v^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. ^', i^. V <». . A >^ W W w Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WSST MAiH STSSET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^ &. iV c\ \ «b 6^ %^ '<^ *rinciple, human and divine, you arc free to transfer that trust into other hands, for the special purpose to which the lands were devoted in 1791 -.—tiU then, I have no hesitation in declaring, that the moment you sanction, as the parent state, the sacrilegious bill sent over by Mr. P. Thomson, the price of your j^o/<7i(^/ expedience is^this— Malachi iii. a. « Ye are cursed with a cui-se, for ye have robbed mk— evi.n this whole nation." And next to the hcinousncss of such a i-obbery is the ' and most useful set of men— the Clerical Body— in com^ dirty objects of political party, year after year, to defen trusted to them under the most solemn sanctions, thvoi. odium, as though they were contending for seliish interests. But yo-a may do your worst, if you choose to nni the hazard— it is not the iirst time that Zion has been beleaguered by her enemies, and she knows who hath said — " Though ye have lien among the pots yet shall ye be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her feathers with \ i-llow gold," for « the Lord hath said, I will bring again from Bashan, I will bring my people again from the depths of the sea." W. J. 1). WADDILOVE,. Agent fur the late P>ishop oi Quebec's Canadian TravellMig Missions among the Destitute. valuable ^br the "11- , of 1 w^m CHURCH ROBBERY IN CANADA. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NliWCASTLE JOURNAL.— No 1. Beacon CiiJinge, Feb. 15, 1840. "Dear Sir, — As T see by the last American Pa{)ers that tlie Govtrnor-Gencral, Poulett Tl . mson, is niai^injr short work with the C'uirch in Upper Canada, anil that Her ]Ntajesty''s Solicitor- General has intronuced a Bill, by his directions, into the House n Assembly, (which has j)assed it,) to settle the question of t .e Church Reserves, without reference either to justice or propriety- will you allow me a brief space in your paper, first, to shew the Clergy and friends of the Churcht the nature of the Bill, and then to give a short specimen from a parliamentary document, (one of those useful publications of which we have I cely heard so much,) to shew them, also, the nature of that Voluntary System which is to succeed to the Church of our Fathers. First — The Bill is to provide for the Sale of all the Church Reserves, in the hands of five (Locusts) Government Commissioners. Then, one-half of the produce is to be divided between the Churches of England (to whom, according to the legal opinion of Mr. Justice Patteson, in 1824, the whole belongs) ; our Sister, the Church of Scotland ; and the Secession Synod of that Church. The other half is to be divided among the two dozen various sects or separatists from the Vatican to the rational Christian Owen's disciples — for tiic only qualification necessary is assuming fhe name Cliristian ; easily done when any thing can be got by it. This, however, bad as it is, is not the worst feature, when we consider th.at the great mass of our emigrants are of the poorest class; for the distribution amongst these ^'prious and undefinable claimants is to be apportioned in direct opposition to the Scriptural principle, by which the Religion of Christ has hitherto been dis- tinguished — "To the poor the Gospel is preaciicd." The new reading is — To the rich a gos))el is to be preached, — for the division of spoil is to be distributed in ])roportion — 7iot to the need of the people, but to the (inioiitit of subscriptions each annually raises in support of iheir form of religious worship — tluis reversing .Jehovah's declaration, " The poor shall be filled with bread, but the rich sent empty away." Apart from any other question, surely nothing can be more iniquitous than thus to rob the poor who are unable to subscribe, to provide fanciful systems for those whose subscriptions shew they could provide for themselves, if they would. >' I'A ^ 6 I am next to give a specimen of the Voluntary System proposed by these legislators ; and I take it without remark from the Report of Lord Gosford, Sir Geo. Gipps, and Sir Charles Grey. I must add, however, tliat in my own mind, I am iiot disposed to implicate the last in any such absurd, wild, and irreligious proposition. — But to the extract. Appendix to 1st Report of Canada Commissioners, No. 12. Dec. 17th, 1835. Hon. G. Moffat and Hon. P. M'Gill examined. After some leading questions relative to the Reserves, the drift and bearing of which are sufficiently appaivnt, comes the following : " Suppose the province divided into districts, in each of Avliich tliere should be a building for worship, and a Minister's house, and a small glebe, and a very moderate stipend annexed, tlie whcde being property of the state ; and that on the death of the Incumbent, three-fifths of the inlialiitants should be allowed to petition for the appointment of a minister for life from any one of the four .sects" (these being stated in the former question, to be Churcli of England, Roman Catholics, Church of Scotland, and Wesleyans,) "and that it should be lawful for the govenior, on such petition, to api)oint accordingly ; what would bo your opinion of such a plan 2" ! ! ! " I am of opinion that such a plan would be inexpedient, for the remaining two-fifths would have great reason to complain. With the exception of Lower Canada, where Roman Catholics prevail, I do not think that in any district, parish, or township, three-fifths would l)e found to concur." — Now mark ! " If three-fifths did not concur, would it not he nn eastj mode of delivering the Government (Christian! ! !) from the burden of supporting an established clergy \ Both Gentlemen evidently were aghast at such a proposition, a. d Mr. M'Gill answered — " T have not directed my thoughts particularly to this, and I did not come prepared for such an examination." The Representatives of the British Government, however, seem not to have been taken aback by this reproof, for the examiner proceeds — " When you say the other two-fifths would have reason to complain, do you bear in mind the circumstance that, they would see at the same time, that in those districts were persons of their persuasion formed a majority, (be they Turk or Heathen the rule applies,) their ministers wove supported out of the funds of the public ?" " I think that in very few places three-fifths would concur ; but even if they did, I do not think the other two would be satisfied." No remark is necessary upon such a heinous anti-christian proposition from British Statesmen, further than to ask, how any clergy can teach their people to reverence a Government which thus sets the rights of the Almighty at defiance to save a penny .^ I remain, your's truly, W J. D. WADDILOVE. V System proposed k from tlie Report les Grey. I must iposed to implicate iisi proposition. — issioners, No. 12. M'Gill examined. Reserves, tlie drift nes the following : j{ wliicli tliere should nail glebe, and a very lie state ; and that on should be allowed to one of the four .sects" I of Fiiigland, Roman at it should be lawful ; what would bo your ent, for the remaining le exeeption of Lower : that in any district, ." — Now mark ! .vy mode of delivering porting an established Lich a proposition, ^ted my thoughts ared for such an ?nt, however, seem for the examiner eason to complain, do t the same time, that a majority, (be they I supported out of the cs three-fifths would would be satisfied." ous anti-christian 1 to ask, how any nment which thus ? a penny ? ^ADDILOVE. CANADIAN CLERGY RESERVES. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEWCASTLE JOURNAL.— No. 2. Dear Sir,— As you have kindly inserted in your Journal to- day my Letter, regarding the Plunder of the Canadian Church, and as I referred, in that letter, to a high legal opinion, given very early in the unhappy conflict which has led to this system of robbery —will you dome tfieftivour, (for the sake of your readers, equally shocked as myself,) to insert the document to which I have alluded. I believe the Kirk of Scotland has few more attached friends than niyself, and grieved have I long been to see the Papist, the Infidel, and the Nothingarian, successfully sapping the foundations of Zion, under the shadow of her venerated name. I am deeply con- vinced that while the two Churches, (agreeing in all that is impm-tant, and only differing in points which must pass away,) carry on the work of their common master, with united hearts — " The gates of hell shall never prevail against either ;" but we have it frnn the same high authority, that "a house divided against itself i.s a house founded on sand ; and how much more certain must be the issue when the division is caused by unjust aggression. The windows of Heaven are wide enough for all."" — Malac. iii. 6-12. Your^s truly, J. W. D. W. Beacon Grange, Feb. 22, 1840. Fiat .lustitia, mat Cooluin. Queries in case, as to the Reserved Lands allotted for the support of a Protestant Clergy in the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada. Whether the Provisions of the Act 31 Geo. III. cap. 31. (1791 -2) i-egulating the allotment for the support and maintenance of " a Protestant Clergy within the same," are, or are not, in your judgment, applicable only to the Clergy of the Church of England .? And in the former case, whether the Governors of the Pro- vinces, acting under Her Majesty's authority, could make any appropriation to the Ministers of other Churches, without directly contravening the Act ? OPINION OF MR. PATTESON. I have delayed answering the case a few days, only because it appeared to me so clear, that I was afraid I had not seen the diffi- culty, if there be any. " I am of opinion that the provisions of 31 Geo. III. are applicable only to the Clergy of the Church of England. Whatever might have been the original meaning of the expression ' a Protestant Clergy,' in the 14 Geo. III., it appears to me that the subsequent Instructions and IVlessage of His Majesty, recited in 31 Geo. 111., together with the Provisions of that Act, (and especially that which speaks of Institution and of the Spiritual Jurisdiction of the Bishop), plainly point out that the expression is to be understood as referring to the Clergy of the Church of England only. ' A Vrotestnnt Cleryy,' evidently means one single and entire body of persons ; now the Clergy of the Church of England, 8 and those of the Kirk of Scotland, can never fonn one body. If, therefore, tlie Clergy of the Church of Scotland bo let in, there is no reason why any other Denomination of Dissenters should not l)e admitted, and the words, ^ a I'rotcfiturit Clergy,' mnst then be taken to mean I'rotcstant Ministers or Tencliers, which appears to rae to be absurd. Tlie expression was used in contradistinction to the Romish Clergy, and although I am not iirepared to say that an Establisliment similar to the Kirk of Scotland, might not have satisfied the words of 14 Geo. III., yet I am quite convinced, that it would not have satisfied those of the 31 Geo. III. Being of opinion, therefore, that the Acts contemplate one single body of Protestant Clergy, I liave no doul)t that the Clergy of the Church of England are that body— and tlie erecting the Provinces into a Bishopric, and every thing done since, plainly shows that such is tlie riglit interi)retation. I am also of opinion, that tiie Govemors of tlie Provinces, acting under His Ma- jesty's orders, caniKjt legally make any approi)iiatioii to the Ministers of other Clmrches. I think that nothing sliort of an Act of the Legislature, coiitirined in England can authorize them to do so. The Charter"' of April, 181!), would create a difficulty in the passing any such Act, and without a new Act, that Charter alone would almost decide the question. " Temple, Mny 20th, um." (Signed) "JOHN PATTESON." ■••" Mr. Justice Patteson here alludes to the Charter instituting the Cori^ora- tion for the Management of the Clergy Reserves. N.B. The opinion of the Learned Judge as to tlie sense of the Legislature, in .31 Geo. III. is confirmed by the fact — that in the same session (17m) in which this Act passed, " Su- Gilbert Elliott endeavoured to obtain an exemption from the operation of the Test Act, in favour of the Membei-s of the Scottish Church, which was negatived by a majority of 87." — Aim. Reg. l7i)l,Page 154. Moreover, tlie few itinerant preachers calling themselves of "the Kirk of Scotland," were not reco<>nize{l by tliat Church till within a very few years; nor were ; 11 ^visions for some of the ig- tlmt in order to give t delay, for the purposJ ution of Ilis Majesty's! of tlie Church oil ?es 88, 39, and 40. Libniit to the Spiri- 3AD states, |). 280,1 Hon! ! ! he recom-.l ^ tlie Churches of Methodists;" — the] I the Ecclesiastical I i and canons ' del ur conscientiously reed and practices ects Her Majesty's ssembly of iJpper for the sale of the ice of the sale sliall n\ the Church of 1 ; that the other onsof relio;ionists, jved in opinion or IN CANADA. RNAL.— No. 3. shewn the havoc ft unchecked) are II Canada, and in- 3 mercantile corn- own class alno, at an Priesthood, an how these voci- and are, conduct- 'stant principles,' I icnow I have no read Hudibras in n than 1 can pos- it hcntic evidence, avincr others to draw their own inferences as to tha iniquity of uch proceedino's — rendered still more glaringly iniquitous by the ontrast it forms with their conduct towards a class who hold, in lie language of the Litany of Edward VI. " the detestable errors )f the Pope of Rome."" " No one can question the authenticity of one of those large )lue folios, which seem to have turned the island mad of late ; , therefore, have recourse to the Appendix, No. 10, First Report f the Triumvirate Commissioners; first, stating a singular speci- men of legislative justice — and what makes the fact still more sin- Igular, is, that the same page (12 of Report) which relates the circumstance, contains a recommendation " that the Koyal Institu- tion should be left to be assisted by the assembly, which ive believe has always shewn itself liberal in encouracjijig the promotion of Education!! The fact is this; the Rev. Mr. Burrage was sent out by government as master of the school, at Quebec. He was guaranteed a salary of c£*200 per annum, paid out of the Jesuits' estates. Lord Ripon gave up these estates, in his liberality, without conditioning for the fulfilment of the pledges by which they were burdened. What follows ? These exemplary liberals of the As- sembly, (if we are to believe the Commissioners), bring in a bill, in 1833, (as soon as the quarry was safe within their grasp), to reduce the salaries of the Protestant schoolmasters of Quebec and Montreal, from =£'200 per annum to i?100 ! and at the same time required them to teach 20 additional free scholars, thus liberally entailing upon them the expense of additional assistants at the very moment when their remuneration was diminished one half ! !! Yet, in the tail of such a statement, the perpetrators of this act of cruel injustice and breach of faith, are to be coynplimented upon their extreme liberality in gratits for education, by British Commission- ers ! ! but I forget myself : these were Protestant school-masters — members of the National Church : — why National ? That all might be entitled to *' a share in her spoil." But to Appendix, No. 10, p. 35, APPLICATION FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE ROYAL INSTITUTION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF LEARNING IN THE PROVINCE OF LOWEJl CANADA. To His Majesty's Commissioners of Enquiry, &c. &c. — The undersigned, having been authorized by a resohition of the Corporation of, &c. " to bring under the consideration of His Majesty's Commissioners tlie necessity, before tlie Crown lands or revenues thereof are surrendered to the provincial legislature, of reserving to the Crown the power of making endowments out of those lands or revenues, for the support of the Grammar Schools of Royal foimdation, hereto- fore established in this province, and in aid of the private endowments of M'Gill College, at Montreal, and for the future extension of that establishment, or the foundation of a univereity, or other sufficient collegiate institutions in the pro- vince, in conformity to the Royal promise, recited in the preamble of the School Act of 1801," respectfully submits to His Majesty's Commissioners a statement of the grounds on which the Board of the Royal Institution solicits the atten- tion of the Commissioners to this subject. The claim for a Royal endowment 12 out of the Crown Lamls, for institutions of oiliication in this province, may b, stated as resting, 1st, on the pledge, contained in a coniTnunication of tlie Roya intention, to this effect, made by tlie Governor of the iirovince to the Provincia Legislature, and recited in the prcaml)le of the above named Provincial Statut of 1801 ; 2nd, on the measures which were taken shortly afterwards bv th Provincial Government, in pui-suance of tliat promise ; — 3rd, on the fulfihneii of a like pledgt, given nearly at the same time, for the benefit of the inhabitant of Upper Canada, who accordingly now enjoy the advantage of such an endow, ment ; — ith, on the fact that all the other North American Colonies have had such endowments granted by the Crown ;— 5th, on the establishment of th ' Royal Grammar Schools at Quebec and Montreal, with a provision for th salaries of the Masters, out of the revenues of the Jesuits' estates ; — (Jth, oni the incorporation of M'Gill College, under a Charter from the Crown, with 'the' declared intention, on the part of His Majesty's Government, at one period (before Popery gained the ascendant,) to assign the revenues of the Jesuits' estates in aid of the private foundation of that institution ; and, lastly, on the! otal absence of any other means or resource, by which the inhabitants of this Province, speaking the English language, can hope to see an Insti- tution established, to which they could send their children for instruction in the higher branches of education. The promise of an endowment in land, conveyed by the Message referred to in the Act of 1801, and the measures adopted by His Majesty's Government, in consequence tliereof, were stated by the Royal Institution in a Memorial to the Earl of Dalhousie in 182G and as a Member of the Board has, by their request, placed l)cf'ure His Majesty's Commissioners a copy of that Re])resentation, it is nimeccssary for the under- signed again to state the terms of that pledge, or the nature of those measures. It may, however, l)e proper to add, that the act of 1801 was passed for the establishment and regulation of free lands, and other institutions of Royal foun- dation, of a more comprehensive nature ; and that it is under this act that the Corporation of the Royal Institution has been established, a,nd has received the devise and bequest under the will of the late Mr. M'Gill, under which M'Gill College has been chartered by the Crown. Under this Act many elementary schools were estaiilished and provided for out of the puljlic revenues ; but no measures were taken for creating the Corporation contemplated J)y the Act ; or for establishing Schools for the higher branches of education, till 1815-16' when His Majesty's government ordered that the Royal Institution sliould be' organized, (with a view in particular to take advantage of the bequest of Mr. M'Gill, who died in 181.3), and at the same time directed that the funds of the Jesuits' estates (given up unconditionally by Lord Ripon ten years after I) should be api)lie(l to the erection of a college under that bequest ; and in tlie year 181(5, masters were engaged, and sent out from Enyland, wlio were to liave charge of Royal Grammar Schools, tlien directed to be established at Quebec and Montreal, with a suital)le i)rovision out of those estates. (How this pled^-e and Royal engagement has been fulfilled since the Jesuits' estates were gi^en up, has already appeared in my preamble to this document.) Tliese measures which were considered as the first ste[.s towards tlie execution of the promises made by the Crown to assign an endowment for education, were followed by the incorporation of M'Gill College, under a Royal Charter, in 1821, of which the Royal Institution are the visitors ; but it was not until 1820, after a long coui-se of litigation, that the Royal Institution can.- into ])ossession of the landed property and buildings near Montreal, devised bv Mr. M'Gill ; nor was It till a few months ago that the judgment was ()])tained before His Maicsty's Privy Council for the sum of X-10,000 also bequeathed by Mr. M'Gill, in trust tor the Royal Institution. This legacy, though now amounting ^vith accumu- lated interest to ^'22,000, is manifestly insufficient without the aid of further endowment, for the establishment and maintenance of an University, as com- templated by the Testator, or even of a single College. Mr. Cochrane proceeds to point out the necessity of provision being made for Academical Institutions ■■isasmm swwssi:; IS his province, may Ik iiication of tlu; Roya ince to the Provinciii ed Provincial Statuti ly afterwards l»y th rd, on the fulfihneii .^fit of the inhabitant ge of such an endow m Colonies have hadi cstaldishment of th h a provision for th its' estates ; — (Jth, o _ the Crown, with the nent, at ono period,! nues of the Jesuits' ; and, lastly, on the I the inhabitants ofl ipe to see an Insti- Idren for instruction f an endowment in t of 1801, and the qucnce tliereof, were »f Dalhousie in 182G, before His Majesty's jssary for the under- •e of those measures, was passed for the itions of Royal foun- ider this act that the and has received the under which M'Gill L't many elementary ic revenues ; but no riplated ))y the Act ; ication, till 1815-16, nstitution sliould be f tlic becjuest of Mr. 'lat the funds of the 1 ten years after I) bequest ; and in the ff, wlio were to liave lablished at Quebec (How this pled/^-e s' estates were gi"en .) Tlu'se measures, tion of the pri)niises , were followed by •, in 1821, of which il 182*), after a long possession of the r. M'Gill ; nor was ffore His .Majesty's Mr. M'Gill, in trust iitmg with accumu- it the aid of further Jniversity, as com- . Cochrane proceeds lemical Institutions f a minor nature, and then stutes the fact reu^ardiag the Schools at Montreal nd (Quebec, that though nent out by His Afiijesty's (iovernment at the time, yet le masters have been left witliout support from 18;J2, xohen the Jesuits' estates ere unconditionally given up ! and he adds, that there is no reasonable ground o hope that any relief will be afforded to the teachers of these Royal Establish- ents, unless His Majesty, in his bounty and justice, shall secure a provision for hem out of his land revenues, at least equal to that upon the promises of which he Establishments were originally formed. He then recites what has been one in the otiier Colonies, where, by the way, the interests of Popery are not o triumphant) and continues, " while such provision has been made for educa- ion in the neighbouring Colonies, and while the establishments for education of hat part of this Province which is of French extraction, and of the Roman atholicpersuasion,aree.rfr;n.'(?t)^,ands'^^^. t^fj^^'^'/^" }^\"^r- MosT miMBLY SaKWETU,-That in the l^'^vn^cial statu eo 801, un^^^^^ which this Corporation has been instituted (observe this is but ten M^^i-s atUr the oassine of the Constitutional Act 31 Geo. III.), it is stated that 11 s MaiS ad been graciouslv pleased to signify his Royal intentions tliat a suit- S provln o^^ waste lands of the Crown should be «'t aP'T'-ty^f ^ l« ^^enSes apin-opriated to those purposes," for the -cc.nipl.shnu.n o ^^^lld^^ Corporation was established ; and that your petitioners cannot ^'f ^^ ^^ J "f EXPLICIT PUBLIC, and SOLEMN declaration of the Royal purpose, as carrying ^Mtl S?aS;;S/«,-/, strong, more particularly as the ^^ ^^'i^^;^^;^ the provincial government, for the express s^gmficahon of His ^Jj ^^^y s p easuic theiUn, and was thereby brought under the «P^",^\,^«"^'^'^['^J^^" ?f "''. ^^ jesty's Government of the day, before it received the final sanction o His Majesty. The petition then goes on to state, that having referred to sundry documents lodged in the office'of their Secretary, ^^'^y fi"'^^";::"^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1801 that his Excellency Lieut.-Governor Milner informed the Executive Council tliat Sis Majesty"^^' being desirous to afford all V-^flZZ\ST^ to his Province of Lower Canada, in carry mg into f '^^^"Vl^Y"/^^!^^^^^^ much importance as the instruction and culucation of youth, 1 jd^f™ ^^^ him through his Grace the Duke of Portland, his Royal pleasure that he should S™n consSng His Majesty's Executive Council, report in -^-^ "-^^^ '^ to what extent it would be proper to appropriate a portion «f ^he Crown 1^^^^^^^^^ or revenues arising therefrom, for this purpose ;" and that 1"« ™ <;".7 refen-ed the matter to a committee. That the Report was approved " Council June 27th, 1803, recommending an appropriation oi sixtctivi loNMislnps ana that the Governor promised to transmit the same to the then Secretary ot State, for His Majesty's Royal pleasure. That it appears from a despatch dated Sept 9th 1803, (a copy of which is in the archives of the mstitution) that His Majesty was graciously pleased to approve the appropiuation of a q"«^"t; J «* land for the foundation of two seminaries, one at Quebec, and one at Monti eal upon the scale recommended by the Council, viz. to the ex ent of 20,000 acres for each School (not one acre of which has been assigiied ! !) This document p. 37-38, is signed by the late Chief Justice, Feb.^lOUi,^836.^^ ^^^^^^^^^ ..^^^.J ANE, al Institution. Iiome (if yoii s have been nterests and I show how rllSES WHICH uul political ;he bosom of get rid of-r- i throne — to J. D. W. "»«? . ?, ran thus — of 1001, under t ten veai-s after ited that " Kis ions that a suit- t npavt, and the nt of whieh this )nt consider this IS carryi"S witli was reserved by ftjesty's pleasure tion of His Ma- sanction of His n-red to sundry Voveml)er 11th, the Executive ; encouragement n an object of so , had signified to e that he should, lat manner, and lie Crown lands, his Excellency oved in Council, Townships, and jcretary of State, >atch dated Sept. Itution) that His of a quantity of one at Montreal, ; of 20,000 acres This document I, President. 15 CHURCH ROBBERY IN CANADA. 'JO TKE EDITOR OF THE NEWCASTLE JOURNAL.— No. 4. Dear Sir, — In my first and second letters I showed your readers the plan of sacrilege in prf)gress for destroying the perma- nence of Protestant Christian Principles in Canada, and I hope might convince some of my brothers in the sister church (not steeped in the mire of faction) v.hat an ill work has been going on under their name, terminating in rr>bbery upon us, without any areat advantage tn themselves. In my second, 1 shewed how tjie same {5atanic principle had been at work in the case of the Royal Insti- tution, and the Schools of Quebec and Montreal, and that, in fact, the Crown of Great Britain — the fountain of honour — and, as it used to be thought, the bulwark of truth and fair deahng — had been plunged into a system of faithlessness and breach of promise towards its subjects of the national religious principles, of which no English private gentleman could have been guilty, without a fair claini to a mission to Coventry. I have promised you, for the information of the mercantile interests of the empire, a document to prove that it is their turn next, and that the attack upon mer- cantile industry, talent, and capital, has already commenced at Montreal, and that they also must be added as an ingredient of the great sacrifice to Baal and his compeers ; as, however, it was stated in the House of Lonls last spring (in reply to his Grace the Arch- bishop of Canterbury) by two Noble Lords who had held, at various periods, the Colonial Seals, that there were " circumstances in the ca})itulation" which made these singularly anti-Protestant arrange- ments mev'itable, and as, if these statements were correct, the docu- ment I purpose to send you would be deprived of much of its force, I think it may be advisable, before I present it to you, to show from the records of those days that such representation was entirely erroneous, and that so far from the city of Montreal being then so circumstanced as to require the terms of the capitulation to be strained from their plain, grammatical meaning, the actual fact was, that the terms were granted by the stop-watch, and a few minutes' hesitation would have caused the city to be bombarded about their ears. The articles also show that the claims now set up were actually presented to General Amherjt, and positively and distinctly rejected. The records to which I refer are the original letter* which passed upon the subject, and which may be found in the tate Papers," Annual Register, 1700, page 2|20. Few of your readers having the means to refer to them, there is no remedy but to make a transcript. LETTER PROM iMO^S. VAUUREUIL TO OEiNEHaL AiMlIERST. Montreal, Sept. 7th, 1760. Sir,— I send to your Excellency M. de Bongainville, Co'wnel of Foot, accom- pauied by M. de Lac, Captain in tiie Regiment ^ la Reine ; you may rely on all that the said Colonel shall say to your Exccllcney in my name. ,^ , ,^^ ^, .,.,,, I have, &c. VAUDREUIL, I ( 16 GENERAL AM.'lKRSl's ANSWER TO THR ABOVE. Camp bofoie Montreal, Sept. 7tli, 17B0. i SiH,— 1 am to tliank your Excellency for tlie letter vou honoured nie witli this rnorninj? by Capt. Bon^'ainville, since which, the terms of capitulation which you demand have been delivered to ine. I send them hack to your Excellency vith those I hare rcnolred to pfore Montreal, Sept. 7tb, 1760. SiR,-Major Abercrombie has delivered to me the letter with which your Excellency has honm.red me, m answer to that which I had addressed to you with the conditions on which / expect t'.at Canada shall surrender. I have already had the honour to inform your Excellency th„t I should not make any alteration in'them ■ I cannot deviate from this resolution ; your Excellency will tliereforo please to take a d^terminatwit immediately, and acquaint nie in your answer whether vou will accept them or not. LETTER I have, &c. FROM M. LEVIS TO JEFF. AMHERST GENERAL AMHERST, o T ,. ^ „ Montreal, Sept. 7th, 1760. n 1*7 .1.^*"^^ *" ^■""'■, I^^f'« I'^"cy M- tlo Lapau.e, Assistant Quarter Master General to the Army, on the subject of ^Z,. too ri.jorovs J,//./., whicli you imrfoi on the troops by the capitulation, an.l to which it iroM not bef.oJh/e for ns to subscribe • be pleased to consider the severity of that Article. I flatter myself that you will be pleased to ^ive ear to the representations that officer will make to you on my part, and have regard to them.— 1 have, &c. ^ LE CHEVALIER DE LEVIS. GENERAL AMHERST S ANSWER TO M. DE LEVIS. R,^ rr,,, ,, ,., , CampbeforeMontreal, Sept. 7th, 1760. l,«o i'v A I '" ^''"fL'> y'i",^'^^^ «ent ^ne by M. de Lepause, has this instant the least th^ conditions which I have offered to the Mar « HM . 1 .. , , J^I'^F- AMijERST. n ^:^;— ^'lese two letters shew palpably, not only that General Amherst meant what he said, i)ut that the capitulators' , — „- .„ ., „i,^ i,,^n iiii: capiiiiiaiors knew what he meant; and had not even the folly to mnke any objections, except upon some point of military degradation." THIRD LETTER FROM M. DE VaUDREUIL TO GEN. AMHERST. a,„ T I J ^ • , Montreal, Sept. 8th, 1760 «r„r. c '~T *''"''*' ^^^^'•"i'"?^ t« accept the conditions which ymir Excellency proposes. Inconsequence whereof, I desire you will come to a deteriniuatbn wilh regard to the measures to be taken relative to the signing of the said article" I have the honour, &c. VAUDREUIL. The last two letters exchanged, relating to mere form of taking possession, I need not trouble you with. ^ Then follow the articles, the French version which I have seen and which shews the original wording presented, and the specific -—-^—'-~-~rr~-'-''-' ymu'i "''"S" -- 1 17 lalteratious in tliat wording made by General Amherst, are even [stronger in favour of tlie British Settlers at Montreal, than the version given in the Annual Kegistrr. I shall now add a brief extract from the projxjsitions nuide by France, and presented to Lord Chatham, then Mr. Pitt, Jidy 15th, 1761 :— France cedesai»Q:;iiaraiitoi'8allCanuda to Envs7i //>,■'" stipulated for by the French king, and granted by the English, " as far as the laws of the realm of Gre«t Britain would permit," mutst, and can otily be understood — a liberal toleration, as clearly distinguished from any thing more — and the clause which specifiiallv *' excepts the religious communities," mu^t of necessity be interpreted by t/iese facts, not by the sophistical arguments of the triumvirate commission. No ll, 5th Report, page 146. H y 18 The last extract with which I shall trouble you, in to show by the evidence of an eve witness, how utterly absurd in the suppo- sition that the Canadians were in a condition to prescribe terms or interpretations to the conquerors, when they passed from the French to the British Crown ; indeed their own histories prove the reverse. Kxtract from a letter of an officer in Col. Frazer's reeiment dated St. N'alier, near Quebec, Feb. 19th, 1701 :— ' " You may easily conjecture that the 8.-virnl parts of tliis country which M-e Jiave heen traversing for tliesc two yeai-s witli the calaniities of war, are greatly ruined, and itd poor inlial)itantH reduced to tlic rtreatest extremities and want- i. great number of wliom wouKl certainly have perished ' this winter had not a' ■ most humane act of British generosity been show^n them, by collecting among oui-selvcs money for buying the nece&saries of life for these needy wretches. Every private man, seijeant, cor])oral, ond drummer iii oi!r regiment, has of their own accord, contributed one week's nay for the relief and 8Upj)ort' of these distressed Canadians ; each subaltern officer has given X'l ; each cajitain £3 • and the major £5 sterling ; so that Wf are now returning good for evil, and en- tirely forgetting that they scalped so many of our countrymen last year." We, dear Mr. Editor, have lived to see — evil attain returned for good, and I can scarcely express to you the astonishment with which I behold these aogressions day by day upon the peace and comfort of the British Settlers, whose industry, talent, and capital alone, have changed the city of Montreal from a mere military Kstation, and an enibarrasse(rfactory,*and the Canadian peoj)le from serfs to freemen (si bona sua norint,) when I recollect the fulsome and c()mj)linK'ntary language of their own historians, before pamper- ing had " taught Jeshurun to kick." We need, however, but look to Ireland for the clue. A nearly similar case to that of Montreal, occurred at Manilla, Oct. Cth,1762. The French histories of tlie time acknowledge, that, had not the r! ■ /p . orrespondence and submission taken place. General Amherst baa -.s-ved, when bo encamped before the city, to cnnimerive the -torm hi/ 'iay hv :k the followbu) mond/n;. On the 6th of Oct., 1W2, General Draper and Admiral Cornish sat down before Manilla with a like intention. To prescrv • the city from pillage, the General gave terms to the autlioritit upon a solemn promise of signing the articles of capitulation which he should dictate. Some time after, the Spanish Goveriunent brought a charge against Gen. D. relative to this ; the terms were, (like Lord Amherst's,) more stringent than they liked, tvhen the danqer was over; he defended hi>Mself in a letter to Lord Hal-fax, the then Secretary of State, by stating " that it is a known and universal rule of war among the most civilized nations, that places taken by storm (as was nearly being the case with Montr(=al) without any capitulation, are subject to all the miseries that the conquerors may choose to inflict." As conquerors, says General Draper, (an*d General Amherst clearly acted upon the same view,) " we took the pen, and dictated the terms we chose to grant." In both cases, the honors of a pillage, or an absolute submission to the term i)roposed, in their plain and literal meaning, was the only alternative presented II, in to sIjow byj 19 to the lu'sic^ed ; they cliose the last, esciipeil the horrors, and it is jiiot for ministers oi' statesmen of the present day to sereen their own liuijdoiiift", as if they were the inevitable rcsidtsof General Amherst's [capitulation ; for upon ///^.v« esperh:' imhits he tvas particiiJarhf [firm a)id ifunrdod. The truth is, and it cannot be denied, that all these consequences and difficulties have followed from a line of policy adopted four years after the cession of the colony bv France, and tlie origin of them can be easily traced to that headlong folly which ])luii^ed the nation into the first American war. Thfi (KlijrdU'lixcmoit of Romanism, in Cdnnda, ivns to he a bridle hi tkejaws of British freemen, and Stamp Acts, &c. Sec. were to be forced down their throats by the aid of French bayonets. Into this, however, I shall not enter ; suffice it to have paved the way for the. document of the citizens of Montreal, by shewing thac the ostensible ground for their oppression is opposed to fact, and that it is based upon a system of political chicanery and anti-christian compromise, which, if there betruth in scripture, (as I told a leading Minister about 14 years ago,) can only end in the utter subversion of British power : whether I was right or wrong, you know, and so does he woMJ. "Thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God ; thou wast the anointed Cherub : thou wast upon the holy mountain of God ; but thou hast sinned, and I will destroy thee, O covering Cherub, from amidst of the stones of fire; thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth, in tlve sight of all that behold thee." — Ezek. xxviii. 3-19. The Montreal dociuTient I will send you, without furtlier comment, as soon as it is returned to me. I remain your obliged and faithful servant, W. J. D. W. Beacon Grange, March 13, 1840. CHURCH ROBBERY IN CANADA. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEWCASTLE .JOURNAL.— No. 5. Sir, — Allow vne to send you the following extract from the 5th Report of the Canada Commissioners, dated Quebec, Oct, 24th, 183tt, as further explanatory of the statement of the Montreal Merchants, inserted in your last. (Pages 14r)-C.) 12.- " The treaty of peace, concluded on the lOth of February, 17C3, empow- ered subjects of France who niiglit not be disposed to remain in Canada, under the dominion of England, to remove from thov-^ountryjand sell their properly, j^rorided it were to British subjects, and within eighteen months." Ps^OTE. — The ecclesiastical bodies were sperijically e.vchided by the 33rd Art. ^f the Capitulation, as clearly understood in 1774, If 'f I 20 see 14 Geo. III. ch. 88; besides which, it could, by no reasonable construction, be applied to proprietors actually resident in Paris. 13.—" On the 29tli of April, 17<, that, before exe- cuting the cession, a communication was received from the F)'ench Ambassador at London, to the following effect : — ' My Lord Halifax, lui a (lit que quoique lo Koi d'Angleterre se filt engaged par le traitt^ a laisser en Canada le libre exercise de la Religion Cathorujue et Jiumaiiie, suivant i,es lois d'Auglettcrre il ne s'ensuivoit pas que des bienfouds, situ^e en Canada, passent contiuucr d'appartenir a des Fran9t:^s, vivants en France, et sujets du Iloi de France, Que sa Maje.stti Bcitan- nique consent que les Pretres du Sominaire de Montreal contiuueut a en jouir, mais sans dt^pendance du St^minaire de Paris.' " Note. — Now, taking into consideration that this title was in c'irect contravention of the capitulation — directly opposed to the precise expression of the Act 14, Geo. III., — never acknowledged m Canada — or openly af homehy Parliament — c(msidered invalid from that day to this by British lawyers, how do these Commis- sioners proceed.-^ It is a constituticmal rule, that " the King of England" is hound by " the Law of Eng'andy Well .? " Unless," say they, " the correctness of the ^.^mbassador's representation be impugned, it follows, that the deed of gift in 1764, whatever may have been its sufficiency, or insufficiency in point of law, was passed in conformity with what had been stated to be the desire of tlie King of England, and that the Act of transfer was sanctioned by his authority, as far as the exidiihj date of laic and of^iimon seemed to allow. In 1774, the vali extract is made from the Act of Donation, passed before Barbel, notary, at Quebec, the 19th of October, 1735, by which it was c-.nveyed t^ them. The next extract which I shall offer is from a Deed of Cession, executed by and between the Seminaire of St. Sul])ice, of Pans, and the Seminary of Montrcd, on the 29th of April, 1764, John C ousturier with others, 1 latter. Th Sulpice which il ceeds tc occasioi His Bi colonist the Col pain of poses oi price ; to the { held in and tra of Mon and on I naiy of of St. held t] were, i Semini T upon t not tr( sion by that sc to His treal, 1 questi( nary ( severa the esl to the Fiefs ( siastiq faite p Paris t cellem conqu Sulpi( in th( reside St. Si and il estate nients which and S remar 27 if the Crown of y, 1714, and the le only existing iilty and homage y Sir F'rederick li to notice more F Gift of the 9th [uired the Island which I am now if Montreal was ;e of Paris) some he remaining es- are now claimed, the Two Monn- niievalier de Be- [717j grants that le Roya! ratifica- ril, 17J8, thisis julpice at Paris. Le Roy etant u ',es du Seininairc dii Scminaire de idreuil et Begon, Sfouvelle France, ain de trois Heux , anx Eccksias- lil tcrrein, Sfc," and, adjoining to : by the Marquis of Canada, anx an augmentation of March, 1735, t generally, takes eurie of the Lake 1, belonged to the ' grants a further J limits the whole d'etendue sur la r pai-ciUcment don de Paris qtd les ,cien terreln, et la )resslv given and OS an'd "Coadjutor iqiies aggreges au ;ant pour eiix Me, Montreal"— This f Barbel, Notary, c<»nveyed to them. Deed of Cession, of Paris, and the n Cousturier with others, being parties for the former, and Stephen INIontgolfier alone for the latter. This Deed recites th^ several titles of the Ecclesiastiques of St. Sulpict, of Paris, to the several estates in Canada now in question, of which it states that t/icy were the undoubted proprietors. It then pro. ceeds to declare the embarrassment which the conquest of Canada had occasioned, that it was impossible for them to keep the property, because His Bi tannic Majesty had been pleased to declare that all foreigners and colonists, proprietors of estates lying in Canada, who would not remam in the Colony as his subjects, should alienate what they possessed, under the i)ain of confiscation, that to sell them to individuals was to defeat the pur- noses of their institution, and, if sold they would fetch but a very small price • that, therefore, in this dilemma, the best course was to relinquish to the Seminary of aiontreal all the right, title, and interest which they held in the property, and accordingly they did thereby cede and abandon and transfer to the Seminary of IMontreal, the Seigneuries of the Island of Montreal and Cote de St. Sulpice, the Lake of the Two Mountains, and one moiety of the Seigneurie of Bourchemin, to be held by the Semi- nary of IMontreal as their property, in the same manner as the Seminary of St. Sulpice had, until the Conquest, held, or of right ought to have held them, the whole being transferred in the state 111 which they then ^vere, ivitlmd ant/ guarantee on the part of the former jjropnetors the Seminary of St. Sulpice at Paris. This Deed, of which I annex to^tliis Report an entire copy, appears upon the point now under consideration, to be so conclusive that I shall not trouble your Excellency with any further extracts. It is an admis- sion by the parties themselves of all that 1 assert. And it is remarkable, that so late as the year I78I, in the Act of Fealty and Homage tendered to His Excellency Sir Frederick Haldimand by the Seminary of Mon- treal, they do not pretend to have any right or title to the estates m question, 'except what they derive from this conveyance from the Semi- nary of Paris. This act of Fealty and Homage first enumerates the several titles by which the Seminary of St. Sulpice acquired and held the estates in question, the cession bf the 29th April, 17^4, from them to the Seminary of aiontreal, and concludes in these words — " Les dits Fiefs et Seigneuries etant la propriety incommutable de JMessrs les Eccle- siastiques du Seminaire de Montreal d cause de la cession qui leur a e e faite par Messieurs les Ljclesiastiqnes du Seminaire de St. Sulpice de Paris le vingt-neuf Avril mil sept cent soixante quatre, rapport^ cidessus." From the evidence which I had the honour to lay before your Ex- cellency, it seems certain that the Seminary of IMontreal was not, at the conquest, a body or community distinct from that of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, of Paris, and that the Priests who composed it did not constitute in themselves a mortmain— that the Priests of St. Sul])ice, who were resident at ^Montreal, were merely deputed agents for the Seminary of St. Sulpice, at Paris, (to whom all the property in question was granted, and in whom all title thereto was vested,) and as such, administered the estates in Canada, and this being the fact, I fully concur in the senti- ments of Sir James Marriot, contained in his Report of the year l/7'>, which is above referred to, and to the opinion of His Majesty's Attorney and Solicitor Generals of this Provhice, expressed in the observations and remarks referred to me j and am clearly of opinion, that the whole of the 28 estates lying in this Province, claimed by the Seminary of Montreal, are lapsed to His Majesty by right of conquest and acquired sovereignty, as the property of a foreign society, domiciled at Paris, and not in Canada, at the time of the conquest. I am further clearly of opinion, that the deed of cession, cf the 29th of April, 17^4, from the Seminary of Saint Sulpicej of Paris, to the Seminary of Montreal, is ipso facto null and void, 1 for the estates had in fact, long before become vested in His Alajesty, the conveyance being subsequent not only to the capitulations of Quebec and Montreal, but to the treaty of peace of 17t)3, by which Canada was ceded in full sovereiiriity to the Crown of Great Britain, and it is there- fore perhajjs unnece"ssary to add, that the Seminary of Paris at that time, had not only no property in the estates which they undertook to convey, but had not in law any right or authority whatever to transfer them, especially to the Seminary of Montreal, who, not being a district commu- nity, but a section only of the Seminary or community of the ecclesiastics of the Church of St.'Sulpice, of Paris, had not, therefore, in themselves alone, any legal capacity whatever, to take and hold estates in mortmain. But' even supposing the Priests of Saint Sulpice, composing the Seminary of iNIontreal at the conquest, really were entitled at that time to and enjoy their own right, the estates belonging to the Seminary of St. Sulpice, 'in Canada, 1 cannot conceive that this right could possibly be extended beyond the term of their natural lives, and as all who were living at the conquest are now dead, the Order of St. Sulpice, quoad Canada, must, I think, have expired with them. For the Seminary of iAIontreal possessed no power to create Priests of St. Sulpice ; and those, therefore, who are now in possession, whether subjects or aliens by birth, if they be ecclesiastics of the Church of St. Sulpice at all, (of which we can have no proof,) must have become such under some foreign authority, and the right of any foreign authority to qualify members to hold real property in any British dominion, cannot, in my opinion, be admitted or recognized for a moment, especially in ecclesiastical matters. I am therefore further of opinion, that if the Priests of St. Sulpice, resident at the conquest in Canada, were, in fact, at that time, under the nane of the Seminary of Montreal a body corporate, capable of holding real estate in mortmain, that such body corpo'-ite, has been long since dissolved by the natural deaths of its menibers, and consequently, that the estates in question have thereby reverted to His JMajesty their right and lawful heir. I cannot leave this part of the subject without recalling to the recol- lection of your Excellency, tliat jMr. Roux and the other French emigrant Priests of St. Sulpice, now in possession of the estates in Montreal, obtained from His Majesty in the year 179'}, a mandamus directing Letters Patent to issue under the G-eat Seal of Lower Canada, declaring them denizens within the limits of t'le Province. — It may become a ques- tion whether they have any legal rghts whatever under this partial and local denization, but certain I am that it does not enable them, either as individuals or as members of a corporation, to hold real estate in this Colony. By our law, aliens have commmnonem jurisgentium, but not juris civilis, and, therefore, nothing short of complete naturalization can enable them to hold immoveable or real property. As to the means by which His Majesty, if he shall see fit, can enter into the possession of the estates which are the subject of this report, there is on this point very little difficulty. 29 K.,e Seminary ,>f ^^-^^i::::^;^:^^^^^^. ,,„lv corp<.rate, .t 'V'^y' l'^''^'^ 1 . f f , /o ' am/»/o against the person* by an infoimation in the natu e 'f/ '/""""'' '"^'r^te and upon obtain- ,v\.o nrnv claiu> to be consulered as tliat b- Y ^^ JJ^*^^^ ,, j,, .i.^i.^d, to ing a judgment against them, .^^f '^""S;; ^: ';'' f .J i,h all the estates are enable the Sheriff in the district of ^^^^f ^^^^ji'/^^^ ^i.jesty, by Com- . situate, to ,^»ter uponthem for jd onbeu^^^^^^^ ^Zm^A :^:n i^^JisSi::^ :f ih^^er ^ Jes^ts, by the natural IS fSe lasf surviviiig "-^-^f ^^^^^ ^lirS^is M^esty. a civil A second means is to institute m t^'«'^' '"''."' "^teg-'by" name as action against the ^-'^M;- ests w k> i.o^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^y_^.^„ ^, equivalent to the English ^^f J;^'" f .'•J^,;'";,'"*;„hibit the admission of any A third means is, (or Ilis J^^"f ^Ynutrevl from whence suppression new members into the Seminary «f ^^\«" J^^^j/Sesty's right to do so, and dissolution will follow "f course and of His Jlaj^J ^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^ if he should see tit, ^ '-^-^^^'^^trifra pow^r to the establish. SXn^:£ ci:^itl^: r:S:gf5otr|eady established, and ;Swere originally founded.undertie^R^^^^^^^^^ ^, ,,^ A fourth means is, an amicable ^"^"Sf'XwTe" ecial v the aliens. Seminary of Montreal, inducing ^^'^"^ *«;;>^'^^;;^; ^r^Son^ life, from natives of France.) upon an assurance of a proper provisio the revenues of the estates. T„,„priai Parliament, declaring that A fifth means -' ^^ ^.^ ^^ *Jf,, "^ e ccinquest, and are nowhis the estates were ^^^^^^f, " "^^JS^ in possession, such pensions ^o^\tntrer^x";u^^^^^^^^ «^^" ^-^ ^''^^And I am of opinion that either of the means wiH^-^^^^^^^^^^^ gx- AH which, nevertheless, IS mosrespec^^^^^^^^^^ ^„, cellency^ great wisdom, by Sir, your J^xceuenty most humble servant, j^ SEWELL, Attorney-General, Lower Canada. Quebec, July 2nd, 1804. 30 REMARKS ON THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO ERECT ENDOW AN ECCLESIASTICAL CORPORATION IN THE PROVINCE OF LOWER CANADA. AND The Ecclesipstics of the Seminary of St. Sulpice of Montreal are In . possession of certain Estates, their title to which is disputed, and the intent of the proposed Ordinance is to confirm their title to those estates, and to constitute and declare them to be a Body Corporate and Ecclesiastical. The points first to be considered, are the respective claims of the Seminary and of other parties, to understand how far it may be equitable and expedient to use the power and authority of Parliament to set aside iheordi^tary course of law, and to extinguish the rights of those who deny and contest the Seminary's title. It is known to several persons in the Province, that the question as to the Seminary's title was submitted to the Crown Lawyers, and in con- sequence of their opinion being adverse to the Seminary, instructions were sent by the Administration of that day to Lord Alymer, to require the surrender of the property to the Govenmient, and, in the event of a refusal, to institute legal proceedings for its recovery. The public are yet in ignorance why Lord Aylmer neglected to act upon those instructions. The subject again underwent examination before the Royal Commis- sioners, and after a long and patient investigation, the Earl of Gosford, Sir Charles Grey, and Sir George Gipps, were unanimously of opinion (although differing on most other subjects) that the Seminary had no legal claim to the Estates held by it, and their Report to the Government was framed accordingly. These circumstances afford as strong proof as can well be obtained, short of a decision in the Courts of Law, against the Seminary's title ; and it is not the fault of the Censiiaires that a legal decision was not obtained long ago. The question was brought before the Courts of Law in this Province, with the intention of carrying it by a final appeal to England ; but, upon its being argued before the Courts of Appeal at Quejjec, the Judges in Appeal professed themselves to be divided in opinion, and no judgment could be obtained ; the effect of which was to stay the proceedings. It is not meant to attribute any improper bias to ihe Members of that Court, but it is, nevertheless, certain, that the most ingeni(M)» advocate of the Semini-ry's cause could have devised no more effectual plan for defeating the ends of justice. It was well understood, that the Provincial Court of Appeals was only resorted to in this case as an intermediate tribunal, before which it was necessary to appear, in order to give the parties a right to carry the case before the King in Council, the Court of last resort. The decision of the Court at Quebec was, tiierefore, comj)aratively unimportant, whether for or against the Censitaircs, but by refusing to render a judgment, the Censiiaires were prevented appealing to England, which can only be done after a judgment has been rendered in the Provincial Court of" Appeals. The 'Court of Appeals, at Quebec, is composed in part of the Judges, but the majority sit there m their capacity of Executive Councillors, and it is bv no means disrespectful to the Honourable Gentlemen who constitute that majority, to aflirm, that their opinion on any intricate point of law is not held in '"%.«'aBi 31 :rect and [ IN ntreul are In ted, and the those estates, >rporate and ilaims of the be equitable to set aside ose who deny e question as , and in con- 'uctions were ) require the 3 event of a ublic are yet instructions, yal Commis- 1 of Gosford, y of opinion had no legal !rnment was be obtained, lary's title ; ion was not irts of Law d appeal to ' Appeal at divided in hich was to •oper bias to lat the most sed no more understood, this case as appear, in he King in t at Quebec against the taires were a judgment le Court of he majority )y no means It majority, lot held in creat respect, when opjwsed to the learning and research of those whose talents and acquirements have raised then to the highest judicial station in the Province. The legal merits of the case, as heard in the Court of Appeals, must be estimated, not by the comparative numbers on one side or the other, but by contrasting the professional knowledge and experience of the INIembers of the Court who were present and voted. The Pre- sidinL' Judge, the late Chief Justice Sewell, maintained the righ<; ot the Censiiaire^m the case, which is, in itself, a strong presumptive proof that the Seminary's title is defective. . p , r The Imperial Government being in possession of these facts, cannot defend the improvident grant to the St. Sulpicians, which is ccmlemplated, bv admitting rights as belonging to that communitv, which, after a tuU ."a impartial investigation, have been formally challenged and denied by the Law Officers of the Crown and by the Commissioners of Inquiry. The case is as yet, however, but partially disclosed, and in order to comprehend the full measure of injustice which the propos,ed Government arrangement would impose on the Censilnires, it is necessary to examine the stipulations entered into by a Royal Proclamation, favourable to the English inhabitants, and the power of the Crown to carry those stipula- tions into effect. „ . . , , ^.v When Montreal surrendered to the British arms, there were three Eeclesiastical Communities established in the city, viz.: the Jesuits, RecoUets, and the St Sulpicians, all of whom were, by the articles ot capitulation, admitted to equal terms. The St. Sulpicians are not men- tioned, except in conjunction with the other communities, nor is there any stipulation favourable to one of those bodies, which does not equally apply to all of them. The French demanded that these Ecclesiastical Commu- nities should be preserved in their constitution and privileges, which was refused. . . ^ a In the treaty of cession, the Religious Communities are not nanied, and the only guarantees are, the liberty of the Roman Catholic religion as far as the laws of Great Britain permit, and leave totheJ^rench inhabitants to sell their estates, and retire from the Colony. " The liberty of the Catholic religion, as far as tne laws of Great Britain permit," may be enjoyed to its fullest extent, without the estab- lishment or endowment of these Ecclesiastical Corporations, and the refusal to continue them in their constitution and privileges, by the articles of capitulation, was a positive and distinct refusal to allow those Corpora- tions to remain in the Colony, and was so considered, and so acted upon, in regard to the Jesuits and Recollets. In neither of those cases were the Communities violently dispossessed of their estates, but by refusing them permission to add to their numbers, the Communities gradually became extinct, and on the death of the last survivor, the property was taken by the Crown. It is difficult \o imagine why the same course was not taken with the St. Sulmcians. who had, in no respect, superior rights to the other Communities, and the extinction of whose feudal privileges was more desirable, inasmuch as they extended over a more valuable territory and interfered materially with the growth and advancement of the chiet com-- mercial town of the Province. Such, however, was not the case, and while the terms of the capitulation were adhered to, in respect to the Jesuits and Recollets, the Ministers of the Crown, from time to time, connived at th< introduction of new membcis into the order ot St. Sulpicc, 32 and permitted tliem u> enjoy undisturbed a Itirge and rupidly acciiniulating revenue. This proceeding on the part of the Goveriiinent, is directly opposed, not only to the terms of the capitulation, but t<» the spirit, if not the very words, of a Royal Proclamation, and an Act of t!u« Imjjerial Parliament. The Royal Proclamation, bearing date at St. James's, the 7th October, 1763, among other assurances of favour and protection, and with a view to the speedy settling of the Colony, declares it to be the Royal intenti( :i, *' to settle aiid agree with the iiiliid)itants of (Hir .said new colonies, or any other person who shall re.sort thereto, for such lands, (eneincnix, and heredilamoUs, as are now, or /icrcfij'fcr shall he, in our power to dispose of, and them to grant to any such person or [.ersfuis, upon such terms, and under such moderate quit-rents, services, and acknowledgments, as have been appointed and settled in other Col(»nies." It does not belong to a brief outline of the case, such as this is intended to be, to enter upon a discussion as to the legal meaning of the terms used in the Royal Proclamation ; it may not be out of ])lace, nevertheless, to observe, that it would be diHicult to designate any " lands, tenements, and hereditaments," which " shall hereaftei be in our power to dispose of," of suHicient value to occupy His IMaje.sty s intention, as att'ecting the general intere.sts of the Colony, unless the " lands, tenements, and hereditaments," then possessed by the Religious Communities, were in- tended to be referred to. The estates held by those Cimimunities were indeed of great magnitudv com])reliendiiig the lordship or superiority over the City of Montreal, a part of the City of Quebec, a..d several Seigniories, forming a large part of the most valuable lands within the Colony ; and it was, undoubtedly, a matter of deep import to a c«Misiderable number of the anciejit inhabitants of the Province, and also to those of His ^Majesty's subjects who were invited by the Proclamation, " t(» avail themselves with all convenient sjjeed of the great benefits and advantages which mu.st accrue therefrom to their commerce, manufactures, and navigation," to understand what were His IMajesty's intentions in respect to th(»se exten- sive estate? which, by the conquest and cession of the Colony, had fallen to the Crown. The feudal rights enforced within those estates, and especially in the Cities, were highly injurious to " commerce, manufac- tures," and consequently to " navigaticm," and it is submitted, that n(» other reasonable interpretati«»n can be given to the Royal Proclamation, than, that it was His Majesty's gracious intention to encourage the ** speedy settling" of the country, and to promote its " commerce, manu- factures, and navigation," by renouncing the oppressive usages and inci- dents of the feudal law in the extensive estates which *' shall hereafter he in our power to dis])use of," and to settle and agree with the ('cusitdire.s, on " such moderate quit-rents, services, and acknowledgments, as have been appointed and settled in other Colonies." This interpretation of the Proclamation is further supported by the large and favourable construction, which, by custom, is always affixed to every Royal promise of grace and favour ; and the rents and profits arising from the estates were not, at the period of which we are sj)eakiiig, of such value as to render the boon which it was pro))osed to best(»w on the (Jetisitaires, an object of much importance to the Government in a pecu- niary point of view. The large sums of money which have been collected by the Jst. Sulpicians, and the immense revenues which it is hi contemplation iicci I mil luting BCtly opposed, f not the very Parliament, e 7tli t)ctolK'r, d with n view »yal inteiiti( :i, lonies, or any ; lie men Is, and <• to (lis post of, ch terms, and lents, as have his is intended he terms used ivertheless, to 8, tenements, wer to dispose 1, as art'ectin^ L'nemeiits, and ties, were in- muni ties were ineriority over ■al Seigniories, ■ Coh)ny ; and l)le number of 1 1 is IVIajesty's lemselves with 8 which must navigation," to th(»se exten- )ny, had fallen B estates, and ^rce, manufac- litted, that no Proclamation, encourage the imerce, manu- sages and inci- ■^liall hereafter he Cciisildires, iients, as have iported by the vays aHixed to 1 profits arising diking, of such best(»w on the ;nt in a necu- been collected I contemplation 33 to confer on theni, have been chiefly created by, and are proposed to be drawn from, the industry, enterprize, and capital of the iidiabitants of the Colony of Hritish and Irish descent, who were invited to settle in the Colony by the K<»>rtl Proclamation, and to whom the promises in that document, it is reasonable to supjjose, were intended more especially to apply ; as without those assurances it could hardly have been expected, tiiut any considerable number of His Majesty's native born subjects would settle in a Colony where the laws and feudal exactions of a despotic Government would continue to be enforced. The intention and ])olicy of the Government in regard to these estates, was again distinctly announced in an Act of the Imperial Parlia- ment, 14th Geo. III. cap. <{3, wliereiu it is provided, " That all His IVIajesty's Canadian subjects within the Province of Quebec, the religiotis orders and eoiinnunities ohIi/ excepled^ may hold and enjoy their property and possessions " Notwithstanding these public and authentic acts, \n opposition to the articles of cajiitulation, in violation of the Royal promise, and agaip>,t the spirit and Mitent of an Act of the Imperial Parliament, the St. Sulpicians have been permitted, until the present day, to enjoy the rents, profits, and feudal rights of their pro])erty and possessi(»iis, and that, too, not in virtue of a Httyal or Parliamentary grant, br.t sim])ly, as has already been shown, by the connivance of tlie Ministers of the Crown ; who have thus, by indi- rect means, counteracted the effect of a Royal promise and an Act of the Imperial Parliament, maintained the St. Sulpicians in the exercise of their constituti(»n and privileges, which had been denied t(» them at the capitula- tion, and virtually erected an ecclesiastical corporation within the Colony, with powers, and for purjioses, such as it is believed nc authority, excejit the Impeiial Parliament, can rightfully bestow. It should also be liorne in mind, that the ()]iinions and Rej>ort, ofhcially coiuiminicated to the (iovernment, were to the effect that the St. Sulpicians wrongfully possessed the estates, and Ciuikl be dispossessed by the ordinary forms of law, with- out having recourse to the Royal authority for their gradual suppression, as had been exercised towards the Jesi'its and Ilecollets. In this situation of affairs, an Ordinance has been submitted to the Special Council of Lower Canada, by authority of the Government, " to Jneorporate the Keelesiastics of the Seinuiari/ of St. Su/pice of Montreal, to eon/inn their title to the Fief and Seip'iorti of the Island of Montreal, the Fief and Seignion/ of the Lake of Two Mountains, and the Fief and Seigniori/ of St. Snlpiee, for the gradual extinction of Seigniorial rights and dues, and for ol her purposes," By this Ordinant-e, it is, among other matters, ordained and enacted, that the said Keelesiastics shall hold and enjoy " the said several Fiefs and Seigniories, with all and every the rights, privileges, and appurte- iiauees thereunto respectively belonging, or in any wise ap|)ertaining," and, " they ari^ hereby conferred and declared good, valid, and effectual in the Law, as /'ul/i/, in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same objects, intents, and purposes, as the Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of the Fauxhonry St. (ierniaiii Lez Paris, or the Seminari/ of St. Sulpice of Montreal, according to its constitution before the Uith day of Septcmher, in the year ]'Jit\), or either or hot h of the .said Seminaries, might or could have done, or had a right to do, or might or could have held, enjoyed, or applied, the same or any part thereof previously to the last mentioned period." 4 34 The " rights and privileges" which " either or both of the said Seminaries," could have exercised" before the 18th day of September, 1759,' while tht Colony appertained to His Most Christian Majesty, the King of France, are not generally known, and it admits of some doubt whether the franiers of the Ordinance were fully informed on that head; the "objects, intents, and purposes" of the St. Sulpicians, will be spoken of hereafter ; but the main point to be considered is, that the landed proprietors of the City and Island of Montreal, and other extensive estates, are to be made and ordained the vassals of these Ecclesiastical Lords; with the privilege, it is true, of purchasing their exemption from the " droits de cens el rentes, tods et ventes^ droit de banalite de moulin, droit de retrait," and sundry other " rights and privi- leges," which existed " before the 18th day of September, 1759," for all which they are held and bound to pay a large and unequally distributed compensation, or to remain in a state of vassalage for ever ; and the money so raised is to be employed for the "same objects, intents, and purposes" as the said St. Sulpicians might or could have done " previously to the 18th day of September, 1759." The Ordinance in question is not what it specifically professes to be, a measure of relief to the Censitaires. It creates the right, legalizes the exactions, and presents them as a free gift to the St. Sulpicians ; and then, in the plenitude of Ministerial generosity, leaves to the landed proprietor the oj)tion of jjurcl' ising his relief from the burdens it imposes, or of be- coming a vassal of the Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of St. Sulpice. The landed proprietors, whose rights are thus sunmiarily proposed to be dealt with, invoke the Royal Proclamation as a protection from this measure of injustice ; but if Royal Proclamations are to be disregarded, still they ajjpeal to an Act of the Imperial Parliament, as a pledge of the national faith and honour that they shall not be made the serfs of an Eccle- siastical coii'munity. If the feudal yoke must be borne, let it, at all events, have the impress of Royalty, for, if serfs at all, the landed proprie- tors are the serfs of the Queen. It has been asserted that the landed proprietors have been gainers by the substitution of an Ecclesiastical, instead of the Royal power, as Seig~ nior ; inasmuch as theSt. Sulpicians have been in the habit of compounding wiih the Censitaires for the Lods et Ventes, at a lower rate than that authorized by Law. It certainly is the case, that the Seminary, holding the estates by a defective title, and being unable to enforce its claims in a Court of Law, has generally accepted, from the English inhabitants, a lower mutation fine than existed, according to its " rights and privileges," before the 18th day of September, 1759." In some instances, one in par- ticuhir which could be named, of a wealthy and public spirited individual who had openly avowed his intention of resisting the claim, a compromise was effected on the payment of a sum, trifling indeed, as compared with the amount which a Seignior may lawfully demand. Individuals, espe- cially among the more wealthy class, have, unquestionably, been gainers by this mode of adjusting accjunts ; but by weakening the force of opposition', and depriving the landed proprietors of the support and active co-opera- tion of those who, from station and influence, ought to have taken the lead, it has materially asisied the St. Sulpicians in their negotiations with the Government, and enabled them to obtain the IMinisterial sanction to a measurCj repugnant to the interests and feelings of the English inhabitants generally, these Seis have unite establish ec lously beei dispossess against the customs of excited am. Seminary, demanded purposes, exactions ; entitled to twelfth par it cannot bi perpetuate Crown, if t effects. The li of the Semi present per neglect of t for granting The questi( is persisted handed ovei " rights ant 1759 ; and tied, becausi last eighty j because the Governmeni trary to law It migh to the lande( Bonsideratioi of the Provi disregarded ;reat and la the Province A sligh losed grant ensible, and nexpedient The "ol far, at leas id privilege nd instruct! inch imporl 11 do wed in t ie Seminar} m I of the said if September, ;ian Majesty, nits of some informed on t. Sulpicians, considered is, lontreal, and he vassals of of purchasing venles^ droit hts and privi- 1759/' for all ly distributed id the money md purposes" ly to the 18th rofesses to be, legalizes the is ; and then, ed proprietor ies, or of be- ilpice. yr proposed to on from this disregarded, pledge of the i of an Eccle- let it, at all ided proprie- en gainers by wer, as Seig- compounding te than that lary, holding :s claims in a ihabitants, a d privileges," s, one in par- sd individual I compromise npared with iduals, espe- ?n gainers by )f opposition, ve co-opera- ken the lead, Dns with the auction to a 1 inhabitants 35 generally. Had the Crown entered upon the enjoyment of its rights in hese Seigmones. the landed proprietors, both French and English^.(m d 7lr 'I *! v'" t'""*." '"I T^ •"'^'^'"'•^ «^ '^^'^^- '^''« schools and colleges established by the St. Sulpicians are essentially French", and it has sedu! lously been inculcated on the French inhabitants, that any endeavours to dispossess the Seminary of its Feudal rights, were directed, not so much against the bt. Sulpicians, as against the language, laws, manners and customs of the "Canadian Nation." Prejudices 'ai/d feelin"ret'""« excited among the most numerous class of the population, in favour of the demanded by the Crown, and the revenues employed for other and general purposes. Considering the vexatious and oppressive character of feudal fnS'T!' f • r'""^ *'*^^' ""'S^*' ^"'^ privileges," the Seignior is twllif J'%'» fr»"^ every purchaser of real property a fine equal to one tweltth part of the price, a claim. which recurs with each successive sale it cannot be supposed that the British Government would have desired to perpetuate such a system of taxation on the estates belonging to the effecis"' >"»^ab,tants of all origins had joined in representin| its evil „f *i ^^ ^'berality— or what, perhaps, might be better termed the policy— ot the Seminary, has delayed the final settlement of the question Jntilthe present penod ; and this delay, which has been occasioned by the culpable neglect of the Ministers of the Crown, is now urged as a principal reason for granting to the St. Sulpicians the legal right to continue their exaction " Ihe question of right is rudely set aside, and if the Government measure IS persisted in many thousands of native born British subjects will be handed over like so many Russian serfs, to be dealt with according to the rights and privileges," which exi.sted before the I8th day of September i J u . monstrous and iniquitous proceeding is alleged to be justi hed, because the wise and equitable Ministers of the Crown have, for the last eighty years denied to the British inhabitants an act of justice, and because the St. Sulpicians have, during that period, been permitted by the (xovernment, to exact, from the British inhabitants, a large revenue, con- trary to law. f« f 1,^*1 ""f^* be supposed, that in sanctioning an act of such gross injustice to the landed proprietors, the Government was influenced by some weighty considerations of state policy ; that it was essential to the general interests t the Province, that, in this instance, the rights of individuals should be lisregarded and set at nought; and that the end aimed at, would confer a ■heProvfncr'"^ '"''^' "*" ^'^ classes of Her Majesty's subjects within A slight inquiry as to " the objects, intents and purposes" of the pro- osed grant will sufhce to show that, on public grounds, it is wholly inde- nsible, and that in its general bearing on the interests of society,"it is as nexpedient and impolitic as it is unjust. n .7\^"«^f'=t«'/"t«nt« and purposes" of the St. Sulpicians of Montreal, , nrf -1 '^ 'i^'V *" P"'^J>^fe concerned, according to their constitution d privileges before the 18th day of September, 1759, are the education d instruction of certain Indian tribes. This was, doubtless, an object of iich importance, when tbe St. Sulpicians were first established and idowed in the Colony ; but the few remaining Indians having a claim on ■e Seminary, are educated and instructed at so trifling an expense that ?' i it scnrcelv merits beinj? taken into account, as comparea with the revenues «f the Community. The surphis funds accruing to the St Sulpicians have been expended and appropriated at their discretion. They h-ive claimed and exercised the right to determine, at their o^vn pleasure,' the obiects. intents and purposes" to which it should be applied, and it is generally understood that a part of these funds has been remitted and expended ni France and the United States. „ • The pro'.osed Ordinance, which is advocated by some well meaning persons, because, as they suppose, it provides for the education of the people, contains no provision whatever for that purpose. The estates and revenues are made over, without restriction, to the St. Sulpicians, for the same objects, intents, and purposes as the Ecclesiastics of the Semi- narv of the Fauxbourg Saint Germain Lez Pans, or the Seminary of St. Sulnice of Montreal, according to its constitution, before the IHth day o September, IToO, or eithe. or both of the said Seminaries might or could have done, or had a ri>.,.t to do, or might or could have held, eiyoyed or applied the same or any part thereof, previously to th. last mentioned period." What the Seminary of Paris, or the Seminary of Montreal, ''might or could have dcme" with the revenues before the l»th ot Sep tember, 1759, is not defined ; they might, it is true, have established schools in this colony, but there is no official document on record, showing that they were bound to do so, and declaring what part of their revenues shall be' appropriated for that " object, intent, and purpose. The estates and revenues in question are of immense value. 1 He evidence given before the Commissioners in 1836 on this head, has rete- rence only to the Fief and Seigniory of the Island of Montreal, no estimate bavin" be^n made in respect to two other extensive Seigniories including a large extent of unconc-ded land, and a domain farm within the limits o the city of Montreal. It is confidently believed that the ^t- Sulpicians wil realize, under the proposed Ordinance, a sum not less than *oUU,UUU besides which, they are permitted to invest £30,000 in realestate which if judiciously laid out in a young and rising colony, will, in the lapse o years, produce a considerable income, ■ j * *!, The granting of this enormous wealth— so disproportioned to thi resources of the T»rovince— to an Ecclesiastical Corporation, which ii empowered to admit and elect new members in perpetual succession without check or interference by the Imperial or the Provincial Govern ments, would be unwise and improvident, under any view of the case, bu there are other circumstances connected with this grant and the uses t( which it will be applied, which render it peculiarly partial and oppressive The tax imrosed by the Ordinance is to be levied indiscnminatel: from all cla.sscs of the landed proprietors, while the education aftorded b the Seminary is adapted to the wants and wishes of a pari onh/ oUhe inha bitants. Aii Act of the Imperial Parliament is to be violated, a Koya promise thro^^.l to the winds, the English inhabitants are to be taxed with out being represented, and the rights of conscience invaded ; and all this i to be done, because it pleases Her Majesty's Ministers to pander to t preiudices and the vanity of the " Nation Canadienve, by richly endowinj !it the public expense, an Ecclesiastical Community, and confernn "rights and privileges," as applied to a system of general education , Canada, which would not be tolerated in any other part of the Britis dominions. Let it not be supposed, that the opponents ot this measui .. Ml . ,. i mmoii weal, to erect a Corporation, with authority to admit and elect new members in perpetual succession, and invested with powers, rights, and privileges, which, improperly applied, would generate discord among the inhabitants, and exercise a powerful influence in the Legislature of the United Provinces. The object of the foregoing remarks is to draw public attention to a subject, which, rightly understood, will be found to affect, in no ordinary degree, the future peace, welfare, and good government of the Provinces. # ^f^. Newcastlo-iipon-Tyne : Frinted by John Hernaman, 19, Grey-Street. '%■ he people , why an resources;, whatever who now »us to the elect new ghts, and imongthe ire of the ntion to a 3 ordinary rovinces. ireet.