'iu s^. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) %< ^ / A O % / ^ 1.0 If"- I I.I 1.25 Wuu 2.5 2.0 1.8 1.4 IIIIII.6 vQ v^ % ^» i^ ^ -s''' ^ o 7 7 '/A m Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. M580 (716) 873-4603 /.. ^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVJ/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques \ ^ s- Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original cony available for filming. Features of this copy whicn 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. [771 Coloured covers/ LjLJ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e D D D D D Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ D Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re Iture serr^e peut causer de Tc^bre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 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 ajout6es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque ceia 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires.- L'lnstitut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ D Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages ddcolordes, tachet^es ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes Showthroughy Transparence Quality of prir Quality indgale de I'impresslon Includes supplementary materia Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible r~^Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ I I Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ 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., ont 6t6 filmies d nouveau de fagon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X v/ 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Bibliothdque natlonaie du Quebec L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce i ia g6n6rosit6 de: Bibliothdque nationale du Quebec The images appearing here are the best quality possible considJring the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with Ihe filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — •- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suivantes ont 6i6 reprodultes avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire filmd, et en conformitd avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiim^s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ► signif ie "A SUIVRE ", le symbole V slgnifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre fiimds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche ^ droite, et de haut en has, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. 1 2 3 32X 1 6 :-j<„.i."j/j!»»sn£.'- •-'.fs^j-x M I -J 6* 1 "JA/U (NOTES ANO rRECEDENTS.) -A Hi The Opposition Pamphlet better known as the " Dansereau Brochure," i;vAMixi:i» AXit HKirrKi) BY THE LIGHT OK BRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY AND rRKOEDENT. b t • • * ( • • , •• • * ». * < « a - 1 % .. B Gi XT E B E C 1879. S" *• : • ; . ..... » ' • . . .,, , '.,,^ ' • • • •...', • • « • < • • •.! ^^i^.&..MMi - "THE QUEBEC POLITICAL CRISIS." (notes and precedents.) The opposition Pamphlet^ belief known as the " Dansereau Brochure," examined and refuted by the Light of British Comtitutional Ilistorij and Precedent. ^,, , r < As wo write, the Province of Quebec is passing? through a political crisis, which transcends in gravity and impor- tance anything of the kind that has yet presented itself in Canadian annals. This crisis has entailed a very serious and disturbing deadlock in our provincial affairs, which not only impedes the usual march of the public service, but redounds with disastrous effect upon i)rivate interests, as well as upon a very considerable proportion of our educational and charitable institutions, public works, roads, railways and colonization undertakings generally. It is therefore the more needful that the issues and principles involved, as well as the responsibility for the actual state of things, should be clearly defined arid thoroughly under- stood. It may be briefly stated that those issues and prin- ciples vitally affect the sacred right of government by tho people and for the people and imperil the stability of those cherished responsible institutions for which our fore- fathers battled and died. Indeed, since the establishment of Responsible or Eepresentative Grovernment in this great dependency of the British Empire^ we look in vain for a X)arallel, either in point of danger to that system of government or in encroachment upon popular rights, to the case which has just arisen in our midst and for which we are indebted, beyond the possibility of question, to a foul conspiracy between the Opposition leaders in the popular branch of the Legislature and a factious, perverse and par- tisan majority in the Crown-nominated and irresponsible 60750 branch — to block the wheels of an Admiiiislration, support- t'd by a majority of the people's representatives, whom they had otherwise been powerless to defeat, and to force its resignation or its dismissal by the Lieutenant Govornor. To the- eternal shame of the conspirators, bo it said that tlicy have not only not disavowed the action of the Legis- lative Council ; but they have formally approved of and openly gloried in it, thus rendering it impossible for any st'll-respecting men, to meet them half-way, by coalition or otherwise, to put an end to the deadlock and give the I'rovincH a strong government. They have even gone further and brazenly admitted through their chief organ. La Minerve, " that the removal of the Johj Cabinet is the corol- lai'ij of Mr. LeicUier's dismissal, and that there is nothing I'xtraordinary in the Council asking for the dismissal of men marked with the stain of the original sin." In other words, they claim that Mr. Joly's retirement from office should follow the outrageous act by which Mr. Letellier was removed and w^hicli has just been so severely con- demned by the J. •. .- We have pointed out that the a(3tual crisis has been pro- voked by iesucs \vhich are fraught with groat danger to the stability of our present system of responsible government ; and it is from this stand-point that it should be viewed and condemned by all patriotic citizens, whether Liberal ^or Conservative, and not frojn that of the merits or demerits of the .Toly Government. To support the Legislative Council in their unconstitutional action would virtually amount to an abandonment by the people of some of their dearest rights. It would invest the Council with powers which that Cham- ber does not and should not possess; unconstitutionally place all Governments in this Province at the mercy of a Crown-nominated and irresponsible body, whoso partisan support is, owing to the character of its composition, already secured to government but by one of the great parties of the State, and linally render impossible the assertion of the popular will as expressed in the elective Chamber by majorities of the people's duly chosen representatives. By the action of the Council the ground of the dispute has been altogether shifted. The quarrel is no longer between Mr. .Toly and any section ot the people's representatives; it is now between the people and the people's rights and the Council and the Council's usurpation of the right to govern against the people's will, as expressed through their elective Chamber and to force upon the Queen's representative advi- sers from the ranks of the minority, unsupported by popular approbation. It therefore behooves all good citizens to look only at the question in this its true light and to lend the moral \ and physical weight of their coiintonancc and support to thosii who are actually championing their liberties and battling lor the cause of Responsible Government. Tho immi- nence of the danger threatening that cause, and the out- rageous character of the Council's encroachment, coupled with its far-reaching and sinister consequences, if unresisted or allowed to become a successful precedent, cannot be over estimated at this juncture. It is time for the people there- lore to bo up and doing, if they wish to protect themselves. Kternal vigilance is said to be the price of liberty, and it is scarcely necessary to add that that glorious British consti- tution as it now stands, under which wo live and which is julraitted .to be the freest under the sun, was only won through long years at the price of such vigilance on the part of the British and Canadian peoi^los. Dishonest and designing men have been at work not only to corrupt the people's representatives and to puit5ha.so their support for the outrage committed by the Council, l)ut to seelc to warp the public mind in regard to that outvago, and to lull it into a false sense of security as to the veal issues involved in the present struggle, l)y distorting the record and appealing to obsolete or garbled precedents. Wo have belbre us, as we write, an unscrupulous pamphlet, bearing the tith^ of '• The Quebec Political Crisis — Notes iind Preci^dents" which has been issued in some mystoriouH w;iy lor tliosc! illegitimate purposes, and which from boginning to end is a tissue of falsilications, misapplications, and fallacious reasoning, intended to justify the action of (he Council and to furnish a color of argument for steps on th(» part of the liead of the Executive, looking to the des- truction of the .loly Government. As the Quebec Mornini^ Chronicle remarked in its issue of the 9th October : ■' Tho book i« full iif 3|)po'ous rpasouintf, illoj»icnl ret'oreinen and allusioiii-', wliicli ilo not alwajH apjily to tlio existing ordor of thing'i. It is strnngoly inconsistent ii) arKuinoDt, and tho cxtraoti wliioh arc introdi-vod, appiirontly to fortify certain linos of icsiic, arn curiously garbled and only hall'-ct;ited. 'I'liis wo tuko it, in not inanly warfare. Xeitlior in it fair to twist anything whicii a public writer may say of onu department of tho Logi«Inturo in order to oonroy an imprecision which wan never in- tended Ijy that writer. This ftylo of l)nKiiies.s may iiuit snmo mindi', but it ia totally Ht TarianPB with ovory principle of justioo and fair play, and it in likely to be so regarded by cvory high-minded mail into whoso hand* tho bookU^t may fall." And, again, in its issue of the 10th October : " W« showed yuitorday how spocioua iind faliaolona was tho rcasonlog indulged in in thi^ brmshitve, anil how miMleadin,; it was and how pron« it was to dceeive the uawiiry and the unsu-tpicious. Wo expose I ths hUo nyitem on which ii; was frauieU, anANSKRKii;'.<4 nainphlot llrit law the ligbt in tlic ouIuiuik of Li Jftit>.'i'i)« newspaper. Jt wai pufj|ii>hod serially tburtio. and wax ufterwanlii llirowii into pa;{e.<, ititulied nn>l tcattorod brokdoast over tbo ovuntry. Tlia Fronuli ooiiy ii fullor of nii«tak«!« than the Engliiili edition, but both «rr rather verinuily In iniiHtatemont ami ]>«rv«riiion of fact. Thii, howavur, was to bo oipeotod from thu N'luruu from whiuh th» pruoiou* ljr>>ad4ido emaoutad, and nobody i.t nineU nurpiliud tiiuroat-" • ••##•*♦#• ■- In tho mennliiii '. it nuy h- \f(i\\ fur us to xhotv up again Mii. l>ANaiRi;Ar a:iil liiK " liiutio giMuo." Wti have nlroady vxiiused lii.s crudv and fnllaoUni raanonuii;, lii» illoK>uiil lediiction*. ivnil hi.'* 8in;{uliirly |)riinitivo wi>y of making quotitianii. Wo tuuk ooeanion, the othei day, in oui' ruviuw ot hU lust work, to point out tho faot tliat liH had nhaniclossly Karblccl n number of (luolations from ronntitulionuj nuthoritloii. mid by moan^ of an in.ijcr '. -uj Hystom of ro^^uery, inado thsfo same extrauti provu a jjood deal of Ilia Hpoolou-i I'd. inning, alutird as it Im. 'J'ho M' ntrfiil Jl'raUt Unt nUn cjinght Mk. !)A.sist:iiKAU ul lii.4 old tri'-kit iind fX|joj«i« liiiu oiuull; in its itnua of rridiiy but." , ' . The remiwks ol' tlio Montreal II, ; fd wore aa Ibllows : " £a Ifiiicri't'* modo of ojtablialilng its points is ' ry limplc. Wf, oan exhibit it in tho gpaoo of what tho printor^ call a low "eui' ," thus : • • • • [t will bo admitted that no adversary wan ov" 'More succinctly cniP.ilod than tho.«i) who have been overthrown by this nppliuatir 1' this" tontrivan^ i,, each point of tho lontrovorny. Nor will it bo thoufjht wondou^i, what wo viretfuUy admit, that it hag perfectly worsted our allioc, and has liitabliahed, ' -r tiie first time, that it is tho r) repru3entati'ind a prompt nioani of arranging tho difference." • # • » # -i , Now you will see the operation of this ingenious contrivance. Where tho dottbd Unci «tftnd in La Minerve, we have the following words in llearn : '• AecorUinnli/ "*« '"l* iit that when th« opinioni o/ the tioo JIou»ei> are divided, the t^iiiion of thn Boute nf Ooinnon* prevaili." It was Hotspur who affirmed that " out of tho nettlo danger ho would pluck tho flower safely." And what great general was it -who was said to organise victory out of defeat? Neither of these eminent men, however, could havi; ■o completely turned the tables on adverse quotation, as La Mincrve has dono in the ))assage qnoted by us and in leveral otheri', where the same strategy has been u.sed with equally powerful effect.'' Now, as this precioits 'production, presumably, of the distorted ingenuity of Messrs. Dansereau, Senecal &; Co., has been circulated broadcast among the public in order that it may poison the public mind ivith. the view of pre- paring the Province for a return to the suicidal regime and It- 8 taxation ix>licy of the DeBourcher villus, Augers, and Chapleaus, which the Quebec Chronicle, very truthfully characterizes as " only equalled by the dark days of Bigot, when the country was eaten up by the contractors and wire-pulling cormorants of that age," we propose in these pages to supply the requisite antidote by examining and weighing seriatim the arguments used and the precedents cited by its authors in support of thoir untenable position. It will be recalled that the reasons of the Legislative Council for suspending their assent to the Supply Bill were embodied in a series of resolutions, moved by Hon. Mr. Jloss, and seconded by Hon. Mr. La Bruere, and thai upon those resolutions an address to the Lieutenant Governor was founded, inviting him to change his present advisers, whose conduct and i)retended faults of omission and com- mission they, the partisan majority of that irresponsible House, condemned under some seven or eight different heads ; although that same conduct had been already exhaustively discussed, pronounced upon and vindicated on twenty-two different occasions in the people's chamber by the rejection of as many votes of non-confidence. f The refusal of Her Majesty's representative to accept the Council's advice as to his present advisers ; his message to that House expressing his ardent desire to see the deadlock put an end to by their voting the supplies ; and the Council's contemptuous disregard of His Honor's wishes in the matter by a further sidjournment from the 30th Septem- ber to the 27 th October, are all circumstances of recent occurrence and will therefore also be readily recalled. The Opposition pamphlet, or Dausereau brochure, starts out with a reference to His Honor's previous message in reply to the Council's address and insists that as the min- istry is supposed to have suggested this answer, of which they assumed the responsibility, the wish expressed by the Lieutenant-Governor that his advisers should find means to re-estahlish harmony belioeen the two branches of the Legisla- ture y is. equivalent to a promise made by the Government to act in this sense. It accordingly takes the Government to task for its failure to comply with this promise. ers, and ruthfully of Bigot, 'tors and i in these ling and recedents position. igislative Bill were Bon. Mr. hai upon j^overnor advisers, ind com- sponsible different already icated on imber by ccept the essage to deadlock and the vishes in L Septein- of recent ed. re, starts ssage in the min- Df which id by the means to Legisla- •^ernment 'ernment : "We think it can be satisfactorily shown that Mr. Joly and his colleagues took every available means within their power, short of proving recreant to the trust reposed in them by a majority of the Assembly and three-fourths of the population out of the Assembly and yielding the un- contestable privileges of the popular branch of the Legisla- ture to the att'ogant usurpation of the nominative branch by resigning their portfolios to re-establish harmony be- tween the two Houses. They went even to the length of I)roposing a conferense for this purpose to the Council, which the latter contemptuously rejected, thus showing the determination of that Chamber to hearken to no reason, to accept no half measures, short of the complete and abject submission of the people's House to their will and uncon- stitutional dictation. Under the circumstances, the plain and only constitutional course left to a Government, right- fully jealous of the preservation of the popular rights and the privileges of the popular branch of the Legislature, was to obtain a renewal of the Assembly's confidence to coun- terbalance the hostility and uncompromising attitude of the Council, and this course Mr. Joly accordingly took when he was again supported by the Assembly; subsequently proposing and carrying an adjournment of that Chamber to the 28th October, for reasons which will be hereafter set forth more fully in these pages. In the connection, it is well to make special note of the fact, that, while the Opposition pamphlet, in one page, cha- racterizes the motion of Mr. Gagnon, M. P. P., for Kamou- raska, expressing this continued confidence of the Assembly in the Joly Government, as vague and as inadequately contradicting the various hostile averments of the Council, in another page (8) it unconsciously sells itself by the admission that they did conflict with the resolutions of the Council. It is also not uninteresting to remark, as illustrative of the irresponsible and unrepresentative character of the Legislative Council, that Hon. Mr. LaBrnere, the seconder of the hostile resolutions adopted in that Chamber, is not even qualified to sit therein, not being possessed of the pro- perty qualification ret^uired by law for that purpose ; and this circumstance is notorious. 2 10 ' 111 the same connection, we may be alio permitted to repro< duce the following communication to the Quebec Morning Chronicle, which appeared in the columns of that journal on the 2nd September last : — IIOW THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFLECTS THE POPULAR WILL. {To the Editor of the " Morning Chronicle.") Sir,— In view of the pig-beaded, faction! and vexatious opposition of tlie Le^ig- Ifttive Council to the assertion of the popular will aa constitutionally exproued by a inrjority of tlie people's representatives in tlie Legislative Assembly, it may not b« uointereiting to your readers to have ( "\ opportunity of appreciating the style in irbich the Council, as at present compose -etleots that will at this juncture. I have {;one, for the instructive purpose, to the tro. 'e of analyrang the recent vote on Dr. Ross' resolutions, the adoption of which has resulted in the present deadlock between the two branches of the Legislature ; and find the following : The vote on the resolutions stood as follows : — For ! — Beaudry, DeBouchtrvHU, Dtonne, Dostaler, ifamlel, Gingra», Ifenrn, De la Bruire, Laviotette, LeMaire, DeLery, Prud'hoinme, i2oy, Savage and Ross. — lb. AoAiNST :— Starnes, Archambault, Bryson, Pronlx, Webb, Wood, and Remil- lard. — 7. Now to commcnea with Hon. Mr, De Boucherville, who voted against the passage of the Supplies, represents or is supposed to represent the division of Montarville, which is composed of the counties of Vorchftres, Chambly and Laprairie, two of which are represented liy supporters of the Joly Qovemment in the Assembly, Messrs. Larose and Pr6fontaine, both of whom were only quite recently elected ; so that, in liny case, the ox-Proinior, in his own division, represents only the minority. Th« next I come to is Mr. Dionne, who sits for the Grandville division, which is composed of the counties of Temisnouata, Kamouraska and L'Islet, or, I should more correctly say, a part of L'Islet. Here again, the Legislative Councillor places himself in oppo- .'•ition to the will of the majority of his division, for Kamouraska and L'Islet are both represented by Liberals, Messrs. Gagnon and I)upnis — Tomiscouata being the only f'.ounty of the threo represented by a Chapleau supporter, Mr. Deschoincs. The Lauzon division iii similarly misrepresented by Mr. DeLery, as its three component counties, Levis, Boauca and Dorchester are represented in the Assembly by two liiberals, Messrs. Pac|uct and Poirior, and one Conservative, Mr. Audet, Mr. Gaudet. I'or the Kennebec division, has not even the satisfaction to say that he reflects in th« slightest shape the popular will of the hour, for, in voting against the granting uf thti Supplies, he voted directly in opposition to the wishes i-t every constituency iu tliat division, namely : LotbiniSre, Megantio and Arthabaska, which have chosen for their representatives in the people's House Messrs. Joly, Irvine and Watts. Messrs. John Hearn for Stadacona, and La Bru5re, Rougemont, arc both in the .^raa un- enviable position as Mr. Gaudet — all the constituencies in the Stadacona division, (Quebec Centre, East and West) and part of Banlieu being represented by Liberals, Messrs. RinfVet, Shehyn and Murphy ; and in the Rougemont division, (St. Hya-« ciutho, Ronviilo and Iberville) being also represented by Liberals, Messrs. Mercier, Bouthillier and Molleur. The same remarks may also be made of Mr. Lavioletto's vote, which was in direct opposition to the wishes of his division (DeLorimier) which is composed of St. John's, Xapiervllle, and parts of Chateauguay and Huntingdon, all of which are represented by Liberals, Messrs. Marchand, Lafontaine, Laberge and Cameron. Mr. Gingras' vote might bo challenged on similar grounds. He sits for the Laurentidcs division, which is composed of Quebec county, represented by Mr. Ross ; Chicoutimi and Saguonay, represented by Mr. Price ; Montmorency, repre- sented by Mr. Chas. Langelier, and Charlevoix, represented by Mr. Gautbior, the only supporter of the Opposition in the crowd. Mr. Savage represents the Gulf division, which is cotnposed of Gaspe, Bonaventure and Rimonski, represented by Messrs. Flynn, Chauveau and Tarte, two Liberals and one Conservative, and yet he also voted for the resolutions. Mr. Roy, for the Sorel division, did tho same partisan thing, though that division is composed of Richelieu, represented by Mr. Mathieu (Conservative), Ragot, by Mr. Blais (Liberal), and part of tit, Ifyneinthe by Mr. Mercier (Liberal). id to reprof c Morning: at journal lAR WILL. n of the LejU- exproued hj « it may not ba ig the stA-Ie in icture- I hftT* t vote on Dr. dlock hetwoen i(;rat, Ifearn, nd Ross. — ii). , and Bemil- it the passage ' Montarrille, two of which »bly, Meeir«. ; so that, in inority. Tlie 1 is composed lore correctly iself in oppo- [slet are botli iDg the only hesncs. The e component nbly by two Mr. Oaudet, efleots in the granting uf istituency in re chosen for itts. Messrs. le ^me un- na division, by Liberals, 1, (St Hya-» irs. Mercier, Laviolette's mier) which tingdon, ail aberge and Ho sits for ted by Mr. Qoy, rcpre- luthier, the 8 the Gulf esonted by and yet he Be partisan [r. Mathieu he by Mr. u To mm up, if the eight members of the Council above designated had honestly desired to give effect to the will of the people as constitutionally expressed by the majority of the repreaentatires of that people in the Assembly, and the wishes of the very large majority of the population of tneir several divisions, as championed by those representatives, the vote on Dr. Ross' resolutions would have been exactly reversed, the Supplies would have been carried, the session over and the country at nouoe, instead or being distracted by an uncalled for deadlock between the two Houses, with all its attendant inconveniences and expense to an already tired and half-beggared Province. While, on the subject of the Council and, as an example of the patriotism which actuates its members, it may be well also to note the fact, for the information of your city readers in particular, that among the Hon. Members of that body who voted with the vindictive DoBoucherville clique and threw out the Government bill passed by the Assembly to ratify certain resolutions passed by municipal corporations, &c., ke., relative to the North Shore Railway, were oui two eminent fellow citizens, Hon. Jao. Heam and Hon. J. Elio Gingras, whose professions of desire on all occasions to advance the interests of the city and district of Quebec, are too well known to be here dwelt upon. Yet among other things, which the bill in question proposed to lega- lise was the extension of the North Shore Railway to deep water in Quebec ; a' work of the greatest advantage to this port and one undertaken by Mr. Premier Joly last winter, in deference to unanimous public opinion, for the purpose of affording some slight measure of relief to our unemployed and starving workmen and their families. Verbum tap, I am. Sir, Your obedient Servant, Quebec, Ist September, 1870. An Elkctor. These are not the only weak points in the enemy's armor. Indeed, their name is legion ; and, to point them out more lucidly, we propose to follow the order pursued by the Opposition pamphleteer when he does what he is pleased to style " proceeding to set forth the different points of constitutional practice involved in this complicated situation ; because consequences as various as they are grave, result therefrom, as shown by the following series of questions." 1. Can the Legislative Council refuse the supplies ? 2. Does the refusal by the Council place the Government under the obligation to resign or to settle the difficulty 7 8. Can the Qovemment continue its administration without supplies 7 4. Can the Government borrow money in default of the supplies ? 5. Can the Lieutenant Governor authorize expenditure without the supplies having been voted ? 0. Should the Lieutenant Governor have been consulted on the ac^umment of the Legislative Assembly ? 7. Could the Lieutenant Governor legally lanetion the bills after the adjournment of the House ? 8. Can the Lieutenant Governor constitutionally grant to Mr. Joly a dissolution of the Home? !tt1 I -DAN Tlie LEGlSLAf IVE COIJNCIL ttE#t(^B Tlll^ 8VPPLIE»? 01 Although we cannot admit the correctness of the assump- tion that the Legislative Council of Quebec occupies to all intents and pxirposes a similar position to the House of Lords in England, seeing that, in the mother- country the Crown, acting by the advice of its Ministers, enjoys and has occasionally exercised the prerogative of creating new Peers in sufficient numbers to defeat or to •' swamp out " (as it is styled,) when necessary, the factious opposition of the Lords to popular measures, while the numerical composi- tion of our IJpperHouse is fixed and unalterable and no such neutralizing expedient is provided for the factious opposi- tion of our Council, we are willing to concede the dis- cretionary right of the latter to refuse the supphes. Indeed, although the wisdom, expediency and propriety of its use by either House, and especially by the Tipper Chamber may well be doubted, that right seems to be theoretically unques- tioned and unquestionable. We are consequently at a loss to understand the special pleading on its behalf of the Oppo- sition pamphleteer and the multitude of more or less garbled, half-stated and misapplied authorities which he quotes to needlessly prove the affirmative of the foregoing proposi- tion, while admitting, in the very same pages* that the House of Lords has never refused the supplies, and that the Legislative Council has not done so either at present, but on the contrary has merely suspended them. He conse- quently makes a distinction between rc/Msm^* and suspend' ing or postponing the supplies, while* endeavoring to palliate the arbitrary character of the action of the Council in so doing. Now all the recognized constitutional authori- ties of England lay it down distinctly that the Lords have no middle course open to them in the matter of the supplies, they must either assent to or refuse, accept or reject them as a whole ; they cannot even alter or amend them in the slightest degree. As Delorme says : " Tlie Lords are expected 'KB tAt It the assump- iipies to all le House of lountry the oysandhas new Peers (as it is ion of the al composi- md no such ous opposi- sde the dis* s. Indeed, r of its use lamber may lly unques- tly at a loss 'f the Oppo- ess garbled, > quotes to ig proposi- Sj that the ttd that the resent, but He conse* id suspend' ivoring^^ to he Council lalauthori- :ds have no le supplies, 5ject them am in the re expected Umplj/ and iolelif either to accept or reject them.'* And May says, at page 682 of his "Parliamentary Practice," 7th edition, "the functions of the House of Lords in matters of supply and taxation are now reduced to a simple assent or negative " ,' and the authorities on this hea TBI exprriiuxt has not been ripbated. Their responsibility, indeed, has become too great for so perilout a proceeding. The establishments and publie credit of the country are dependent en their votes, and are not to be lightly thrown into disorder." Tet, as some mortals do not hesitate to enter, where angels fear to tread, the factious and partisan majority in the irresponsible Legislative Council of this Frovmce, basing their outrageous itction upon a virtually antediluTian •f the Opp6* Bared in its »y of i» friend ih at pur))orting to latter we taken calls " a phraaa reign, and never arlier date. In lit Anno broAgbt the Crown. The notations not in rhatover in the 'ithholding' it even the e hesitated iance with D. 1705: Qi, hj refuiing lemanda of the utimatet roted ■ , remarks . by 'stopping more forniid- r aiitmhly for 9n the prero- >M Me Weapon Pitt proposed Drt from Lord that HO *ucU ' proceed with Rockingham » bill, antil elt'B retreat, >mmooa hare use it by the kern at their aponaibility, ihmenti and be lightly r, where ority in rovmce, lilnTian 15 precedent, which even has no analogy or application to their case, have not hesitated, contrary to modern British precedent and the present spirit of the British Constitution, to do what the people's representatives, the guardians of the public purse, the all powerful British House of Com- mons, have studiously eschewed. These conspirators have not hesitated to attempt to coerce not only the responsible branch of the Legislature, but Her Ma,jesty's representative in the choice of his constitutional advisers, with which they have nothing whatever to do, as well as to cast into disorder the establishments and public credit of the country by a proceeding as novel at the present <^y as i^ is uncon- stitutional, while seeking to revive, in their greed cf i power, the imfortnnate state of things which existed in Canada, thanks to the viellards malfaisants oi the Council, previously to 1887. They cannot even plead the miserable excuse of an infringement of their privileges as put forward by the British Lords for their obstructive action in 1705, and by the Legislative Council of Canada in 1856, when the latter also refused the Supplies, (though their action in so doing elicited the formal protest of the leading Conser- rative members of that Chamber at the time) basing their refusal upon an alleged infringement of their privileges in that they had not been consulted as to the fixing of a placv. for the permanent seat of government. On the contrary, in opposition to all precedent, they go out of their sphere, as well as their attributes, to coerce the other powers of the State, and to condemn "the national policy." While on the subject of the Canadian precedent above alluded to, it may be disposed of at once by stating that the Legislative Council of that day was a body elected BY THE PEOPLE, which it is not now, and that there is a wide difference between the rights and the action of such a body and that of an irresponsible, Crown-nominated and partisan Chamber, such as the same House is at present. The same remarks equally apply to the case of the refusal of the Supplies by the Legislative Council of the Colony of Victoria, which is also cited in the Opposition pamphlet : Cox, British Commonwealth, p. 55G-557, says : "Tb« Act of the Colonial Legislature for establishing a constitution in and for the Colony of Victoiin is Tory similar to the Act just notioed. Nearly corresponding ^««*l^ ftroTiitoQi arfi raad« f the Constitutional Reform Bill introduced into the Assembly of that Provinoo, any raenaaro parsed in the popular Uonse during two oonseoutivo aefisions and rejected by the Oonneil, shall bo subaiittod to popular vote. Tho London Spectator is cx«Tcited over the opposition os ono fraught with danger to reproaentative government and foreign to the principle of the British Constitution. It oontendg that by placing tho people above Parliament tho latter will sutTor in public CHtimntion, and beenmo of Mooondary consideration. Yesterday's Toronto Mail soems to apprehend no danger to the Conservative cause from tho idea in this country I The Mail Bays : — " The plebiscito already obtains here to a slight e.vtent in connection with prohibitory legislation, but has not boon thought of as a means of relief from Upper Chamber ohstrnotivenesa. It may not be quite in linrmony with the spirit of the British con- stitution, bu( neither is Australian lifo and surroundings ; and if our brethern of tho Southern hemisphere wish to do a little politieal experimenting, there is no particalar harm in it. Other Anglo-Saxon countries will, at all ovoutEi, have the gratuitous benefit of their experiment" We opino that tho Provinoo of Qneboo will likely bo the first to follow their example in the way of teaclking its Upper Iloueo common scnec.'' It is asserted, however, that if the Lords have never refused to pass the Supplies, they have frequently rejected money bills, and an attempt to justify the conduct of the Legislative Council on the strength of these precedents is made. It is undoubtedly true that, in the past, the Lords did encroach upon the rights of the Commons in this particular, but that little game has been long since put an end to. On the 6th July, 1860, the Commons adopted the following resolutions : — lo, That the right of granting aids and suppHos to t))0 Crown, i.s iu the Com»wn» alone. 2o. That the power of the Lords to reject bills relating to taxation, is Justly regarded by this House with peculiar jealousy, ns affecting the right of the Coramona to grant tho supplies and to provide the ways and moans for tho service of the year. 3o. That to guard for the future against an unduo exercise of that power by the Lords, and to seeuro to the Commons their rightful controlover taxation and supply, this House has in its own hands the power so to impose and remit taxes and to frame billa of supply, that the right of tho Commons as to the matter, manner, measure and time, maybe maintained inviolate." 2iL 17 And May says at p. 683 " Parliamentary Practice " : " The glgnifloaoee of thoss resolutionii was lUuitrated in the next Senilon, when the Commong, without exceeding their own poweri, were able to repel the roocnt enoroaohmonti of the Lordi, and to vindicate taeir own linanolai nicendaooy. They Again reiolved that the paper dutiei should )eropoaled; but instead of seelting tho oottcurrenoo of the Lords to a separate Biil for that purpose, they included tho repeal of these duties in n general flnanoial moasuro, for granting tho property tax, &o., and other wnys and moans for tho service of tho year, which the Lords were cmmtmined to aeecpt. The flnanoial sohomo was presented, for acceptance or rejootlon as awliolo ; nnd> in that form, tho priviUgci of the Oommon» were neviira. And tho budget of each year has been since comprised in a general or composite Act. Nor wuh there nny- thing novel or unprooedcnted in this procooding." In a high moralizing strain, the Opposition pamphlet tells us that the House of Lords have never refused a supply bill, pure and simple, because English Governments have always had so high a sense of honor, that they have abandoned the field before being forced to such an extre- mity ; and adds in the way of a homily upon tho disadvantage of weak governments and their inability to work beneficially for the country, and to secure the adoption of their measures: — "Can any one quote a pre- cedent showing an English Ministry so clinging to power ? Has a Ministry which abandoned all its measures ever been allowed to remain in power ? Such conduct is regarded there as dishonorable, and such as no intelligent man could support." Now let us see what some of the highest authorities say on these grave points : Bagehot— p. 132 : " The elective ia now tho most important function of the IIcuso of Commons. It is most desirable to insist and bo tedious, on iliii, because our tradition requires it. At the end of half tho Sessions of Parliament, you will reiij in tho newspapers, and you will hear oven from thoso who liavo loolicd close at the matter and siiuuld know better. " Parliament has done nothing this Session, '^ome thii'iji we^'e promlised in the Qtiecu's peerh, btit they were on/y little ihingn, and rnont of them h ve not pn/tted." Lord Lyndhurst used for years to recount tho amull dtitcniniiH/H of legislative uehiove- mcnts ; and yet these wore the days of tho first Whig Governments, who had moro t) do in legislation and did more than any Government. The true answor to such harangues as Lord Lyndhurst's by a Minister, should have been in the first person. He should have said firmly : 'Purliamtnl hns mniittained ME and thai wni itn greatent duty ; Parliament has ca ried on, what, in the lanjwxge of tradiiionnl refpect, ire call the Queen't Guvernment ; it has maintaiiiei what wisely or untoiiiely it detmeU the beat Exeoutive of tho L'ngHah nation," May's Constitutional History of England, p. 476, says : ' " I^an neither be alRrmed that Strong Governments were characteristic of tho Parliamentary system, subverted by tho Reform Act; nor that weak governments have been oharactoristio of tho new system and tho result of it. In both periods, tho stability of Administrations has been due to other causes. If, in tho later period, Ministers have been overthrown, who, at another time, might have been upheld by tho influence of the Crown ; there have yet been governments supported by a Pariia- 3 \ '^wf 18 moninrfl mt{lor!l)) anil pullie apjiyolitllDU itrvngrr in woinl/orcr and ninrf myinhh «/ uverpowtiringinifre^lnndvfirH to the nalionnl uclfi.u-e than niiy Winldtrion deriving tlicir power from Ioib populoui) Rouroei." " After tho Roform Act, Karl Oroy'N Minlittry wmi nil puTreiful, iinlil it wni(l niorr inpniih of (itrioo fieri ving their I. iinlil it WHS din- rojiRorthnn timt of !• Jiord Abcrdoon'H 'iry failmeg. Wh«t iiUtratioii, until it H'Mo.i I,y (1,0 ,)!(,. "'I Jioth AliiiiMrioH "« iiiitiuriiy in t/,r "t any time. Ami '<• (lint of w/iiiUvir Dilcrcnii/iili'if ii^t/ie il /iiim, ]iru>'j,frih/ I tha hiilury »/ as tho fore- aro, arc tho Ills, even of f the House, p;imphh,^toer ^7, p. 1042) at a govorn- :>lo to givo \. bo remem- at Minister on a vital laving been X the same e Speaker's I, that Her iificulty by mons. An ambiguous 2b on tho '■ question, applicable irguments occasion, t that the Y, fuid at ouse that ot possess tduct the 19 aftairs ol' tho House, wiieheas the Joly GOVERNMENT DID AND DOES POSSKSH A OLKATl MAJORITY. In tho same snoech, lio\vo\ er, several passages arc re- l)orted, which aro extremely relevant to our argument AVe quote two of them as specially worthy of reproduction and particular note at present. They will bo found on tho page of Hansard above-mentioned, and are as follows : " Wo appealed to tlie onuntry inhich trnii an connllliitional a roiirm ni mujniinh and our conduct shuwod that on that ocoaaion thero was no nnworihi/ tUmjiiii/ to ojjive." " It In not wise on tho part of tho IIouso of Commons to analyze with too clogo a Rorntiny tho nuuioricnl uliinionta by which a Ministry is oarriod on. To do no would bo to rltinto tho practical qiialitius for which tiiia Ilouso ig oelobratod." Lord Brougham's review of tho business of the Session of 1847, is also cited in deprecation of tho evils of a weak government; but thero is a failure to add that Lord lirougham was in Opposition at the time, when it was excusable for him to use any arguments against tho Govern- ment of the day, and that at the conclusion of his speech on that occasion, ho moved tho following resolution, which was rejected without discussion : " That an humble address bo presented to Ilor Majesty, assuring Her of the deep interest which this House must over take In whatovor subjects are graciously rccom- mondod by Ilor Majesty ; that it ia with great pnin the Hoitaa in obtiytd to admit that uc'trly the whole of the anhjeett thua recommended, and of high importance in ihcn- xelven, have not been ao/ar aucceaa/ullj/ dealt withaa to jiroducc any legislative mcaauren In which Her Majcati/'a royal conacnt can now he ttakcd ; that it ia veri/ jmin/ul to the Jfimae to rejlect that other iiihjecta of vaat nioment have bean abandoned withont anything effectual having been done with respect to them ; that it is the oarnost hopo that no otlior Session of Parliament may over pass without moro being done for tho improve- ment of the institutions of tho country and for tho benoUt of Ilor Majesty's subjoots timn it has boon found possible to aocomplisli in tho Session which is now so near its close; and that tho Ilouso now, as at all times, doth gratefully aolsnowledgo Ilor Mujesty'B parental caro for the welfare of Ilor dominions." We ask particular attention to the lines italicized in the foregoing. They virtually embody the leading ground of objection and complaint raised during the recent Session, both by the Opposition in tho Assembly and the factious and partisan ma-jority in the Legislative Council against tho claims of the Joly Government to a continuance of power ; and it may therefore be not uninteresting to learn how they were dealt with by the British Commons. Their fate is thus brieily and unostentatiously recorded : " Lord Brougham made somo observations in reply, aftor whloh the motion was put and negatived without division." Haniard, 111, p. 090. ^ 80 The lurlher quotations of thb Opposition prvinphlot, to endeavor to ostahlish a comparison between lilnglish and Canadian majorities in the popular branch, and to prove that, because, in Homo instances, Ministries in England, reduced to diroctiiij? the allairs of the country with small majorities, have hastened to relievo themselves of the ros- poasibility, the Joly Government, forsooth, should resign ; are equally without force, point or application. It is impos- Niblci oven to be^^in to institute a fair numerical comparison between majorities and minorities in the British House of Commons with its 658 members and in our little Provincial Assembly with its 05. As the Quebec Morninf^ C/ironinfe very properly remarked on the subject in its issue of the !'th October instant : — " Soiiio stress HO(^mH to lici laid im Hio i'lWt tliiit Itoiiimsio ii Uritiiih Oovernmont ro^isnod wlioii tlioy I'.mml Unit tlioy wuni HiipiiortBil in tlm OomniniiH by a majority nf only tliruo, Mr. Jiily'n .Miiii.itry hIkiiiIiI aiiii|)C u xiiiiitur lino of rondiiut baoaiiao bii majiirity itiriuunt.s lo tlm Hniiid niiintior, and runlKn iiIho. Thiit in vory iibHurd. A iiiHJiirity of throB In tlm I'nivlnno of tjimhoo Ih oiiual to a nmjorlty nf thirty In Kri^'land. Iiidood it ii* ii inoro iMofiii iiiajovity horu than thirty in in Uniflandi and tliu moiiibori of tho Op|i09ttioa know it wull enough." To sum up, under this head, the Council can reject the Supplier, if thi^y choose to depart from the long established usage in the connection of the Lords in England ; they can even suspend the Supplies as they have presently done, if they choose to act uncnmtilutionallt/. But in so doing they play a dangerous game and risk their very existence as a distinct branch of the Legislature. In a contest with the people and the people's representatives, they have nothing to gain, but everything to loose, for the people will not consent to be deprived of their rights or to be dictated to by an irresponsible House in the nominations to which they have no direct voice, and the Council must therefore eventually go to the wall as the question is no longer between the Council and the Oovernment, but between the Council and the people. As May says at page 47Gofhis constitutional History, vol. I : " The Lords may sometimon thwart a minintry, reject or mutilato its moasuroi* ; and even eondomn it ( policy ; butthoyaro poro-.rlcHu to overthrow a mimHtri/ mtp- jhirteii by the Commntiii or to n]iholil ft miniHtry which the CommonH havo con- domnod. Imitead of mniii/ niaita-ii, a Quvvrnment hn» onlif one (the Commona)." II.- DOEH Tlie IIOHTILE VOTE OF THE COUNCIL IMPOtifi ANY OBLIGATIONS ON THE CIOVERNMENT ? Under this caption, with Iho view of endeavoring" to show that, under existin^jf circumstances, the .Toly Ooveni- mont should either resign or bo dismissed, and that the Assembly should yield to the Council, the apologists of the Legislative Council lay down the proposition that there in no measure depending on the power of the Legislature that the Government can carry out without the concurrence of the Legislative Council. The Government, they allege, must render an account of its conduct to both Houses, and its policy is incomplete, its authority lessened, if it bo condemned by one of the branches. Theoretically, they )• ) no doubt, right, but neither authorities nor precedents u 1 lacking to prove the supremacy of the Lower or elective branoh and its power of ultimately over-riding all oppo- sition to its measures. For instance, Farrall , Law of Parliament says at pages 58, 59, 98, 105 and 107 : "Diit tho King and tlio Lords ciin do nr tliinf; without tho asgont of llie Commons, for, (IB Haimstorl t'urtliur roiiiarks, 'ovory lUron of Purlianiont doth reprefont but hii) own porxon, and Rpoiiketh in tlio buhalf of hiniuulf alono. I)ut in tho Knights, citizong and burgu!igo:< aru represented the OonimonH of tho whole realm ; and evorr of those givoth not conaunt only for hinisulf, but for all ihoHo also for whom liu id sent.' Tho Peers possoss iho privilege of logislating in trust for tho good of the community ; and in this sonso tbey niny be said to bo also ropresentutivoR of the people I but as tliey now hold tliis privilege horeditnrilly. ihoy virtually and in fuct but represent thointiolvos individually. Not so tho Commons — they immodiatolT spring from tho puopto, and reiiresont tho moral, tho physical, and tho flnantdal stroDgth and powor of tho country, aud aru, to use tho words of Queon I'Mizaboth, 'tho body of the realm.' They directly represent thoso, for whoso advantage nil prerogatives and privileges wore created and conferred ; and for whoso good, when- ever their abuse Fhall liuvo rendered it nocossury, they may bo, as Blaokatono contends, constitutionally resumed. It is, thon, and ovor has been, a fundamental principal in the Kritish constitution — sinuo our Oovernmcntal practices deserved tho name of constitution — that whtvevcr the Lords will peraiit in rijictin;/ vtcnturen, which ihf Kinho doclarod himsolf iu tho Lord's IIouso to bo tho champion of tho ju»« privileges of his order." Of course, \vliile our provincial constitution remains as it is at present, w^o cannot go so liir as the wrriter above cited. The consent of the Council to all legislative measures is a necessary formality which must unfortunately bo complied with. But the above extracts conclusively show the author's thoiough apprc^^iation of the folly and evils of deadlocks created by the Lords, and of the necessity of some power in the constitution to neutralize their factious opposition to the popular will. Again, the unconstitution- ality and absurdity of the Upper Chamber dictating to the Lieut.-Governor the choice of his responsible advisers, claiming to decide the fate of ministers supported by a majority in tho elective branch, and withholding the sup- plies in order to force their partisan views upon the head of the Executive, are forcibly demonstrated by Bagehot in the following: — rage XXXVIII. (Introduction.) "Tho Ilou.ie of Coinraong on!;/ can rcrcc;'' a MiDifitcr by a vote of censure. J/oxt o/' the viiiiistric.ifor thirty years hitre nerer pom.-'sscd the confidence if the Lor da ; and in snch cases a vote of conauro by t'j:j Lords cnuld therefore have little weight; it would bo simply the particular cxprostion of a general political disapproval. It would be like a vote of censure on u Libtral Government . y tho Carlton or on a Tory Uovernmont by tho Reform Club. And in no case has an adverse vote by tho Lords the same decisive efioct as a \ ote of tho Commons ; the Lower IIoueo is the ruling and the choosing House, and, if a Government really possesses that, it thoroughly possesses nine-tenths of what it requires. The support of the Lords is an aid and a luxury / that of tho Commons is a strict and indispensable neossity." Bagehot further says, on the same subject, at page XXV of the " English Constitution " (2nd edition.) " The Uonso of Lords must yield whenever tho opinion of tho Commons is alpo the opinion of the nation, and whon it is clear that the nation has made up its mind." Again at page XXXII : " I coneoive, thoroforo, that the f^roat power of tUo House iif Lords should bo exercised very timidly and very cautiously." r. 13: " The Iloug'^ cf Lords still exevoisss several useful functions ; but the ruling influence — tho deciding faculty — has passed to what, using the language of eld tiir j, we still call tho Lower IIouso— to an Assembly Avhicb, though interior as a dignified institution, is superior as an efficient institution." .' . 24 And p. 89 : " Molt polltloal oriios— tha dooisiro votes whioh dotermine th« fate of the Govtrn- ment— aro generally either on questions of foreign policy or new laws, and the questions of foreign policy generally come out in this way, that the Qovemment has ivlready done somothing, and that is for the one part of the Legislature alone — for tho House of Commons and not for the llouso of Lords — to say whether they hare or have not forfeited their place by the treaty thoy have made." And at page 27, Todd observes : " Though entitled equally with the Commons, to express their opinion upon all nets of Administration, and their approval or othorwiso of tho general conduct or policy of tho Cabinet, they are powerless by their vote, to support or overthrow a Ministry against the will, of tho House of Commons." And as Lord John Russell is cited in the connection, let us see what that distinguished statesman thought of the value of an adverse vote of the Lords in regard to its effect upon a Ministry : " And I believe thnt a change of Oovcrnmont rosuKing from a resolution of the lIouRO of Lords witli respect to the conduct of tho Executive Qovemment of this country woiildbo contrary to tho constitution of this country, and that, wuile it might cause great confusion in tho State, it would be to none so dangerous as the House of Lords. To place upon tho llouso of Lords the weight and responsibility of controlling the Executive Government of tho country would soon put that House in a position which they have never hitliorto occui)icd and which they cannot safely maintain • * Sir, — If these are my opinions, then I could not consent to surrender the reins of power in consequence of the resolution which has been arrived at by the House of Lords."— Hans l^eb, vol. CXII, p. 10i>. Hearn, p. 174, says : Where the two Houses aro at v.ariiinco respecting (iio ^^vioe they s^hould offer to the King, the constitution affords according to the liature of the case a twofold solution of tho difiRculty. AVhero tho subject of ditroroiico is tho practical adminis- tration of existing laws and requires an immediate decision, the remedy in the jyre/i:- renco (fiecn to the itdvia «j' the uinmons." Andat p. 216 : " There are few instances of tho resignation of a ministry in consequonoe of any impediment presented by the action of the House of Lords." And at p. 222 : " There is one question which must always be uppermost in the mind of every servant of the Crown. — " How is tho Quoon'e Government to bo carried on ?" If the measure or tho loss of a measure do not affect or affect in but a slight degree the fxintiiig law, ministers are bound, however much they may disappiove of the innovation or however much they may regret tho loss of their proposal, Jio continue in office." Again at p. 225 : These defeats and t?pecial!y the loss of his Irish propositions and of his schemes for the fortification ot t>i9 dock-yards, were subjects of bitter mortification to Mr. Pitt ; yet neither he nor hia opponents appear to have thought that he was under any obligntion to rehign. These precedents of Mr. Pitt's have <>' double interest. On the one side, the events themselvcB curiously illastrato the supposed strength of 26 asequcnce of any tba " itroDg Qorernmenta " before the Reform Aot. On the other lide, the courie which Mr. Pitt then adopted Ecems coDcluBivoly to show that a Minister, who ii ooDBciouB that he retaios the geooral coiifideoce both of the King and of Parliament, i/i not required to re»iyn because Some of hi» moat important linitUitiie proposali Jiiive Hot been accepttd. For the practice in later times, I need only refer to the long li^t of meaHures wbioh, as I before observed, tho House of Lords, rorely against the will of the Ministers of the day, either rejected or lanjely modified. Very recently we have seen more than one Reform Bill, a name once of mn;;io potency, quietly sot aside without any detriment to the Ministry that proposed it. It thus appears that Minis- tors, even when defeated on very important mcii^ures of legislation, have not thought it their duty to resign gee pages 228, 232. ^ With respect to the claim of the Lords to advise the Crown in regard to Ministerial changes, the Opposition pamphlet cites Todd, vol. I, p. 211, as follows : •' It is the undeniablo right of either House of Parliament to advise the Crown wpon the exoroise of this (dismissal of Ministers) or any other of its prerogatives." But, with its usual duplicity and bad faith, it stops short here again and fails to give the qualifying considerations which Todd supplies, and which are as follows : But the right cannot be pressed so far as to render the Sovereign accoui • table to Parliament for Her conduct in changing her advisers. " Lord Selkirk, Part Dob, vol. I.X, p. 377. The House of Lords have nothing to sny to the changes which may tako placo in His Majesty's Councils. It is His Majesty's prerogative to appoint His own Ministers and to change them as he pleases.' In support of its views, the Opposition pamphlet quotes Ilearn on the "Government of England," p. 160 — 61, but again, with characteristic misrepresentation, it designedly and with glaring bad faith omits from the text words and whole phrases, which qualify or explain the author's mean- ing and the omission of which altogether alters the latter. In order that the public may the better appreciate this fraudulent attempt to dupe and mislead it, we print side by side the reproduction and the original : (Opposition Pamphld.) (Original.) But the House of Lords has a right of advice co-extensive with that of the ('omnions ; and to the House of Lonls the remedy of adiesohition cannot be npplied. . . . Wlieti a hostile vote has hecn passed ngaiiist any ministry in the House of Lords it ought to obtein from the House of Commons a vote of a directly opposite cliaracter. Since Parliament consists of two parts atid since questions of administration do not, like questions of IpgislRtion, admit of compromise or But the House of Lords has a right of advice co-extensive with that of the Commons ; and to the House of Lords the remedy of a dissoluiion cannot lie applied.... When a hostile vote Ims been passed a_gainst any ministry in the House of Lords it ought to obtain from the House of Commons a vote of a directly opposite character. Since Parliament consists of two parts and since questions of administration do not, like questions of legislation, aUiuu of compromise or 26 dplay, if tlioro lie a rliffcrencc between tlioHO parts ro.«pci;tiiig the conduct of any ministry, poinc means of f^jieedilv (leciding llulr diflcrence must lio found, (ileum, Government of England, p. lliO-Gl.) delay, if there be a difterence between these parts respecting the conduct of any miniptry, Pome niean»-of speedily deciding tliat diflerence muPt be found. ACCORDINGLY, THE RULE IS THAT AVHEN THE OPINIONS OF THE TWO HOUSES ARE DIVI- DED, THE OPINION OP THE HOUSE OF COMMONS PREVAILS. (Hearn, Government of England, p. IGO-Gl.) The lines capitalized are those omitted from the original text. The Opposition i>amphlet asserts, that a difference of opinion existing between the two Houses, the Government constitutionally had one of two courses to take and that it took neither, being consequently censurable. These courses were : lo. To fulfill the promise contained in the answjer of the Lieut,' Governor to the Council of settling the difficulty, 2o. To challenge the Council and to cause the Lower House to completely reverse what the Council had decided upon ; for, as Lord John Russell said of the House of Lords : " The censure of the policy oft, Govomracnt liy the House of Lords is a matter of very groat importiinco and can only be counterbalanced by the formal approval of the same policy, by the House of Commona. (Hansard, toL 192, p. 105.) Now we respectfully contend that the Joly Government took not only one of these courses, but the two of them. Consistently with its own dignity, it did all that could be reasonably expected from it to restore harmony between the two branches. It even went further and took the initiative in broaching through one of its members, the President of the Council, the question of a conference be- tween the Houses with a view to settling the difficulty, though the constitutional pratice is that the first conference upon a bill must be demanded by that House in whose possession the bill is, and is usually demanded in order to Ktate reasons for disagreeing; and though it is irregular' to demand a conference for the purpose of requiring the reasons of the other House. (lifterence between "g «lie conduct, of nieans-of spcediJy nee must be found. THE RULE IS E OPINIONS OF 5ES ARE DIVI- SION OF THE oNs prevails! t of England, p, n the original difference of i trovernment e and that it yhle. These iiswjer of tho difficulty, ■ the Lower I had decided use of Lords : Lords is a matter rormal approval of 105.) &overiunent of them. 1 that could ny between d took the Jiubers, the aference be- e difficulty, conference 'e in whose in order to rregular'to Hiring the 27 I'he Supply Bill, in regard to which the disagreement occurred, was in the possession of the Council at the time, and it was consequently the duty of that Chamber to have asked for a conference with the other House with respect to it. The Council, however, did not only not perform this, their plain constitutional duty, but they actually rejected tho suggestion of the President looking to a conference, thus clearly establishing the factious, partisan and unreasoning character of their opposition. It is therefore quite evident that it was the Council and not the G-overnment, who did not wish to settle the matter, and this truth received a further illustration on the 30th September, when the Council again met and not only persisted in their suspension of the supplies, but actually treated with contempt the appeal of the Lieutenant Governor (asking them to put an end to the deadlock and expressing his ardent desire to see tho supplies voted,) by a further adjournment to the 27th October, without even taking His Honor's message into consideration. Under the circumstances, it is not easy to see what other course was open to Mr. Premier Joly, but to adjourn the Assembly, which, having got through all its own work, after an exceptionally prolonged session of two months and a-half, could not, on any practical or common sense ground, be asked to continue sitting with folded arms to await the leisure or the good pleasure of another Chamber, of a change in whose opinions there seemed to be little hope or prospect. Then, as to the second point, that the Government should have met the adverse action of the Council, by a counter vote of the Assembly, the Opposition pamphleteer takes exception that the Government secured the passing by the Assembly of a vague resolution, which bears on no parti- cular fact and that it did not cause the Legislative Assembly to deny the following averments of the Legislative Council : 1. That tho govommcnt is open to ocnsure for having wiftdrawn nearly all the measures announced in the speech from the throne. 2. That tho government is open to censure for holding office with a majority varying between the casting vote of the speaker and a majority of two. 3. That tho government is open to censure for given out considerable contracts, paying large sums of money, remitting suras of money, and the whole without the authorization of the houses and, in some cases, indirect contradiction of their orders. 4. That the government is open to censure for having violated the spirit and the letter of the law in three or four acts of administration. 5. That the government iaopen to censure for having violated tho financial obU gationa of tba oouatry towards certain private railway oompanlos. ^'J^i^ 2'6 cided majorities in the Assembly. In fact, the G-ovcrn- ment successfully withstood some 22 diflerent votes of want of coulidence in regard to them or upon the variations which were played upon them by the Opposition leader and his lieutenants ; and it is consequently idle to insist that the following resolutions, moved on the 2nd September by Mr. Gagnon, the member for Kamouraska, and adopted by the Assembly, is vague, and does not, by its formal approval of the Joly Government and its policy, both chal- lenge and counterbalance the adverse decision of the Council : — " Mr. GAGNON moved, seconded bv Mr. Nelson, — " That the conati- tntion given us in 1867, by tlie British Korth America Act, is similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom. " That in the said constitution the Legislative Council and the Legisla- tive Assembly of this Province, are respectively intended to fill, within the limits of their powers, the places of the House of Lords and of the House of Commons of England. " Tliat from time immemorial, the House of Lords in England has been in the habit of respecting the will of the popular branch of Parliament with regard to supply. " That the House of Lords has never refused the granting of supplies to Her Majesty or suspended the adoption of the Supply Bill for the purpose of putting a pressure upon the liead of the Executive Government, and of inthiencing him in the choice of his advisers. "That by the principles of the British constitution, as understood ami nractisod for a long time, the fate of our administrations rests not with the Upper House but with the elective branch of Parliament. " That this House has, during the present session, frequently given clear proofs of its confidence in the advisers of His Honor the Lieutenant Governor, and especially in voting the supplies demanded by them. *•' That the sai^ supplies have been voted to Her Majesty onlv because of the confidence reposed by this House in the said advisers, and that this House would not have voted the said supplies if His Honor liail had advisers not enjoying the confidence of the Legislative Assembly. " That this House would see with regret the said supplies put in the hands of advisers in whom it would not have expressed its confidence." Objection is made that Mr. Joly or some member of his Government should have taken the initiative in the Assembly in moving that Chamber for an adverse vote to irroot ozpenscf wfth Ihat of the Upper Ilduse, and that they acted uncoiistituti-' onally in allowing a private member to do so. But there is a strong precedent lor their course in the connection. In 1850, Lord John JlusseU's Ministry \va.s consuied by the Lords for their conduct in the affairs of Greece. Hearn, p. 163, thus reports what followt'd : " LonlJolm Run.iell, who was then Primo Minister, rct'usocl to HOcopt tlai I'csignation of Lord Palinerston tlien Foreign Sticretavy, unci announced tbat th" Government dissentcid from tlie general rule of tliu law of nations thus hiid clown by the House oiLonh uiul I'ef'used to conduct if self arco'diiifjli/ in t/ial rule, and tliat it would adhere to its former i)olicy. Jiut. nUhow^h he n(f'fn;d faciUiies for a motion, THE PRKMIER DID NOT HIMSELF SEEK' THE 'iNTKllFiUKENCE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. A motion stronRly approvuig of the principles, which regulated the foreign policy of HerMajeaty'n Government was moved by.VIr. Pioebuck (a priealf. member) though not an habitual supporter of tlio Ministry, ar.d was carried by a majority of forty-six. This victory effectually secured the Ministry, whose existence had previously bsen very precarious. "We shall conclude our remarks, under this head, with one more quotation as a clincher to the arguments of those, who would wish to see an irresponsible Crown-nominated body like the Legislative Council override the popular will. It is from no less a personage than Earl G-rey, to whom our Opposition pamphleteer is so fond of appealing as an un- qu.estionable avithority. May, Constitutional History of England, vol. I, page 267 : F.arl Grey said : — If a majority of this House (the Lords) is to have the power, whenever they please, of opposing the declared and decided wishes both of the Crown and the people, without any means of modifying that power, then this country in placed entirel// iinder the influence OF AN UNCONTROLLABLE OLIGARCHY. I say that, if a majority oi" this House should have the power of acting adversely to the Crown and the Commons and was determined to exercise Maijjoirer, without being liable to check or control, the constitution is com- pleteh) altered and the governrnent of this country is not a limited monarc/i// ; it is no longer, my Lords — the Crown, the Lords and the Commons, but a House of Lords— II SEPARATE OLIGARCHY— governing absolutely the others." These words of Lord Grrey correctly pourtray the situation of the Province of Quebec at this moment. III.-CAN THE eCYERBrniEN'r DO UriTHOVT SUPPLIES? IV.-CAN THE GOVERNMENT BORROW CONSTITUTION- ALLY ? V.-CAN THE LIEUT.-GOVERNOR AUTHORIZE EXPENDI- TURE WITHOUT A VOTE OF SUPPLY ? The Opposition pamphleteer has wasted a great deal of research and printer's ink to prove the negative of the three foregoing propositions. He has done so probably for his own satisfaction, as we cannot conceive (except to play upon the doubts of the wavering or the fears of the timid, or to maliciously insinuate that the Joly Government had done one or other of the unconstitutional things involved in the above propositions) the utility of proving what no one else contests. Although we might refute the majority of his deductions and show again, in the connection, that he is guilty of considerable misap- plication, as well as mutilation of the authorities and precedents he cites in such profusion, we shall not follow him under these heads, as it is not only mani- festly idle and superfluous to do so, but as we must presume that in due time and course the Government will advise and take the necessary constitutional steps to put an end to the deadlock, and to relieve the Province, as well as itself, from the disagreeable alternative of having recourse to any exceptional measures to sustain the public credit and carry on the pullic service. Under the heading of "Can the Government constitu- tionally borrow ?" it is, however, important to take special note of the unconscious admission of the Opposition pamphlet on page 32. In its attempt to prove the negative of its own proposition, it falls into the fatal acknowledg- ment for its cause that the Government cannot constitu- tionally borrow, because in the first place there must be a deficit, WHICH DOES NOT EXIST IN THIS CASE. This is surely selling its friends with a vengeance, after all their iSVPPLIEg? fSTITVTIOIV. JE EXPENDI- 81 lamentations during the session over the state of our finances, and tho financial crimes of the Joly Government, and shows what sacrifices the unprincipled will indulge in at times to make an imaginary point against an adversary even to their own detriment. In the meanwhile wo defy contradiction of the assertion that the Joly Government has effected any other loans than the $8,000,000, tho ^270,000, and tho $500,000 authorized by law. groat deal of gativeoftho probably for tcept to plav )f the timid, rnment had oual things of proving light refute '■ again, in •able misap- lorities and B shall not only maui- s we must rnment will eps to put Province, as of havinsr at constitu- ake special Opposition le negative knowledg- )t coustitu- e must be a 2. This is rail their TI.~SnOVLD THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR HAVE BEEN CONSULTED AS TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY? Tho proposition involved in this question may be at once nefi^atived. All the recognized authorities of our day on constitutional law and Parliamentary practice agree in holding that it is no longer necessary to consult the head of tho Executive with respect to an adjournment of both or of either of the Houses of Parliament for any period of time short or long. Indeed, they go further and assert that the power to adjourn is not only inherent in and essential to the independence of the Houses ; but that, if assumed by tho Crown, it might be used for sinister pur- poses. Although exercised and admitted in early times in the mother coiintry, its use has been so constantly and determinedly resisted in modern days by successive Par- liaments, that it has ]iow passed into the category of things that havo been, but will never be again. The half-heart- edness of the attempt of the authors of the Dansereau brochure to justify its revival by casting doubts upon the constitutionality of the action of tho Joly Government in adjourning the Quebec House of Assembly on the 2nd September last to the 28th October, without a direct recommendation from the Lieut.-Governor to that eiFect, or at least without consulting that officer or the other House — a position which is altogether untenable — is only too apparent by their studied avoidance of all the standard authorities of modern times on the subject, and their eager ' appeal to precedents which are as obsolete and as inap- plicable to the support of a correct reading of modern parliamentary usages, as they are suited to their retrogressive views and foreign to the spirit of our day and the princi- pies of responsible government. For the better iniormation of the public, we quote from a few of those standard authorities, commencing with Sir William Blackstone, . whose opinions possess a perennial freshness, vigor and applicability, of which no lapse of time can deprive them. I. Blackstone, ch. 2 : "Formerly there were many instances of tlie Ilonsoa adjourning at the expressed desire of the King, but the practice of ao adjourning haa been discontinued. HAVE BEEN 2IVT OF THE >n mny be at 'sot' our day itice agree in t the head of of both or ny period of and assert ^(^nt in and ^}it that, if sinister pur- early times stantly and cessive Par- ry of things i balf-heart- Bansereau s upon the 'ornment in n the 2nd it a direct at elFect, or ther House -is only too B standard their eager ' lid as inap. of modern Progressive ^e prinei- ^formation ' standard lackstone, 'igor and i'e them. 38 Perry's Parlianifnf , 284 tt ttq ; 2 HatsoU, 311 tt aeq " Mr. Amos obwrvci that the power of adjonnmiont, if iiwHumpd by the Oown, ini>?ht be uflod for Bill infer jjiirpOHeH.HjK'cially if UuMwIjournnu'iitH were protracted or rejieated or ended in a prorogatum or diHHoiiition. IIo ciff.-* Hevonil iiistiincos in wbidi jidjoiirnmeiitH were eo uwed it> tlie icign of CliarleH Jl (Eu;5liHli ConHtiliitloii, Ch. :o." I Farrall — Law of rurliaiucnt, pages (19, 70 : " I liHve not met witii any ca'^es wherein tiie CnniMioii.-* liave rosJNled tha dcirc of the Sovereign in the jiroruj/alion of J',irliaini:iU ; \m\, (here are inntanoes where (hey have expressed the utmost Jealousy renpenthxj their pri- rile(/e to adjourn thcmschen and hai'c totallij diareijardcd the Kim/x rommifsion direciiny an adjournment" " lytli Miircli. iMt Se3S. .Tacobi — Tt was resolved : That thin Uouir, hi/ itielf'and of itself mi j hi be adjourned," A, Chas. I (IGHl). The Bpeaker delivered a mesHage from the Kin;; commanding him " to adjourn the Hou.se until Tuesday, oome nevun uij;i»t following; " wliich was dinreijarded on tlio frround '* thai the adjournmeni <>/ the JJouie did properly belong to thcmsekca." Cox — On the British Commonwealth, p. 48 : " Adjournment, by which the deliberationa of either HouHes are tempo- rarily Buspended, are solely in the power of each inilependently. Tht plea- ■ Hure of the Crown that both IIouhos eho\ild adjourn han somctimeH been signified by meswage or proclamation, but it h in the discretion of each lluu^e to comply with the request." Hatsell, p. 621: , " The true Parliamentary doctrine is that tlie King has no authority to adjourn I'arliament." Chitty, on prerogative, eh. YI, p. 71 : " The two Houses reapectively possess the exclusive power of adjourning themselves, nor can the Kiny exercise it ; and an ailjournmeiit of one Houce '\» not, ipso facto, an adjournmeut of the other. • • • An adjourninent may be made by the Houses not only fryni day to day, but for a fortnight or a longer period, as is usually done at Christmas or Easter or upon other particular occasions." » May's Parliamentary Practice, 7th edition, p. 49 ; " Adjournment is solely in the power of each House respectively. It has not been unusual, indeed, for the plfusuro of tlie Crown to be signifiedin person, by message, commission or proclamation, tliat both Houses should adjourn ; and in some cases such adjoiirnments have scarcely dilt'eretl from prorogations. lUit although no instance has occuned in which either Houses has refused to adjourn, the communication might bo disregarded. " Business has frequently been transacted after the King's desire has been made known ; and the question for adjournment has afterwards been put. in the ordinary manner, and determined after debate, amendment, and division. Under these circumstances it is surprising that so many instances of this practico uliould have occurred in comparatively modern times. Both Houses adjourn at their own discretion, and daily exercise their right. Any interference Ofi the 84 part of tho Crowu lo Ihorcforo Impollll.^, n« It mayrhnnco tomoft with opjioiil. tlon; fttiil utinoc'KHftrj, «.< Mlnli'ttr.'* mnl onlij itKsiyit a KVf/iv.irut iitunejui- adjournmenl, w/ini I'dr.'i JJoiikc irmi/d (uljoiiru ut'itx mrii acronl, and for ir.nj jii'iidil, howivri' vxlniihd, vfu'rh li'ii' nrfit.iioii. villi/ yi'ijiiiri'. Tlu'|ilt'H«iiri'(>f lie Ui'owit WHH, liut, iti(;'nilli'rtniiity of pro- ) CounciJ, as it in Montreal, St. Hyacintho, md elsewhere. ^0 cruelty, of private affairs, noe npon tho ody of gentle- ally lon;tr aijd ely discussed every of the icil of which 'he American on of the un- king clauses : hout t!ie consent «^^• but wo tion that tlie ition of the itrary, the.se lianietrically quoted from of our day 8& show that tlie prosonl reconui/od usag-e in tho two countries i.s essentially diHeront in tho matter of adjournments of the [Houses— tho .United yiat(!s apparently havin^- retained I from their colonial times a practice in this particular then in voi^ue imd derived from England, which has since hci'ii utterly discarded by tho mother country. Indeed, for the murposos of ])aeking up his untenable position in the con- iiectjon, the Opposition pami)hleteer mit>ht with eijunl point have quoted and applied to the case in hand llio iisage as to adjournmentH in the French llepublic or amonj;' the Zulus, as to have called into evidence the American 1 practice. The Opposition pamphlet goes on to assert that this [denial of the right to colonial assemblies to adjourn them- I selves jjeeww to bo in accordance with constitutional juris- prudence and quotes, lo, from " Chitty on Prerogative," p. , ?17, in support of its pretension. In this instance, we have j again to notice a wicki^d and deliberate mutilation of the text, with the intention of cunningly and fraudulently adapting it to the case of tho adversaries of tho .Toly Government, and surprising the good faith of the public. Jin order that tho reader may bo bettor able to detect the [fraud and appreciate its signilicance, we give below side by [side the quotation as it appears in the Opposition pamphlet [and, as it appears in the original : {Opposition pamphlet.) " Tho constitutions of tlie Engli.sli Parlirvmcnt and tho coloniiil asscm- lilicsucccflsarilydifibr: the taller cannot fcen adjourn ihemselres ; tWn* ia done ^ l»j' tlie Governor, wlio n^ rcpro^enta- I live of thc! Kin,^ is ti»c (irst brimcli of jthis .subordinate liO^ri-slaturc." {Original.) " Tho constitutions of tlio En^lif^h Pnriiuniont and tho colonial assemlilics ncces.'!arily differ : tho latter cannot even IN GENERAL adjourn them- selves ; tliifl is done hy tho Governor wiio as representative of the Kin.q;, !■< (he first branch of this eubordinnle fjegislatnre. • • • L^cal circiuins- tances and tho necessity of the case must also create several difrerenee.-i between Parliament anliow8 liow much they dread a general election, and how fearful they are of the consequences of an appeal to the people that they are now trying to trample s d J( o: k w fr , ... P ■ m r m f > f i§tiafi m'W^ " . Kat the rvativft ;r8 ftivi wholff ion. It are of trample before tlio whirlwind of popular cianior, wliicli a iscneral floeUun woulil pre ul an election contest i.s tlio very thini' wiiich ihcy would avoid as 45 s liuderfoot, and to crusri out of existence foiever. Thov arroj;atc to thi'tu eelvcfl haughty and defiant airs in private, but they fear tlie clamor of an out- raged public opinion and they dare not face an ofTeiuled but mighty jieople who would sweep them from the political arena with one univereal sweep. Not all the painphletM in tiio world could nave thrm. They would perish before the —'•■-'••"-' -^ ' — ' i:-> 1 -i.:.: _ ii yoke, and pestijenco and a plague." It may be briefly stated that the Oppo.^itioii pamphlet was prepared at a time when a dissolution of the Legislti- ture, before the date of the reassembling on the 28th October, was deemed imminent. Hence the strenuous efforts of its author to prove the unconstitutionality of such a step durinf^ the adjournment (no doubt lor the very for- cible reasons set forth in the above extract from the Chronicle.) • . Speaking of the Opposition to Mr. Pitt's first administra- tion, Mr. Todd (p. 65) uses language which may be equally well applied to the case of the Quebec Opposition, their objects, and their dread of an appeal to the people. This language is as follows : "Too much exasperated to acL wilh caution, the Opposition ruined their cause by faotiouij extravagance and precipitancy. They were re- solved to take the King^a Cabinet by storm, and without pause or parley Htruck incesBantly at the door, 'iheir dread of a dissoluiion, tohichthcij 80 loudly condemned, showed little confidence in public support. Instead of making common cause with the people, thcij lowered their contention to a party struggled Yet, though Todd styles this Opposition " indefatigable, unscrupulous, and even factiou-s," ho states that ''ihej/ shrank from refusing the Supplies.'^ And remember that he speaks of the Opposition in the Commons and not in tho Lords. Instead of making common cause with tho people and defending its rights against the Legislative Council, the Quebec Opposition, like tho Opposition to Mr. Pitt, have lowered their contention to a party struggle. Hence tho well justified refusal of Mr.' Joly to coalesce with any such enemies to popular rights. Hatsell is cited to e.r4ablish the absence of any precedents for dissolution during adjournment ; but that eminent writer very carefully adds thai no argument can be drawn from thence^ against such a dissolution. i.V:. m ■MHP ■m ■H 46 Novertlieless, it is admitted that in pushing the lloyal prerogative to its extreme, *' there is no doubt it loould have its effect ; but it requires at least spme extraordinary circum- stance to justify it." We think it can hardly be denied that the unprecedented act of the Council and its disturbing eil'ects upon the affairs of the Province constitute sufficiently extraordinary circum- stances to justify even more extreme measures than a disso- lution, if such were possible ; that a dissolution would have its effect ; and that the Lieutenant-Governor would incur no disgrace in giving effect to the A'oico of jiopular opinion, even had he to follow the precedent established, by the mild-mannered and easy-going Richard Cromwell, whose character offered so marlced a contrast to that of his stern and revolutionary father, the Protector. Nevertheless it is well to remember that it is to a Revolution that we owe the l)urification, and, in a great measure, the present condition of the British constitution. As to the statement that a dissolution, under present circumstances, would completely undo the work of the session, if the sanctioning of the bills on the 11th Septem- ber be illegal, it may be allowed to go for what it is worth. It is quite gratuitous; while we have only to look for the source of its inspiration in the equally gratuitous recom- mendation of the Opposition pamphleteer that such a result should not be risked, and the country swamped with law suits. In other words, his meaning is that nothing will be wrong, but everything be right, if the Lieut.-Governor only refuses the advice of his responsible Ministers, should they deem it necessary to dissolve the Legislature. This is certainly not the doctrine laid down in the Letellier case ; and he cannot blame us if wo hold his friends to the latter strictly at this juncture. But he is not without alleging further reasons of a similar stamp to warrant the refusal at any time of a disso- lution, if necessary, to the Joly Government. He insinu- ates that they have not exhausted all means to re-establish the desired harm&ny between the two branches of the Le- gislature. To, put his meaning in plain English, the Joly Government, tlien and there supported by a majority of the people's representatives, should either, by their resig- 47 put mi cud to tlio doadS mi''^ ''"'^'""tional rae™ "(i ' m. immenso majority to Afr ?„1 ^™'"'?' "Jefitious, m' ,' t^ .-isti„ti'j;;s, r ttt^r'" »J^o;v'S do so, seems: thai it is f old theri i^ " ""^'"""r advised to not persist lil™ ti.e LewXth / n "" 'i'"^™ why it shoaid • 'he general elections did .it n^T""' "*■ ^''o'"™, whom STonnd after renentorl „„ , ""'''" »i"l who heU .i^^^ ;vhat„ay&i,,i;Pb^f,»^d npp I ,„ peopI^Vow^htl: ' to the wishes of the pe"nro „L^'«'" "^ •=^''=='1 iudifTeren 'e aslave to the Crovvli ao^'tt'eTR*- ' ^'""»''" '» the level o" 48 nil that the Lflgisktivo Council of Victoria is a body elected bif the people nad that thero is no analogy whatever betwcoii it(s action and that of an irrosponsiblo ChambiT like tho Quebec Lt'gislativc Council. With rcjrard to tho right of tho opinion of tho Commons lo prevail, Ua^t.'liol says at page 227 : " TIh' itlliiiiiilc aulliorily in llic iMij^lifli ci-UHtitiitlun in n Ufwhi rhrful lluune of (oiniuan!'. No iiiiiltcr wlutlicr tlio <|ii<>liuii ujmhi wliicli it. ilt'cidcK !«• uiliiiiiiiHtniti\ f or It';ii-hitivi' ; iio tiuiltor wliitlicr it coucorim liij^h iimttoin iif llu' crtHi'iiliiil foil jit it lit ion or fiiiall maltci'.^ cif iltiiiy dctiiil j no innltiT wlx'tlicr il Ix'ft (iiicf-lion ul' iiiiikinjt u war or contiiiniiir; II war; no matter wlictlicr it, 1m.' iin|>ti.sini; a tax on llio i.^siiin;^ of jjiipor ciirriMicy ; no matter wlicthor it lien .liU'Htioii n'iatiiij: to Ji)iii;i, Irclaiidor I.u(k1oii— A NKW JIOl'HK UF COM- MONS CAN DlCSl'O'l'lCALLy AN'D FJN-A1,I.Y UHSOLYIi. Tlie HoU'O of Coimiu'M'' inav. ii' >vih ('.iiuiiiiuil, ii-Hi'iit in niiiinv niiitlrri to llu' it'vifion oi'ilu' IloiiHi' of .liurd.-', and r\ilimit in mattiTn about \vlii*:!i ii (larcs littl"' to tin- t'u-'ju'n.^ivi* \clj of till' Iloiitf of I^ords ; Iml, ulion t-mv of llic i)oi)u!ar a^n'iit, it can nilr oi it likc.f ami. dtvidf u.i it /ihes, and it can take llip lii'ft Kociiritv lliat if (l(>t"< nut dccid" in vain. If can rnHiirc tliat il.s iU- crpcH Hhall ».c i'xcoutcd FOR IT AND IT ALONIO Al'l'OINTS TJIK EXECUTIVE. But tho cloven loot of the conspiracy is fully revealed in the next paragraph of the Dansereau brochure, and therein will be found their entire caso and the airn of their aspi- rations and machinations. As a simple means of restoring harmony, the Lieutenant-Governor i.s boldly advised lo dispense vnlk his responsible ministers and, BY virtue of THE iiiuiiT HE POSSESSEja, to put himself in consUtulioni' relationship u'ilh those who have refused the Supplies wh ho will bo assured by the conspirators of the Cour that the Houses can be put in accord, if they be allowed to lurnish him with other advisers. Of course, this has been their game from the outset ; but it is wonderful that their apologist should have thought it necessary to waste so much ink and time before laying down a proposition so simple. It is not surprising, however, that as a true Tory, making light of the popular will, he should be found quoting and insisting as a justificatory precedent for the Lieutenant Governor, upon the outrage known as the Double Shuffle of 1858, when Sir Edmund Head refused a dissolution to the Brown-Dorion Ministry and forced its retirement within twenty-four hours after accepting office. We are accordingly treated to an analysis of Governor Head's >mmimmMpwmmw.^:} 40 J'eaaoiis for refu*- 2 ■"" "/ too C,ott-„. "- ^Zlt^pri^^-^i- \ ^«., even .„„ This reason »r"l7 ""' ''"''^""y "'""'"" «'"--'^''- affairs of ihl ^^^^ as tho /♦fk "l . ' -^'"^^^ a»e either that the advice that he obtains from it is unacceptable to him ; or that he can obtain no definite and decided advice, or that the two portions of his Council are discordant. In other word.-< either there is a difference of opinion between the Crown and the House of Commons on the subject of eon?*; ministry ; or the different parts in lite Commons are so equally divided that buainess i.^ obstructed, or tub two IIODSIS CANNOT OX SUMK MA.T£RIAI, QUESTION COUG TO AN ACnGKHRNT." the '■r-'f^W-' 41 "•ent, Vhkh IST^' '•^J^ct any bilfe '"^^ ''««<'^ thSoiJ a^lff- ''*' '^'^ tl.eiv "•ent, which KT'^ '•^J^ct any b J « ,1 '"^^ •'««<'^ theroia a^lff- ''** «'' ^hei, "fits renrofiPnf f!"^ *'»« extent to vul f ^ '^'"""stration. tlipV/ "'® House of J "' P- i36, says : ^d again, at p. 249 • ""'• i'eeponsibilify of ^^^. p. 58. says: ' owing to DI88BJrsiOK8 BE- 52 And again, at p^ 6u Another ground of dissolving Parliament has been the existence of dia* Eutes between the Lords and Commons and of this one of two instances may e briefly referred to. Charles II prorogued liis third Parliantent " because to liis grief he saw there were sucli ditt'erences between the two Houses that lie is very afraid vsar ul-«ffect8 will comb or it," and during tlie period of pro- rogation, the Parliament was dissolved. And again, at p. 60 : On another occasion of a dispute between tlie two House.^, Parliament was dissolved in 1801. And again, at p. 61 : Another dissolution of Parliament in 1705 was occasioned by a dispute l>etween the two Houses with respect to the important case known as that of the " Aylesbury Men." Bagehot, at page 15, says : "Though appointed by one Parliament, it can appeal if it chn<^ " to the next. Theorotioally, indeed, the power to dissolve Parliament is entrust the Sovereign only; and there are vestiges of doubt whether in all cases n Sovi ign is bound to dtswlre Parliament, when a Cabinet asks him to do so. BUT NEQLBCTINa SUCH SMALL AND DUBIOUS EXCEPTIONS, thb Oabixit which was choscn bv onh Hnaaic op Commons has an appeal to the next House of Commoks. The chief Committee of the Legislature has the power of dissolving the predominantpartof thi>t LoKislaturo— THAT which at a crisis is the Supreme Leoislaturk. The English system, therofora, ia not an absorption of the executive power ; it is a fusion of the two. Either THE Cabinet LEQiSLATEs AND acts, us it CAM dissolve.. It is a crea- ture, but it has the power of destroying its creators. In regard to the right of a Government to recomihend a dissolution and the duty of the Head of the Executive to accept their advice, Hearn thus lays down the British rule at page 117 : — "The proper conduct of Parliamentary Government implies that the King shall not retain any servants whom Parliament advises him to dismiss ; and that ho ehall, while he retains them, give to his recognized servants his full Confidence AND BE EXCLUSIVELY GUIDED BY THEIR ADVICE." May, edition of 1873, page 53li, observes : "The necessity of refusing the Royal assent is removed by the etrict observanes of THE COXSTITUTIOXAL PRINCIPLE THAT THE CKOWN HAS NO WILL BUT THAT OF ITS MINISTERS." The greater necessity of a dissolution being granted in this country when the Houses differ, will be better demon- strated and understood by the absence from our system of a means of bringing the Lords to reason, which is provided by the British system. Hearn, p. 168, says : "There is, however, another method by which it is said that a refractory Hbufo of Lords may bo brought to reason. When (hat Home periists in ita opposition t« "^w^Ww ^^d May's Con«r. .- "''"^'^'''''^«P-i.^-''''"''-''-''«oJ =™SiS££;vsSSr:Ss;...., Hewn, p. ISO. "'°''"'""- tlo Oonstitution is The On„„„-,- °' ''° "■■""'""»"*• '''; >^'»>' of the subject i, , ' f '""^ ""' ^-*n Mr •■•'onffside of r„ 1 '^"" "'•""= «'«." \nen t ■"°' ''' 8 .')8 THE LKTELLIER CA^E. The following despatch from the Colonial Secrolaiy to the Marquis of Lome, relates to the ease of the Hon. Lnc Letollier de St. Just, the Lieutenant-Governor of Quebec : — '• Downing-street, July 3, 18T9. " My Lord, — Her Majesty's G-overnment have given their attentive consideration to* your request for their in- structions with reference to the recommendation made by your Ministers that Mr. Letellier, the Lieutenant-Governor of Quebec, should be removed from his office. It will not have escaped your observation, in making this request, that the constitutional question to which it relates is one affecting the internal aftairs of the Dominion, and belongs to a class oi subjects with which the Government and Parliament of Canada are fully competent to deal. I notice with satisfaction that, owing to the ability and patience with which the new Constitution has been made by the Canadian people to fulfil the objects with which it was framed, it has very rarely been found necessary to resort to the Imperial authority for assistance in any of those com- plications which might have been expected to arise during the first years of the Dominion ; and I need not point out to you that such references should only be made in circum- stances of a very exceptional nature. I readily admit, however, that the principles involved in the particular case now before me are of more than ordinary importance. The true effect and intent of those sections of the British North America Act, 18G7, which apply to it, have been much dis- cussed, and as this is the first case which has occurred un- der those sections, there is no precedent for your guidance. For this reason, though regretting that any cause should have arisen for the reference now made to them, Her Majesty's Government approve the course which you have taken on the responsibility and with the consent of your Ministers, and I will now proceed to convey to you the views which they have formed on the question submitted for their consideration. The several circumstances affecting the particular case of Mr. Letellier have been fully stated in Sir J. A. Macdonald's memorandum of April 14, in I) SI in th iiv mo in] an CI pre( ac ii( as t( an a Gov and J-iieu Am posit aiatte no do is. e; s tod feej, this rij course parties duties under the Gol point wheth ei T ' ^«pppfWW«'('"J|'i'"'!''*UK''.,,:f^' 6$ »ormS;f °;«';«»^^^^ loltor or Am .s j i^eteiiier. jf :rV='7 "3 required on H,„ . ""^ ex- o»8htnotto hi "^'"^^ whether M/ r^i ,|^^ ^^ajesty's «ffaiast his remo^aT'^^'^l^^^^^ ^oaso„s^ t^ '^'^^^ or verv oki„ ^^i"Ovai wonhl j "** i" iavonr of and le "ot emnmV TT °^ ^Ir. LetoJlip •'« « """"-'^^^s from precedent which vln'* '^ '' '«erejy ,Vv?ew o^Jr^-^^^^^^^ J «^iion in this i'lstlno '°"'i^^^ ^4 be esirujiii'^^'^iP^'^^^t «« to the ine.W "A^; ""? ^^^ doJbts whLh . '^ ^^ y^"'' «» authoritative Sxnr?''^^'^'^*^' «^at v^u hav^^ ?*"/^^'» ^-orernmentonth?tT^'^^*^*^opinioLfw ^^^^ ^or ?nd functions of hp ^p'^'^^* ^^^^tion of the r.f'' ^.^J^'^y'^ f^^outenant-Goreinor S'^^^^^^^-G^enera] n S- "''^^^^*^'^-^ position of the T ,• . ® ^a^n PrincinJe, Si ^'*^.^^ ^orth Parties^^^•ef ?f *^'^ ^"^P^rtiality tow i ^^ «^«"^d, of duties of hL offi."'"'"*^''^^ *« the prLepT. Jvt "^'^^ P^^^^ ca under the fqth'i- ^"'^ ^or any^So/r^^''^^^^^^ «^the the GorL„ ' V^^^^^'i of the Act d v? .{"^ "^^^ t^ke he is PointXi?h wS'r^'^^- This brinJs^f ^ responsible to' -^^theri-!; '^71^'^::^^^^^^^^ In ^^^ "^» ^^hethor the conduct ofT'^f^^^' GO teiiont-Govornor merits removal from office, it would bo right and sullicieiit lor tho Governor-General, ns in any ordinary matter of administration, simply to follow tho advice of his Miiiislers, or whether ho is placed by the special jn'ovisions of the statute nnd(^r an obligation to act upon his own individual judi>meut. "With refcnmce to this question it has been noticed that while under section .')8 of the Act the appointment of a Lieutenant-Governor is to be made 'by the Governor-General in Council by instru- ment under the Great Seal of Canada,' section 69 provides that 'a Lieutenant-Governor shall hold ollice during the ]>leasure of the Governor-General ;' and much stress has been laid upon the supposed intention of the Legislature in thus varying tho language of th(^so nections. But it must bo remembered that other powers vested in a similar way by tho statute in the Governor-General were clearly intend- ed to be, and in practice are, ex(>rcised by him ])y and with the advice of his Ministers ; and thouuh the position of a (rovernor-G-eneral would entitle his views on such a sub- ject as that, now under consideration to peculiar weight.^ yet Her Majesty's GovernuKMit do not Jind anything in tho circumstances which woiild justify him in departing in this instance from the general ruh\ and declining to follow tlio decided and sustained opinion of his Mi,nistcrs, who are responsible for the peace and good goA'ernment of the whole Dominion to the Parliament to which, according to the 50th section of the statute, tho cause assigned for the removal of a Lieutenant-Governor must be communicated. Her Majesty's Government therefore can only desire you to n^- quest your Ministers again to consider the action to bj taken in the case of Mr. Letellier. It will be proper that you should, in the first instance, invite them to inform you whether their views, as expressed in Sir J. A. Macdonald's memorandum, are in any way modified after perusal of this despatch, and after examination of tho circumstances now existing, which, since the date of that memorandum, may have so materially changed as to make it in their opinion no longer necessary for the advantage, good government, or contentment of the province that so serious a step should be taken as the removal of a Lieutenant-Governor from office. It will, I am confident, be clearly borne in mind that it was the spirit and intention of the British North America Act, 1867, that the tenure of the hinh office (■ '^TT-^.'FfS' 01 V {■^ of Lieutonnnt-Governor hHouM, as a rule, endnro for the term of years specially meiitiouod, and that not only should tho [)OWtn' of removal uov(5r be exercised except for grave cause, but that the fact that th(5 political opinions of a Lieutenant-Oovernor had not been, during his former career in accordance with thos(^ held by any Dominion Ministry who might happen to succeed to power during his term of oIRce, would attbrd no reason for its exercise. Thii political antecedents and present position of nearly all the Lieute- nant-Governors now holding officc^provi! that the correct- ness of this view has been hitherto recognized in practice, and I cannot doubt that your advisers, from the opinions they have expressed, would be equally ready with the late Government to appreciate the obj^-ctions to any action which might tend to weaken its influv^nce in the future. I have directed your attention particularly to this point, because it appears to me to be important that, in considering a case which may be referred to hereafter as a precedent, the true constitutional po.sition of a Lieutenant-Goveruor should be defined The whole subject may, I am satisfied, now be once more reviewed with advantage, and I cannot but think that the interval which has elapsed (and which has from various causes been unavoidable) may have been useful is affording means for a thorough comprehension of a very complicated question, and in allowing time for the strong feelings on both sides, which I regret to observe have been often too bitterly expressed, to subside. " I have, &c., " M. E. HICKS-BEACH. The Right HoA. the Marquis of Lorne." ../. f • • • « • t * • « * I • • t I • • > »