts of Cana- Ihird month nt with the int liad ever uced cBrtain ipunsible go- to secure the advance the B, aa wasevi- le amended Jenham) the e le<;inlttturo than it liad Dr'aper and [piicitiy pro silily to the not been for of Mr. Blaiie stB, the res- the Imperial )uted in toto, ' towards the are now. — \tronago and he presiding ; and had the emselvea to- lie same spirit characterifed cs Bagot, and ings of Upper Lord Syden- id soon havt? Upp' Cana- , and Q8 etH' as hir Char- ild now be m stead ofbeinj; I to pieces by trils to imiuo- - - J -.11 ; * .. L'li, auu Sii '>" isels and mo- men, 1 mean iciple— just in execution.— Tbi« vi bject affordi materials for an elaborate t>a . j ; but 1 can proceed no further than these i^M referencr:!. It is ^ot possible tliat tho Home Uorerninent can feel encourajjed or authorised to recommend inveotniont or incur responsibility on account of Canada, wiien they see the chief persons in its governmaut employinj; every means to render ilie con- uezion between it and England as nominal aa may be ; nor can tliey regard themselves aa very decently treated when they are never referred to by Canadian Kxecntive CDuncil- Jors except in somi: fucIi insidioi's terms us those contained in Mr. Baldwin's favourite phrase, " dusty slielves of the colonial olHco" — a phrase that indicates distrust and hatred ; and is calculated tc produce them !)olh, and not attachment or respect for the Imperial (.Jo- vernment. And every man in Canada should mark the PROOKCSS in the senti.nenls and feelinj;s of these paity combinations and proceedings. — Little more than a year ago, the late Counsel- lors would advise tlic distribution of tlio pa- tronage of till.' crown without re^jard to sec- tional differences " relifpous'ur political." — Now it must be demanded to be distributed with special relerence to these difTuronces. — A few years ago, Mr. liincUs and his friends would bow to the decision of a high commis- ■ioner even in regard to responsible Govern- ment. Now, they resist the Imperial autho- rity, even on deciding on certain facts which the constitution expressly makes it the judge. Jn January last, the chairman of the Toronto Association admits a two-fold responsibility on the part of the Governor General to the Imperial authority ; in March, all responsibi- lity on the part of the Governor General to the Imperial authority is denied under the auspices of the Toronto Association. It is thus that Mackenzie's associations advanced from step to step bufore 18:57. It is tiius that the principles of one jear are rejected and trampled upon the following year ; and no man bcinnini; such a course can tell where he will land. The authors of the French revolution set out with sound principles, but finished their career of party combination and party improvement without any principles. The London Quarterly Review for March, (article »' Revolutionary Tribunal,"; has the following monitory remarks : " ' No body goes so far na ho who knowrt not where ho is going.' Ha. beapierreand Marat's first steps in literature and in public life were by essays and speeches for the total abolition of the puiii.shment of death: they became, within a fe% months, the most fearful professors of both the theory and practice of judicial marder th?t ever decima- ted mankind. The first decree, (in 1739) that tlie National Assembly pasEL^d on the penal code, provided that capital punishment should in no case be followed by conn cation of pro- perty. The first decree (in 17!)3) of the Na- tional Convexitioii, on ths s.imn :;uhjf'!:t, wa;;, that in every case confiscation should ine.vora- bly follow ; and it would be easy to shew that_ there was not one of the salutary principles of government advanced by the legislators of 1789, which wai not by the most contradic- tory energy trampled under the feet of thele- gialatora of 1793. ' f). Finally, I submit whether the people of Western Canada can do better in 1S4&, in re- gard both to the representation and the execn- tive council, than ihi-y did in 1841? As first minister of the Crown in Canada, Lord Syden- ham avowed the principles and objectM of his administration, and in her Majesty's nainn askjd the people for their support. They did not ran^e themselves under the banners of Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Draper; but elected members upon the ground of their supporting or opposing the avowed principles and polic)' of the Governor General; and they selpited the best represeiUulion that Canada ever had. Let them do the same again. Sir Churles Metcalfe is not less liberal tlian was Lord Sydenham; nor is lie less trust worthy. In a late reply " To the I'astors and -dele- gates of the congregational Churches of East- ern Canaila," his Excellency said—" Being in principle an advocata for those blessings (civil and religious freedom) and opposed to political exaltation of distinction or any church over another, I aim at justice to all. I rely, on those, to whatever denomination they beloii;,', who are loyal to the queen, and attachi'(Uo the mother country, and who seek the welfare of this colony as an integral por- tion of the BritiHh Empire. I thank you for the assurance of your hearty support in every measure that may appear to you for the di- vine glory, the public good, and the honour of the Saviour, whom all Christians must re- cognize and adore, as head of the Church. I do not desire support on other conditions ; and I shall not willfully sanction measures of an opposite character." By giving i^ord Sydenham and the persons whom he thought proper to select a fair and generous trial, they obtained responsible go- vernment, good measures, and important as- sistance from the Imperial Parliament — and a change in the admini.ftration when it was subsefjuently desired. Let them give Sir Charles Metcallc and his advisers the same trial — judging by measures— and they will escape the rocks and shoals on which the con- stitutional ship is like to founder, and leave the way open for any man or men to be em- ployed in the service of the country, without reference to past differences. If the adminis- tration thus formed and granted— what the last administration asked tor and were allow- ed—the common justice of a trial, should not redeem their promises and fulfil the expecta- tions of the country, tliey can at any time bt changed, by a vole of the Legislature. But n league or an attempt to oppose an adminis- tration upon other grounds than its measures has always proved suicidal in Canada, how- ever plausible the pretext, and is at variance with t.'ie very end as well as the first princi- ple* of civil ixovernment. An administ.aiion thus formed will not be established upon and incorporated by tlie par- ty-plunder articles of leogue confederacy, but upon its merits— its honesty- its justice •- Its f«fficienc7 to promote the general good ; of vrliicli every member of the Legiilalure will 1)« the indep«ndant watohman and the unbri- bed judge. It is thua tliatrasponaibia govern, iiient v^ill havp a fair field of Buoceiarul expe- riment in a British colony ; that the preroga* Mvo of tiiu Crown will be unfringed by stipu- lating demand or factious combination, whilat ,ta exercise will be constitutionally ehecked ^.n!»t the Go- vernor was the invader instead of lli» defend- er of constitutional rightv. The independent and impartial judgment which I myself en deavour to exercise, I desire to see exercised by every man in Canada. 1 believe it jom- portB best with constitutional safely, with ci- vil liberty, with public duty, with national greatness. * With the jwUtics of parly— involving the confederacy, the enslavement, the selfisluies!) the exclusion, the trickery, the antipathies, Ihu criminations of party— no good man ought to be indentified. 1 believe ht cannot belio long and be a man of Ood. Thus to article and resign himself, will soon eat up the spirit, if not sap the principle.s of his holy Christianity. Upper Canada ci>nlains the warnintT monarnentn of many such moral Bhipwrecks. May they not be mnlti|)lied. With tho politics of liovernment— involving its objects, its principles, its balanced pov.ers its operations— even against the encroach- ments of any party— every liritish «ubject Has much to do. Civil Government, as St. Paul says, '■ is an ordinance of God." Every Christian- every Christian minister —has something to do with every ordinance of God." He is not to see it abused, or tram- pled under foot, or perverted for parly or sec- tional purposes ; but he ifi to eeek its applica- tion, to tho benefieient ends for which it was desi<'nod by our common Creator and Gover- nor.° Such have been l!ie ends for wliicli the people of Catiada have loner sonj;lit its appli- cation, such havo bei'n tho ends soufxhtby the Governor General. Jly all therefoie, that is sacred and imporlant iii these end-i, 1 believe " It is tho duty and interest of tho People of Canada to maintain thoao views which they have always proles.scd, and wliich SirCliarlos Metcalfe has mogt explicitly nnd fully avowed."